The Procedural Index for Mortality Risk (PIMR): an index calculated using administrative data to quantify the independent influence of procedures on risk of hospital death

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Surgeries and other procedures can influence the risk of death in hospital. All published scales that predict post-operative death risk require clinical data and cannot be measured using administrative data alone. This study derived and internally validated an index that can be calculated using administrative data to quantify the independent risk of hospital death after a procedure.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>For all patients admitted to a single academic centre between 2004 and 2009, we estimated the risk of all-cause death using the Kaiser Permanente Inpatient Risk Adjustment Methodology (KP-IRAM). We determined whether each patient underwent one of 503 commonly performed therapeutic procedures using Canadian Classification of Interventions codes and whether each procedure was emergent or elective. Multivariate logistic regression modeling was used to measure the association of each procedure-urgency combination with death in hospital independent of the KP-IRAM risk of death. The final model was modified into a scoring system to quantify the independent influence each procedure had on the risk of death in hospital.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>275 460 hospitalizations were included (137,730 derivation, 137,730 validation). In the derivation group, the median expected risk of death was 0.1% (IQR 0.01%-1.4%) with 4013 (2.9%) dying during the hospitalization. 56 distinct procedure-urgency combinations entered our final model resulting in a Procedural Index for Mortality Rating (PIMR) score values ranging from -7 to +11. In the validation group, the PIMR score significantly predicted the risk of death by itself (c-statistic 67.3%, 95% CI 66.6-68.0%) and when added to the KP-IRAM model (c-index improved significantly from 0.929 to 0.938).</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>We derived and internally validated an index that uses administrative data to quantify the independent association of a broad range of therapeutic procedures with risk of death in hospital. This scale will improve risk adjustment when administrative data are used for analyses.</p

Primary care provider perceptions of intake transition records and shared care with outpatient cardiac rehabilitation programs

Abstract Background While it is recommended that records are kept between primary care providers (PCPs) and specialists during patient transitions from hospital to community care, this communication is not currently standardized. We aimed to assess the transmission of cardiac rehabilitation (CR) program intake transition records to PCPs and to explore PCPs' needs in communication with CR programs and for intake transition record content. Method 144 PCPs of consenting enrollees from 8 regional and urban Ontario CR programs participated in this cross-sectional study. Intake transition records were tracked from the CR program to the PCP's office. Sixty-six PCPs participated in structured telephone interviews. Results Sixty-eight (47.6%) PCPs received a CR intake transition record. Fifty-eight (87.9%) PCPs desired intake transition records, with most wanting it transmitted via fax (n = 52, 78.8%). On a 5-point Likert scale, PCPs strongly agreed that the CR transition record met their needs for providing patient care (4.32 ± 0.61), with 48 (76.2%) reporting that it improved their management of patients' cardiac risk. PCPs rated the following elements as most important to include in an intake transition record: clinical status (4.67 ± 0.64), exercise test results (4.61 ± 0.52), and the proposed patient care plan (4.59 ± 0.71). Conclusions Less than half of intake transition records are reaching PCPs, revealing a large gap in continuity of patient care. PCP responses should be used to develop an evidence-based intake transition record, and procedures should be implemented to ensure high-quality transitional care

A discharge summary adapted to the frail elderly to ensure transfer of relevant information from the hospital to community settings: a model

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Elderly patients admitted to Geriatric Assessment Units (GAU) typically have complex health problems that require multi-professional care. Considering the scope of human and technological resources solicited during hospitalization, as well as the many risks and discomforts incurred by the patient, it is important to ensure the communication of pertinent information for quality follow-up care in the community setting. Conventional discharge summaries do not adequately incorporate the elements specific to an aging clientele.</p> <p>Objective</p> <p>To develop a discharge summary adapted to the frail elderly patient (D-SAFE) in order to communicate relevant information from hospital to community services.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>The items to be included in the D-SAFE have been determined by means of a modified Delphi method through consultation with clinical experts from GAUs (11 physicians and 5 pharmacists) and the community (10 physicians and 5 pharmacists). The consensus analysis and the level of agreement among the experts were reached using a modified version of the RAND^®/University of California at Los Angeles appropriateness method.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>A consensus was reached after two rounds of consultation for all the items evaluated, where none was judged «inappropriate». Among the items proposed, four were judged to be « uncertain » and were eliminated from the final D-SAFE, which was divided into two sections: the medical discharge summary (22 main items) and the discharge prescription (14 main items).</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>The D-SAFE was developed as a more comprehensive tool specifically designed for GAU inpatients. Additional research to validate its acceptability and practical impact on the continuity of care is needed before it can be recommended for use on a broader scale.</p

