Search

Background: Poverty is associated with increased risk of chronic illness but its contribution to critical care outcome is not well defined., Methods: We performed a multicenter observational study of 38,917 patients, aged ≥ 18 years, who received critical care between 1997 and 2007. The patients were treated in two academic medical centers in Boston, Massachusetts. Data sources included 1990 US census and hospital administrative data. The exposure of interest was neighborhood poverty rate, categorized as < 5%, 5% to 10%, 10% to 20%, 20% to 40% and > 40%. Neighborhood poverty rate is the percentage of residents below the federal poverty line. Census tracts were used as the geographic units of analysis. Logistic regression examined death by days 30, 90, and 365 post-critical care initiation and in-hospital mortality. Adjusted ORs were estimated by multivariable logistic regression models. Sensitivity analysis was performed for 1-year postdischarge mortality among patients discharged to home., Results: Following multivariable adjustment, neighborhood poverty rate was not associated with all-cause 30-day mortality: 5% to 10% OR, 1.05 (95% CI, 0.98-1.14; P = .2); 10% to 20% OR, 0.96 (95% CI, 0.87-1.06; P = .5); 20% to 40% OR, 1.08 (95% CI, 0.96-1.22; P = .2); > 40% OR, 1.20 (95% CI, 0.90-1.60; P = .2); referent in each is < 5%. Similar nonsignificant associations were noted at 90-day and 365-day mortality post-critical care initiation and in-hospital mortality. Among patients discharged to home, neighborhood poverty rate was not associated with 1-year-postdischarge mortality., Conclusions: Our study suggests that there is no relationship between the neighborhood poverty rate and mortality up to 1 year following critical care at academic medical centers.

