A Web-Based, Provider-Driven Mobile App to Enhance Patient Care Coordination Between Dialysis Facilities and Hospitals: Development and Pilot Implementation Study.

BACKGROUND: We piloted a web-based, provider-driven mobile app (DialysisConnect) to fill the communication and care coordination gap between hospitals and dialysis facilities. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to describe the development and pilot implementation of DialysisConnect. METHODS: DialysisConnect was developed iteratively with focus group and user testing feedback and was made available to 120 potential users at 1 hospital (hospitalists, advanced practice providers [APPs], and care coordinators) and 4 affiliated dialysis facilities (nephrologists, APPs, nurses and nurse managers, social workers, and administrative personnel) before the start of the pilot (November 1, 2020, to May 31, 2021). Midpilot and end-of-pilot web-based surveys of potential users were also conducted. Descriptive statistics were used to describe system use patterns, ratings of multiple satisfaction items (1=not at all; 3=to a great extent), and provider-selected motivators of and barriers to using DialysisConnect. RESULTS: The pilot version of DialysisConnect included clinical information that was automatically uploaded from dialysis facilities, forms for entering critical admission and discharge information, and a direct communication channel. Although physicians comprised most of the potential users of DialysisConnect, APPs and dialysis nurses were the most active users. Activities were unevenly distributed; for example, 1 hospital-based APP recorded most of the admissions (280/309, 90.6%) among patients treated at the pilot dialysis facilities. End-of-pilot ratings of DialysisConnect were generally higher for users versus nonusers (eg, "I can see the potential value of DialysisConnect for my work with dialysis patients": mean 2.8, SD 0.4, vs mean 2.3, SD 0.6; P=.02). Providers most commonly selected reduced time and energy spent gathering information as a motivator (11/26, 42%) and a lack of time to use the system as a barrier (8/26, 31%) at the end of the pilot. CONCLUSIONS: This pilot study found that APPs and nurses were most likely to engage with the system. Survey participants generally viewed the system favorably while identifying substantial barriers to its use. These results inform how best to motivate providers to use this system and similar systems and inform future pragmatic research in care coordination among this and other populations.

Effectiveness of a Web-Based Provider Communications Platform in Reducing Hospital Readmissions Among Patients Receiving Dialysis: A Pilot Pre-Post Study.

Rationale & Objective: Suboptimal care coordination between dialysis facilities and hospitals is an important driver of 30-day hospital readmissions among patients receiving dialysis. We examined whether the introduction of web-based communications platform ("DialysisConnect") was associated with reduced hospital readmissions. Study Design: Pilot pre-post study. Setting & Participants: A total of 4,994 index admissions at a single hospital (representing 2,419 patients receiving dialysis) during the study period (January 1, 2019-May 31, 2021). Intervention: DialysisConnect was available to providers at the hospital and 4 affiliated dialysis facilities (=intervention facilities) during the pilot period (November 1, 2020-May 31, 2021). Outcomes: The primary outcome was 30-day readmission; secondary outcomes included 30-day emergency department visits and observation stays. Interrupted time series and linear models with generalized estimating equations were used to assess pilot versus prepilot differences in outcomes; difference-in-difference analyses were performed to compare these differences between intervention versus control facilities. Sensitivity analyses included a third, prepilot/COVID-19 period (March 1, 2020-October 31, 2020). Results: There was no statistically significant difference in the monthly trends in the 30-day readmissions pilot versus prepilot periods (-0.60 vs -0.13, P = 0.85) for intervention facility admissions; the difference-in-difference estimate was also not statistically significant (0.54 percentage points, P = 0.83). Similar analyses including the prepilot/COVID-19 period showed that, despite a substantial drop in admissions at the start of the pandemic, there were no statistically significant differences across the 3 periods. The age-, sex-, race-, and comorbid condition-adjusted, absolute pilot versus prepilot difference in readmissions rate was 1.8% (-3.7% to 7.3%); similar results were found for other outcomes. Limitations: Potential loss to follow-up and pandemic effects. Conclusions: In this pilot, the introduction of DialysisConnect was not associated with reduced hospital readmissions. Tailored care coordination solutions should be further explored in future, multisite studies to improve the communications gap between dialysis facilities and hospitals.

Association of COVID-19 pandemic-related concern and health routine changes with functioning among individuals with systemic lupus erythematosus.

OBJECTIVE: To examine whether pandemic-related issues were associated with physical functioning, community mobility and cognition among individuals with SLE. METHODS: Participants were recruited (6 October 2020-11 November 2021) for this cross-sectional study from a population-based cohort of individuals with validated SLE in metropolitan Atlanta, as part of an ongoing ancillary study. Pandemic-related issues (concern about the pandemic (very vs somewhat/not at all concerned); changes in physical activity and sleep (less vs more/same); difficulty obtaining food and medications and accessing routine care (any vs none)) were self-reported. Self-reported physical functioning and episodic and working memory performance were reported as t-scores (such that a score of 50=population mean and a 10-point difference=1 SD) and community mobility scores ranged from 0 to 120, with higher scores representing better functioning for all domains. Differences in scores were assessed via t-tests and age-adjusted, sex-adjusted and race-adjusted linear regression. RESULTS: Among 245 participants (mean age, 46 years; 95% female, 77% black), physical functioning t-scores (mean=44) were consistently lower (by 3-5 points) for those who reported concern about the pandemic, less physical activity and sleep, difficulty obtaining food and medications, and accessing routine care. Similarly, community mobility scores (mean=48) were lower (by 10-20 points) for these individuals. There were no substantial differences in episodic memory and working memory t-scores (mean=50 and 47, respectively) by pandemic-related issues. CONCLUSION: We found that physical functioning and community mobility, but not cognition, were lower among those who reported more concern about the pandemic or greater disruptions to health routines. Future studies should explore interventions among these vulnerable individuals with SLE, who already disproportionately suffer from functional impairment, to maintain functioning and prevent adverse outcomes during times of crisis.

Associations between remote patient monitoring programme responsiveness and clinical outcomes for patients with COVID-19.

OBJECTIVE: To assess whether engagement in a COVID-19 remote patient monitoring (RPM) programme or telemedicine programme improves patient outcomes. METHODS: This is a retrospective cohort study analysing patient responsiveness to our RPM survey or telemedicine visits and outcomes during the COVID-19 pandemic. Daily text message surveys and telemedicine consultations were offered to all patients who tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 at our institutional screening centres. Survey respondents with alarm responses were contacted by a nurse. We assessed the relationship between virtual engagement (telemedicine or RPM survey response) and clinical outcomes using multivariable logistic regression. RESULTS: Between 10 July 2020 and 2 January 2021, 6822 patients tested positive, with 1230 (18%) responding to at least one survey. Compared with non-responders, responders were younger (49 vs 53 years) and more likely to be white (40% vs 33%) and female (65% vs 55%) and had fewer comorbidities. After adjustment, individuals who engaged virtually were less likely to experience an emergency department visit, hospital admission or intensive care unit-level care. CONCLUSION: Telemedicine and RPM programme engagement (vs no engagement) were associated with better outcomes, but this was likely due to differences in groups at baseline rather than the efficacy of our intervention alone.