The relationship between diabetes mellitus and 30-day readmission rates

Abstract Background It is estimated that 9.3% of the population in the United States have diabetes mellitus (DM), 28% of which are undiagnosed. The high prevalence of DM makes it a common comorbid condition in hospitalized patients. In recent years, government agencies and healthcare systems have increasingly focused on 30-day readmission rates to determine the complexity of their patient populations and to improve quality. Thirty-day readmission rates for hospitalized patients with DM are reported to be between 14.4 and 22.7%, much higher than the rate for all hospitalized patients (8.5–13.5%). The objectives of this study were to (1) determine the incidence and causes of 30-day readmission rates for patients with diabetes listed as either the primary reason for the index admission or with diabetes listed as a secondary diagnosis compared to those without DM and (2) evaluate the impact on readmission of two specialized inpatient DM services: the Hyperglycemic Intensive Insulin Program (HIIP) and Endocrine Consults (ENDO). Methods For this study, DM was defined as any ICD-9 discharge diagnosis (principal or secondary) of 250.xx. Readmissions were defined as any unscheduled inpatient admission, emergency department (ED) visit, or observation unit stay. We analyzed two separate sets of patient data. The first pilot study was a retrospective chart review of all patients with a principle or secondary admission diagnosis of diabetes admitted to any adult service within the University of Michigan Health System (UMHS) between October 1, 2013 and December 31, 2013. We then did further uncontrolled analysis of the patients with a principal admitting diagnosis of diabetes. The second larger retrospective study included all adults discharged from UMHS between October 1, 2013 and September 30, 2014 with principal or secondary discharge diagnosis of DM (ICD-9-CM: 250.xx). Results In the pilot study of 7763 admissions, the readmission rate was 26% for patients with DM and 22% for patients without DM. In patients with a primary diagnosis of DM on index admission, the most common cause for readmission was DM-related. In the larger study were 37,702 adult inpatient discharges between October 1, 2013 and September 30, 2014. Of these, 20.9% had DM listed as an encounter diagnosis. Rates for all encounters (inpatient, ED and Observation care) were 24.3% in patients with DM compared to 17.7% in those without DM (p < 0.001). The most common cause for readmission in patients with DM as a secondary diagnosis to the index admission was infection-related. During the index hospital stay, only a small proportion of patients with DM (approximately 12%) received any DM service consult. Those who received a DM consult had a higher case mix index compared to those who did not. Despite the higher acuity, there was a lower rate of ED /observation readmission in patients followed by the DM services (6.6% HIIP or ENDO vs. 9.6% no HIIP or ENDO, p = 0.0012), though no difference in the inpatient readmission rates (17.6% HIIP or ENDO vs. 17.4% no HIIP or ENDO, p = 0.89) was noted. Conclusions Patients with both a primary or secondary diagnosis of DM have higher readmission rates. The reasons for readmission vary; patients with a principal diagnosis of DM have more DM related readmissions and those with secondary diagnosis having more infection-related readmissions. DM services were used in a small proportion of patients and may have contributed to lower DM related ED revisits. Further prospective studies evaluating the role of these services in terms of glucose management, patient education and outpatient follow up on readmission are needed to identify interventions important to reducing readmission rates.https://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/136189/1/40842_2016_Article_40.pd

Population-Based Medical and Disease Management: An Evaluation of Cost and Quality