Background: The COVID-19 pandemic has highlighted that bereavement care is under-recognized with few hospitals offering universal bereavement services. Methods: One hundred sixty-nine bereaved individuals, whose loved ones died at our hospital during 2021 and 2022, completed a survey about their experience with the bereavement program. Results: Of respondents who recalled receiving bereavement outreach, 79% rated speaking to a team member soon after the death as having a positive impact on their bereavement, and 75% rated receiving a condolence call or note from the team positively. Feedback also identified opportunities for improvements in care: (1) importance of compassionate communication and connection with family members after a death; (2) more flexible hospital visitation policies; and (3) additional support for families during the end-of-life (EOL) period. Conclusions: The findings demonstrated that a hospital-based bereavement program can positively impact an individual's bereavement experience with a formal letter of condolence, psychoeducation information, and direct outreach from team members soon after death, being positively evaluated. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Advancing health equity entails reducing disparities in care. African-American patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD) have poorer outcomes, including dialysis access placement and transplantation. Estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) equations, which assign higher eGFR values to African-American patients, may be a mechanism for inequitable outcomes. Electronic health record–based registries enable population-based examination of care across racial groups. Objective: To examine the impact of the race multiplier for African-Americans in the CKD-EPI eGFR equation on CKD classification and care delivery. Design: Cross-sectional study Setting: Two large academic medical centers and affiliated community primary care and specialty practices. Participants: A total of 56,845 patients in the Partners HealthCare System CKD registry in June 2019, among whom 2225 (3.9%) were African-American. Measurements: Exposures included race, age, sex, comorbidities, and eGFR. Outcomes were transplant referral and dialysis access placement. Results: Of 2225 African-American patients, 743 (33.4%) would hypothetically be reclassified to a more severe CKD stage if the race multiplier were removed from the CKD-EPI equation. Similarly, 167 of 687 (24.3%) would be reclassified from stage 3B to stage 4. Finally, 64 of 2069 patients (3.1%) would be reassigned from eGFR > 20 ml/min/1.73 m2 to eGFR ≤ 20 ml/min/1.73 m2, meeting the criterion for accumulating kidney transplant priority. Zero of 64 African-American patients with an eGFR ≤ 20 ml/min/1.73 m2 after the race multiplier was removed were referred, evaluated, or waitlisted for kidney transplant, compared to 19.2% of African-American patients with eGFR ≤ 20 ml/min/1.73 m2 with the default CKD-EPI equation. Limitations: Single healthcare system in the Northeastern United States and relatively small African-American patient cohort may limit generalizability. Conclusions: Our study reveals a meaningful impact of race-adjusted eGFR on the care provided to the African-American CKD patient population. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Importance Death due to preventable medical error is a leading cause of death, with varying estimates of preventable death rates (14%-56% of total deaths based on national extrapolated estimates, 3%-11% based on single-centre estimates). Yet, how best to reduce preventable mortality in hospitals remains unknown. Objective In this article, we detail lessons learnt from implementing a hospital-wide, automated, real-time, electronic mortality reporting system that relies on the opinions of front-line clinicians to identify opportunities for improvement. We also summarise data obtained regarding possible preventability, systems issues identified and addressed, and challenges with implementation. We outline our process of survey, evaluation, escalation and tracking of opportunities identified through the review process. Methods We aggregated and analysed 7 years of review data regarding deaths, review responses categorised by ratings of possible preventability and inter-rater reliability of possible preventability. A qualitative analysis of reviews was performed to identify care delivery opportunities and institutional response. Results Over the course of 7 years, 7856 inpatient deaths occurred, and 91% had at least one review completed. 5.2% were rated by front-line clinicians as potentially being preventable (likely or possibly), and this rate was consistent over time. However, there was only slight inter-rater agreement regarding potential preventability (Cohen's kappa=0.185). Nevertheless, several major systems-level opportunities were identified that facilitated care delivery improvements, such as communication challenges, need for improved end-of-life care and interhospital transfer safety. Conclusions Through implementation, we found that a hospital-wide mortality review process that elicits feedback from front-line providers is feasible, and provides valuable insights regarding potential preventable mortality and prioritising actionable opportunities for care delivery improvements. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: The study objective was to investigate the association between primary language spoken and allcause mortality in critically ill patients. Materials and Methods: We performed a cohort study on 48 581 patients 18 years or older who received critical care between 1997 and 2007 in 2 Boston hospitals. The exposure of interest was primary language spoken determined by the patient or family members who interacted with administrative staff during hospital registration. The primary outcome was 30-day mortality. Associations between language and mortality were estimated by bivariable and multivariable logistic regression models with inclusion of covariate terms thought to plausibly interact with both language and mortality. Adjustment included age, race, sex, Deyo-Charlson index, patient type (medical vs surgical), sepsis, creatinine, hematocrit, white blood count, and number of organs with acute failure. Results: Validation showed that primary language spoken was highly accurate for a statement in the medical record noting the language spoken that matched the assigned language. Patients whose primary language spoken was not English had improved outcomes (odds ratio 30-day mortality, 0.69 [95% confidence interval, 0.60-0.81; P b .001), relative to patients with English as the primary language spoken, fully adjusted. Similar significant associations are seen with death by days 90 and 365 as well as in-hospital mortality. The improved survival in patients with a non-English primary language spoken is not confounded by indicators of severity of disease and is independent of the specific language spoken and neighborhood poverty rate, a proxy for socioeconomic status. There are significant limitations inherent to large database studies that we have acknowledged and addressed with controlling for measured confounding and evaluation of effect modification. Conclusions: In a regional cohort, not speaking English as a primary language is associated with improved outcomes after critical care. Our observations may have clinical relevance and illustrate the intersection of several factors in critical illness outcome including severity of illness, comorbidity, and social and economic factors. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

OBJECTIVES: Care management programs are employed by providers and payers to support high-risk patients and affect cost and utilization, with varied implementation. This study sought to evaluate the impact of an intensive care management program on utilization and cost among those with highest cost (top 5%) and highest utilization in a Medicaid accountable care organization (ACO) population. STUDY DESIGN: Randomized controlled quality improvement trial of intensive care management, provided by a nonprofit care management vendor, for Medicaid ACO patients at 2 academic centers. METHODS: Patients were identified using claims, chart review, and primary care validation, then randomly assigned 2:1 to intervention and control groups. Among 131 patients included in intent-to-treat analysis, 87 and 44 were randomly assigned to the intervention and control groups, respectively. Patients in the intervention group were eligible to receive intensive care management in the community/home setting and, in some cases, home-based primary care. Patients in the control group received standard of care, including practice-based care management. Prespecified primary outcome measures included total medical expense (TME), emergency department (ED) visits, and inpatient utilization. RESULTS: Relative to controls, patients randomly assigned to receive intensive care management had a $1933 smaller increase per member per month in TME (P = .04) and directionally consistent but nonsignificant reductions in ED visits (17% fewer; P = .40) and inpatient admissions (34% fewer; P = .29) in the 12 months post randomization compared with the 12 months prerandomization. CONCLUSIONS: Our study results support that targeted, intensive care management can favorably affect TME in a health system--based high-cost, high-risk Medicaid population. Further research is needed to evaluate the impact on additional clinical outcomes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]