Search

Objective: To determine the effect of pneumonia on 30-day mortality in patients hospitalized for acute stroke., Methods: Subjects in the initial cohort were 14,293 Medicare patients admitted for stroke to 29 greater Cleveland hospitals between 1991 and 1997. The relative risk (RR) of pneumonia for 30-day mortality was determined in a final cohort (n = 11,286) that excluded patients dying or having a do not resuscitate order within 3 days of admission. Clinical data were obtained from chart abstraction and were merged with Medicare Provider Analysis and Review files to obtain deaths within 30 days. A predicted-mortality model (c-statistic = 0.78) and propensity score for pneumonia (c-statistic = 0.83) were used for risk adjustment in logistic regression analyses., Results: Pneumonia was identified in 6.9% (n = 985) of all patients and in 5.6% (n = 635) of the final cohort. The rates of pneumonia were higher in patients with greater stroke severity and features indicating general frailty. Unadjusted 30-day mortality rates were six times higher for patients with pneumonia than for those without (26.9% vs 4.4%, p < 0.001). After adjusting for admission severity and propensity for pneumonia, RR of pneumonia for 30-day death was 2.99 (95% CI 2.44 to 3.66), and population attributable risk was 10.0%., Conclusion: In this large community-wide study of stroke outcomes, pneumonia conferred a threefold increased risk of 30-day death, adding impetus to efforts to identify and reduce the risk of pneumonia in patients with stroke.

During the mid-1970s, four similar groups of patients and providers were created with the institution of the Firm System at Cleveland Metropolitan General Hospital (Metro). In the early 1980s, ongoing randomization was initiated for patients and physicians, setting the stage for the performance of randomized controlled trials. Techniques such as stratification and blocking are used with randomization to ensure that equivalent numbers and characteristics of patients and physicians are distributed among the firms. Comparability of key patient and physician features across firms has been documented during the baseline periods of several recent firm studies. Dissimilarities among firms can occur secondary to differential drop-out of patients (residue cohort effect), or to administrative decisions that adversely affect the structural or operational integrity of the system. Prestudy evaluations of equivalence and vigilant system maintenance programs are methods to identify and minimize important differences among firms.

We evaluated the reorganization of a general medical clinic into several group practices, using equivalent groups of patients and physicians in a randomized controlled trial. The group practice, unlike the traditional clinic, provided decentralized registration, clinic coverage five days a week, and telephone coverage at night and on weekends. Residents worked in small groups with an attending physician, nurse practitioner, and receptionist. All financial activity involving a sample of 2299 patients was followed during the 11-month intervention. The total hospital charges per patient were 26 percent lower for the patients seen in the group practice than for those seen in the traditional clinic (P = 0.003). This difference was primarily attributable to inpatient charges, which were 27 percent lower per patient hospitalized (P = 0.004). The mean length of stay was 8.3 days among group-practice patients and 10.5 days among traditional-clinic patients (P = 0.011). We conclude that organizational changes to improve outpatient access and to integrate inpatient and outpatient services can decrease medical charges.

The effect upon patient satisfaction of a reorganization of a traditional medical clinic into a group practice model was examined in a controlled trial in which both patients and physicians were randomized. The group practice model, unlike the traditional clinic, provided decentralized registration, 5 days/week clinic coverage, and night/weekend phone coverage. Residents worked in small groups with an attending physician, a nurse practitioner, and a receptionist. This reorganization resulted in a substantial decrease in charges and utilization for patients in the experimental group. A panel of 302 patients was interviewed prior to the reorganization and 1 year later. Patients in the experimental groups perceived improvements in access to their physicians as well as decreases in clinic waiting time and decreases in the lag time between requesting and obtaining an appointment. General health perceptions and other satisfaction measures were unchanged. The authors conclude that a group practice organization can result in decreased patient charges without substantially altering patient satisfaction.

Changes in the health care system and especially in reimbursement systems are creating new challenges for all hospitals. These challenges are particularly critical for academic medical centers. The traditional (inpatient) teaching base is threatened by changes in the case mix of patients entering hospitals and by the associated decreasing lengths of stay. The effects of the new financial pressures are intensified in academic centers which have been shown to be less efficient and more costly than community hospitals. This paper describes the formation and evolution of the Metro Firm System, an organizational structure which is adapting to the changing demands placed on an academic medical center. Inherent in its structure is the ability to evaluate easily and rigorously changes that have been suggested in the system prior to implementing them. Operational details essential for understanding functions of and interrelationships within the system are included.

Physician knowledge of costs and charges for medical services is thought to have substantial relevance for cost containment. Unfortunately, numerous studies have demonstrated the difficulties in using educational techniques to improve knowledge and reduce charges. Furthermore, reductions in charges, when achieved, have not correlated with improved physician knowledge. The authors examined several methods of ascertaining physician knowledge of charges and they suggest that previous methods may have been too insensitive. Previous reports may have underestimated physician knowledge of costs and charges.