Informational needs of general practitioners regarding discharge medication: content, timing and pharmacotherapeutic advice

textabstractObjective: To investigate the needs of Dutch general practitioners on discharge medication, both regarding content, timing and the appreciation of pharma-cotherapeutic advices from clinical pharmacists. Setting: A general teaching hospital in Amsterdam, the Netherlands. Method: A prospective observational study was performed. A questionnaire with regard to the content, optimal timing (including way of information transfer) and appreciation of pharmacotherapeutic advices was posted to 464 general practitioners. One reminder was sent. Main outcome measure: Description of the needs of general practitioners was assessed. For each question and categories of comments frequency tables were made. The Fisher-exact test was used to study associations between the answers to the questions. Results: In total, 149 general practitioners (32%) responded. Most general practitioners (75%) experienced a delay in receiving discharge medication information and preferred to receive this on the day of discharge. GPs wished to receive this information mainly through e-mail (44%). There was a significant correlation (P = 0.002) between general practitioners who wanted to know whether and why medication had been stopped (87%) and changed (88%) during hospital admission. The general practitioners (88%) appreciated pharmacotherapeutic advices from clinical pharmacists. Conclusion: This study indicates how information transfer on discharge medication to GPs can be optimised in the Netherlands. The information arrives late and GPs want to be informed on the day of discharge mainly by e-mail. GPs wish to know why medication is changed or discontinued and appreciate pharmacotherapeutic advices from clinical pharmacists

Predictive validity of the CriSTAL tool for short-term mortality in older people presenting at Emergency Departments: a prospective study

© 2018, The Author(s). Abstract: To determine the validity of the Australian clinical prediction tool Criteria for Screening and Triaging to Appropriate aLternative care (CRISTAL) based on objective clinical criteria to accurately identify risk of death within 3 months of admission among older patients. Methods: Prospective study of ≥ 65 year-olds presenting at emergency departments in five Australian (Aus) and four Danish (DK) hospitals. Logistic regression analysis was used to model factors for death prediction; Sensitivity, specificity, area under the ROC curve and calibration with bootstrapping techniques were used to describe predictive accuracy. Results: 2493 patients, with median age 78–80 years (DK–Aus). The deceased had significantly higher mean CriSTAL with Australian mean of 8.1 (95% CI 7.7–8.6 vs. 5.8 95% CI 5.6–5.9) and Danish mean 7.1 (95% CI 6.6–7.5 vs. 5.5 95% CI 5.4–5.6). The model with Fried Frailty score was optimal for the Australian cohort but prediction with the Clinical Frailty Scale (CFS) was also good (AUROC 0.825 and 0.81, respectively). Values for the Danish cohort were AUROC 0.764 with Fried and 0.794 using CFS. The most significant independent predictors of short-term death in both cohorts were advanced malignancy, frailty, male gender and advanced age. CriSTAL’s accuracy was only modest for in-hospital death prediction in either setting. Conclusions: The modified CriSTAL tool (with CFS instead of Fried’s frailty instrument) has good discriminant power to improve prognostic certainty of short-term mortality for ED physicians in both health systems. This shows promise in enhancing clinician’s confidence in initiating earlier end-of-life discussions

Chronic fatigue in childhood cancer survivors is associated with lifestyle and psychosocial factors; a DCCSS LATER study

Background: The purpose of this study was to determine factors associated with chronic fatigue (CF) in childhood cancer survivors (CCS). Patients and methods: Participants were included from the Dutch Childhood Cancer Survivor Study (DCCSS) LATER cohort, a nationwide cohort of CCS (≥5 years after diagnosis) and siblings as controls. Fatigue severity was assessed with the ‘fatigue severity subscale’ of the Checklist Individual Strength (‘CIS-fatigue’). CF was defined as scoring ≥35 on the ‘CIS-fatigue’ and having fatigue symptoms for ≥6 months. Twenty-four parameters were assessed, categorized into assumed fatigue triggering, maintaining and moderating factors. Multivariable logistic regression analyses were carried out to investigate the association of these factors with CF. Results: A total of 1927 CCS participated in the study (40.7% of invited cohort), of whom 23.6% reported CF (compared with 15.6% in sibling controls, P &lt; 0.001). The following factors were associated with CF: obesity [versus healthy weight, odds ratio (OR) 1.93; 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.30-2.87], moderate physical inactivity (versus physical active, OR 2.36; 95% CI 1.67-3.34), poor sleep (yes versus no, OR 2.03; 95% CI 1.54-2.68), (sub)clinical anxiety (yes versus no, OR 1.55; 95% CI 1.10-2.19), (sub)clinical depression (yes versus no, OR 2.07; 95% CI 1.20-3.59), pain (continuous, OR 1.49; 95% CI 1.33-1.66), self-esteem (continuous, OR 0.95; 95% CI 0.92-0.98), helplessness (continuous, OR 1.13; 95% CI 1.08-1.19), social functioning (continuous, OR 0.98; 95% CI 0.97-0.99) and female sex (versus male sex, OR 1.79; 95% CI 1.36-2.37). Conclusion: CF is a prevalent symptom in CCS that is associated with several assumed maintaining factors, with lifestyle and psychosocial factors being the most prominent. These are modifiable factors and may therefore be beneficial to prevent or reduce CF in CCS.</p

