Person:

Schnipper, Jeffrey

Objective To evaluate the primary diagnoses and patterns of 30 day readmissions and potentially avoidable readmissions in medical patients with each of the most common comorbidities. Design: Retrospective cohort study. Setting: Academic tertiary medical centre in Boston, 2009-10. Participants: 10 731 consecutive adult discharges from a medical department. Main outcome measures Primary readmission diagnoses of readmissions within 30 days of discharge and potentially avoidable 30 day readmissions to the index hospital or two other hospitals in its network. Results: Among 10 731 discharges, 2398 (22.3%) were followed by a 30 day readmission, of which 858 (8.0%) were identified as potentially avoidable. Overall, infection, neoplasm, heart failure, gastrointestinal disorder, and liver disorder were the most frequent primary diagnoses of potentially avoidable readmissions. Almost all of the top five diagnoses of potentially avoidable readmissions for each comorbidity were possible direct or indirect complications of that comorbidity. In patients with a comorbidity of heart failure, diabetes, ischemic heart disease, atrial fibrillation, or chronic kidney disease, the most common diagnosis of potentially avoidable readmission was acute heart failure. Patients with neoplasm, heart failure, and chronic kidney disease had a higher risk of potentially avoidable readmissions than did those without those comorbidities. Conclusions: The five most common primary diagnoses of potentially avoidable readmissions were usually possible complications of an underlying comorbidity. Post-discharge care should focus attention not just on the primary index admission diagnosis but also on the comorbidities patients have.

Background: Unresolved medication discrepancies during hospitalization can contribute to adverse drug events, resulting in patient harm. Discrepancies can be reduced by performing medication reconciliation; however, effective implementation of medication reconciliation has proven to be challenging. The goals of the Multi-Center Medication Reconciliation Quality Improvement Study (MARQUIS) are to operationalize best practices for inpatient medication reconciliation, test their effect on potentially harmful unintentional medication discrepancies, and understand barriers and facilitators of successful implementation. Methods: Six U.S. hospitals are participating in this quality improvement mentored implementation study. Each hospital has collected baseline data on the primary outcome: the number of potentially harmful unintentional medication discrepancies per patient, as determined by a trained on-site pharmacist taking a “gold standard” medication history. With the guidance of their mentors, each site has also begun to implement one or more of 11 best practices to improve medication reconciliation. To understand the effect of the implemented interventions on hospital staff and culture, we are performing mixed methods program evaluation including surveys, interviews, and focus groups of front line staff and hospital leaders. Discussion At baseline the number of unintentional medication discrepancies in admission and discharge orders per patient varies by site from 2.35 to 4.67 (mean=3.35). Most discrepancies are due to history errors (mean 2.12 per patient) as opposed to reconciliation errors (mean 1.23 per patient). Potentially harmful medication discrepancies averages 0.45 per patient and varies by site from 0.13 to 0.82 per patient. We discuss several barriers to implementation encountered thus far. In the end, we anticipate that MARQUIS tools and lessons learned have the potential to decrease medication discrepancies and improve patient outcomes. Trial registration Clinicaltrials.gov identifier NCT01337063

Objective: There has been little research to examine the association of post-discharge adverse events (AEs) with timely follow-up visits after hospital discharge. We aimed to examine whether having a timely follow-up outpatient visit would reduce the risk for post-discharge AEs. Methods: This was a methods study of patients at risk for post-discharge AEs from December 2011 through October 2012. Five hundred and forty-five patients who were under the care of hospitalist physicians and were discharged home from a community hospital, spoke English, and could be contacted after discharge were evaluated. The aim of the study was to examine the association of post-discharge AEs with timely follow-up visits after hospital discharge based on structured telephone interviews, health record review, and adjudication by two blinded, trained physicians using a previously established methodology. Results: We observed a higher incidence of AEs with patients that had their first follow-up visit within 7 days after hospital discharge (33.5% vs. 23.0%, p = 0.007). This effect was attenuated somewhat but remained significant when adjusted for several patient factors (adjusted OR 1.33, 95% confidence interval 1.16–2.71). Conclusion: This observational study paradoxically showed an increase in post-discharge AEs with early follow-up, likely a result of confounding by indication and/or information bias that could not be completely adjusted for. This study illustrates the potential hazards with conducting observational studies to determine the efficacy of various transitional care interventions, such as early follow-up, where risk for confounding by indication is high.