Unplanned readmission rates, length of hospital stay, mortality, and medical costs of ten common medical conditions: a retrospective analysis of Hong Kong hospital data

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Studies on readmissions attributed to particular medical conditions, especially heart failure, have generally not addressed the factors associated with readmissions and the implications for health outcomes and costs. This study aimed to investigate the factors associated with 30-day unplanned readmission for 10 common conditions and to determine the cost implications.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>This population-based retrospective cohort study included patients admitted to all public hospitals in Hong Kong in 2007. The sample consisted of 337,694 hospitalizations in Internal Medicine. The disease-specific risk-adjusted odd ratio (OR), length of stay (LOS), mortality and attributable medical costs for the year were examined for unplanned readmissions for 10 medical conditions, namely malignant neoplasms, heart diseases, cerebrovascular diseases, pneumonia, injury and poisoning, nephritis and nephrosis, diabetes mellitus, chronic liver disease and cirrhosis, septicaemia, and aortic aneurysm.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>The overall unplanned readmission rate was 16.7%. Chronic liver disease and cirrhosis had the highest OR (1.62, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.39-1.87). Patients with cerebrovascular disease had the longest LOS, with mean acute and rehabilitation stays of 6.9 and 3.0 days, respectively. Malignant neoplasms had the highest mortality rate (30.8%) followed by aortic aneurysm and pneumonia. The attributed medical cost of readmission was highest for heart disease (US$3 199 418, 95$2 579 443-803 393).</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>Our findings showed variations in readmission rates and mortality for different medical conditions which may suggest differences in the quality of care provided for various medical conditions. In-hospital care, comprehensive discharge planning, and post-discharge community support for patients need to be reviewed to improve the quality of care and patient health outcomes.</p

A systematic review of tests of empathy in medicine

Abstract Background Empathy is frequently cited as an important attribute in physicians and some groups have expressed a desire to measure empathy either at selection for medical school or during medical (or postgraduate) training. In order to do this, a reliable and valid test of empathy is required. The purpose of this systematic review is to determine the reliability and validity of existing tests for the assessment of medical empathy. Methods A systematic review of research papers relating to the reliability and validity of tests of empathy in medical students and doctors. Journal databases (Medline, EMBASE, and PsycINFO) were searched for English-language articles relating to the assessment of empathy and related constructs in applicants to medical school, medical students, and doctors. Results From 1147 citations, we identified 50 relevant papers describing 36 different instruments of empathy measurement. As some papers assessed more than one instrument, there were 59 instrument assessments. 20 of these involved only medical students, 30 involved only practising clinicians, and three involved only medical school applicants. Four assessments involved both medical students and practising clinicians, and two studies involved both medical school applicants and students. Eight instruments demonstrated evidence of reliability, internal consistency, and validity. Of these, six were self-rated measures, one was a patient-rated measure, and one was an observer-rated measure. Conclusion A number of empathy measures available have been psychometrically assessed for research use among medical students and practising medical doctors. No empathy measures were found with sufficient evidence of predictive validity for use as selection measures for medical school. However, measures with a sufficient evidential base to support their use as tools for investigating the role of empathy in medical training and clinical care are available.</p

Measuring Attitudes Towards Social Europe: A Multidimensional Approach

Although the notion of ‘Social Europe’ can refer to different principles and policy options, most research narrows down attitudes towards Social Europe to a unidimensional construct. In this study, we instead propose a multi-dimensional approach, and contribute to the literature in three ways. First, we elaborate the notion of ‘Social Europe’ conceptually, and distinguish between the decision-making level for social policy, European social citizenship, harmonization, member-state solidarity and interpersonal solidarity. Second, analysing the 2014 Belgian National Election Study by means of confirmatory factor analysis we evidence that citizens indeed have distinct attitudes towards the policy principles and instruments of Social Europe. Although these attitudinal dimensions are interrelated, they cannot be reduced to a single Social Europe factor, meaning that citizens differentiate in their attitudes between various aspects of Social Europe. In addition, our research indicates that member-state solidarity is the primary aspect of Social Europe in public opinion, whereas the feature that has received most scholarly attention in empirical research to date—the preferred decision-making level for social policy—cannot be considered as a key component of attitudes towards Social Europe. Third, we investigate whether citizens with different educational levels conceptualize Social Europe similarly using multigroup confirmatory factor analysis. Results indicate that the attitudinal factor structure of Social Europe is largely equivalent among lower and higher-educated citizens