Association of Communication Between Hospital-based Physicians and Primary Care Providers with Patient Outcomes

Background: Patients admitted to general medicine inpatient services are increasingly cared for by hospital-based physicians rather than their primary care providers (PCPs). This separation of hospital and ambulatory care may result in important care discontinuities after discharge. We sought to determine whether communication between hospital-based physicians and PCPs influences patient outcomes. Methods: We approached consecutive patients admitted to general medicine services at six US academic centers from July 2001 to June 2003. A random sample of the PCPs for consented patients was contacted 2 weeks after patient discharge and surveyed about communication with the hospital medical team. Responses were linked with the 30-day composite patient outcomes of mortality, hospital readmission, and emergency department (ED) visits obtained through follow-up telephone survey and National Death Index search. We used hierarchical multi-variable logistic regression to model whether communication with the patient’s PCP was associated with the 30-day composite outcome. Results: A total of 1,772 PCPs for 2,336 patients were surveyed with 908 PCPs responses and complete patient follow-up available for 1,078 patients. The PCPs for 834 patients (77%) were aware that their patient had been admitted to the hospital. Of these, direct communication between PCPs and inpatient physicians took place for 194 patients (23%), and a discharge summary was available within 2 weeks of discharge for 347 patients (42%). Within 30 days of discharge, 233 (22%) patients died, were readmitted to the hospital, or visited an ED. In adjusted analyses, no relationship was seen between the composite outcome and direct physician communication (adjusted odds ratio 0.87, 95% confidence interval 0.56 – 1.34), the presence of a discharge summary (0.84, 95% CI 0.57–1.22), or PCP awareness of the index hospitalization (1.08, 95% CI 0.73–1.59). Conclusion: Analysis of communication between PCPs and inpatient medical teams revealed much room for improvement. Although communication during handoffs of care is important, we were not able to find a relationship between several aspects of communication and associated adverse clinical outcomes in this multi-center patient sample

General practice vs surgical-based follow-up for patients with colon cancer: randomised controlled trial

This trial examined the optimal setting for follow-up of patients after treatment for colon cancer by either general practitioners or surgeons. In all, 203 consenting patients who had undergone potentially curative treatment for colon cancer were randomised to follow-up by general practitioners or surgeons. Follow-up guidance recommended three monthly clinical review and annual faecal occult blood tests (FOBT) and were identical in both study arms. Primary outcome measures (measured at baseline, 12 and 24 months were (1) quality of life, SF-12; physical and mental component scores, (2) anxiety and depression: Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale and (3) patient satisfaction: Patient Visit-Specific Questionnaire. Secondary outcomes (at 24 months) were: investigations, number and timing of recurrences and deaths. In all, 170 patients were available for follow-up at 12 months and 157 at 24 months. At 12 and 24 months there were no differences in scores for quality of life (physical component score, P=0.88 at 12 months; P=0.28 at 24 months: mental component score, P=0.51, P=0.47; adjusted), anxiety (P=0.72; P=0.11) depression (P=0.28; P=0.80) or patient satisfaction (P=0.06, 24 months). General practitioners ordered more FOBTs than surgeons (rate ratio 2.4, 95% CI 1.4–4.4), whereas more colonoscopies (rate ratio 0.7, 95% CI 0.5–1.0), and ultrasounds (rate ratio 0.5, 95% CI 0.3–1.0) were undertaken in the surgeon-led group. Results suggest similar recurrence, time to detection and death rates in each group. Colon cancer patients with follow-up led by surgeons or general practitioners experience similar outcomes, although patterns of investigation vary