Reports by the Institute of Medicine and the Health Care Financing Administration have emphasized that the integration of medical care delivery, evidence-based medicine, and chronic care disease management may play a significant role in improving the quality of care and reducing medical care costs. The specific aim of this project is to assess the impact of an integrated set of care coordination tools and chronic disease management interventions on utilization, cost, and quality of care for a population of beneficiaries who have complementary health coverage through a plan designed to apply proactive medical and disease management processes. The utilization of health care services by the study population was compared to another population from the same geographic service area and covered by a traditional feefor- service indemnity insurance plan that provided few medical or disease management services. Evaluation of the difference in utilization was based on the difference in the cost permember- per-month (PMPM) in a 1-year measurement period, after adjusting for differences in fee schedules, case-mix and healthcare benefit design. After adjustments for both case-mix and benefit differences, the study group is $63 PMPM less costly than the comparison population for all members. Cost differences are largest in the 55-64 and 65 and above age groups. The study group is$115 PMPM lower than the comparison population for the age category of 65 years and older, after adjustments for case-mix and benefits. Health Plan Employer and Data Information Set (HEDIS)–based quality outcomes are near the 90th percentile for most indications. The cost outcomes of a population served by proactive, population-based disease management and complex care management, compared to an unmanaged population, demonstrates the potential of coordinated medical and disease management programs. Further studies utilizing appropriate methodologies would be beneficial. (Disease Management 2006;9:44–55)Peer Reviewedhttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/63418/1/dis.2006.9.45.pd

Direct maternal morbidity and the risk of pregnancy-related deaths, stillbirths, and neonatal deaths in South Asia and sub-Saharan Africa: A population-based prospective cohort study in 8 countries

Background Maternal morbidity occurs several times more frequently than mortality, yet data on morbidity burden and its effect on maternal, foetal, and newborn outcomes are limited in low- and middle-income countries. We aimed to generate prospective, reliable population-based data on the burden of major direct maternal morbidities in the antenatal, intrapartum, and postnatal periods and its association with maternal, foetal, and neonatal death in South Asia and sub-Saharan Africa. Methods and findings This is a prospective cohort study, conducted in 9 research sites in 8 countries of South Asia and sub-Saharan Africa. We conducted population-based surveillance of women of reproductive age (15 to 49 years) to identify pregnancies. Pregnant women who gave consent were include in the study and followed up to birth and 42 days postpartum from 2012 to 2015. We used standard operating procedures, data collection tools, and training to harmonise study implementation across sites. Three home visits during pregnancy and 2 home visits after birth were conducted to collect maternal morbidity information and maternal, foetal, and newborn outcomes. We measured blood pressure and proteinuria to define hypertensive disorders of pregnancy and woman’s self-report to identify obstetric haemorrhage, pregnancy-related infection, and prolonged or obstructed labour. Enrolled women whose pregnancy lasted at least 28 weeks or those who died during pregnancy were included in the analysis. We used meta-analysis to combine site-specific estimates of burden, and regression analysis combining all data from all sites to examine associations between the maternal morbidities and adverse outcomes. Among approximately 735,000 women of reproductive age in the study population, and 133,238 pregnancies during the study period, only 1.6% refused consent. Of these, 114,927 pregnancies had morbidity data collected at least once in both antenatal and in postnatal period, and 114,050 of them were included in the analysis. Overall, 32.7% of included pregnancies had at least one major direct maternal morbidity; South Asia had almost double the burden compared to sub-Saharan Africa (43.9%, 95% CI 27.8% to 60.0% in South Asia; 23.7%, 95% CI 19.8% to 27.6% in sub-Saharan Africa). Antepartum haemorrhage was reported in 2.2% (95% CI 1.5% to 2.9%) pregnancies and severe postpartum in 1.7% (95% CI 1.2% to 2.2%) pregnancies. Preeclampsia or eclampsia was reported in 1.4% (95% CI 0.9% to 2.0%) pregnancies, and gestational hypertension alone was reported in 7.4% (95% CI 4.6% to 10.1%) pregnancies. Prolonged or obstructed labour was reported in about 11.1% (95% CI 5.4% to 16.8%) pregnancies. Clinical features of late third trimester antepartum infection were present in 9.1% (95% CI 5.6% to 12.6%) pregnancies and those of postpartum infection in 8.6% (95% CI 4.4% to 12.8%) pregnancies. There were 187 pregnancy-related deaths per 100,000 births, 27 stillbirths per 1,000 births, and 28 neonatal deaths per 1,000 live births with variation by country and region. Direct maternal morbidities were associated with each of these outcomes. Conclusions Our findings imply that health programmes in sub-Saharan Africa and South Asia must intensify their efforts to identify and treat maternal morbidities, which affected about one-third of all pregnancies and to prevent associated maternal and neonatal deaths and stillbirths