How well can hospital readmission be predicted in a cohort of hospitalized children? A retrospective, multicenter study.

BACKGROUND: Children with complex chronic conditions depend on both their families and systems of pediatric health care, social services, and financing. Investigations into the workings of this ecology of care would be advanced by more accurate methods of population-level predictions of the likelihood for future hospitalization. METHODS: This was a retrospective cohort study. Hospital administrative data were collected from 38 children's hospitals in the United States for the years 2003-2005. Participants included patients between 2 and 18 years of age discharged from an index hospitalization during 2004. Patient characteristics documented during the index hospitalization or any previous hospitalization during the preceding 365 days were included. The main outcome measure was readmission to the hospital during the 365 days after discharge from the index admission. RESULTS: Among the cohort composed of 186856 patients discharged from the participating hospitals during 2004, the mean age was 9.2 years, with 54.4% male and 52.9% identified as non-Hispanic white. A total of 17.4% were admitted during the previous 365 days, and among those discharged alive (0.6% died during the admission), 16.7% were readmitted during the ensuing 365 days. The final readmission model exhibited a c statistic of 0.81 across all hospitals, with a range from 0.76 to 0.84 for each hospital. Bootstrap-based assessments demonstrated the stability of the final model. CONCLUSIONS: Accurate population-level prediction of hospital readmissions is possible, and the resulting predicted probability of hospital readmission may prove useful for health services research and planning.

Off-label drug use in hospitalized children.

OBJECTIVES: To describe the magnitude of off-label drug use, to identify drugs most commonly used off-label, and to identify factors associated with off-label drug use in children hospitalized in the United States. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. SETTING: Administrative database containing inpatient resource utilization data from January 1 to December 31, 2004, from 31 tertiary care pediatric hospitals in the United States. PARTICIPANTS: Hospitalized patients 18 years or younger. MAIN EXPOSURES: Institution and patient characteristics. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Off-label drug use was defined as use of a specific drug in a patient younger than the Food and Drug Administration-approved age range for any indication of that drug. RESULTS: At least 1 drug was used off-label in 297 592 (78.7%) of 355 409 patients discharged during the study. Off-label use accounted for $270 275 849 (40.5%) of the total dollars spent on these medications. Medications classified as central or autonomic nervous system agents or as fluids or nutrients, or gastrointestinal tract agents were most commonly used off-label, whereas antineoplastic agents were rarely used off-label. Factors associated with off-label use in multivariate analysis were as follows: undergoing a surgical procedure, age older than 28 days, greater severity of illness, and all-cause in-hospital mortality. CONCLUSIONS: Most patients hospitalized at tertiary care pediatric institutions receive at least 1 medication outside the terms of the Food and Drug Administration product license. Substantial variation in the frequency of off-label use was observed across diagnostic categories and drug classes. Despite the frequent off-label use of drugs, using an administrative database, we cannot determine which of these treatments are unsafe or ineffective and which treatments result in substantial benefit to the patient.

Creating a regional pediatric medical disaster preparedness network: imperative and issues.

Over the past few decades, the number of disasters, both natural and human initiated has increased. As a result, since the September 11, 2001 attacks on the World Trade Center and Pentagon, there has been a new emphasis on disaster preparedness. However, the preparedness emphasis has been primarily directed toward adults and little attention has been specifically given to the needs of children. One reason for the lack of attention to pediatric needs in disaster planning is that childhood is seldom viewed as a separate and special stage of growth, fundamentally different from adulthood. The expectation during emergencies is that the care provided for adults is appropriate for children. The purpose of this paper is to examine the types of and increase in disasters and discuss the importance of specifically addressing the special needs of children in disaster planning. Further the paper argues for a regional network approach to emergency pediatric care that would increase surge capacity for children during disasters and other emergencies.

Do local opinion leaders augment hospital quality improvement efforts? A randomized trial to promote adherence to unstable angina guidelines.

BACKGROUND: The influence of an opinion leader intervention on adherence to Unstable Angina (UA) guidelines compared with a traditional quality improvement model was investigated. RESEARCH DESIGN: A group-randomized controlled trial with 2210 patients from 21 hospitals was designed. There were three intervention arms: (1) no intervention (NI); (2) a traditional Health Care Quality Improvement Program (HCQIP); and (3) a physician opinion leader in addition to the HCQIP model (OL). Quality indicators included: electrocardiogram within 20 minutes, antiplatelet therapy within 24 hours and at discharge, and heparin and beta-blockers during hospitalization. Hospitals could determine the specific indicators they wished to target. Potential cases of UA were identified from Medicare claims data. UA confirmation was determined by a clinical algorithm based on data abstracted from medical records. Data analyses included both hospital level analysis (analysis of variance) and patient level analysis (generalized linear models). RESULTS: The only statistically significant postintervention difference in percentage compliant was greater improvement for the OL group in the use of antiplatelet therapy at 24 hours in both hospital level (P = 0.01) and patient level analyses (P <0.05) compared with the HCQIP and NI groups. When analyses were confined to hospitals that targeted specific indicators, compared with the HCQIP hospitals, the OL hospitals showed significantly greater change in percentage compliant postintervention in both antiplatelet therapy during the first 24 hours (20.2% vs. -3.9%, P = 0.02) and heparin (31.0% vs.9.1%, P = 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: The influence of physician opinion leaders was unequivocally positive for only one of five quality indicators. To maximize adherence to best practices through physician opinion leaders, more research on how these physicians influence health care delivery in their organizations will be required.

Compliance with vision-screening guidelines among a national sample of pediatricians.

OBJECTIVE: The American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) recommends vision screening from birth through adolescence, with visual acuity testing and binocular screening to begin at age 3 years. The 1996 AAP guidelines advised referral for visual acuity worse than 20/40 for children aged 3 to 5 years and worse than 20/30 for children aged 6 years and older. Our objective was to describe vision-screening and referral practices in a national sample of primary care pediatricians. METHODS: We mailed a survey to a random sample of US pediatricians. Initial nonresponders were mailed up to 3 additional surveys. All mailings occurred between May and October 1998. Analyses focused on primary care pediatricians and consisted of descriptive statistics and regression analyses. The main outcome measure was compliance with 1996 AAP recommendations for vision screening. RESULTS: Of the 1491 surveys mailed, 888 (60%) were returned, including 576 (65%) from primary care pediatricians. Vision-screening methods included visual acuity testing (92%), cover test (64%), red reflex test (95%), fundoscopic examinations (65%), and stereopsis testing (32%). Respondents routinely performed visual acuity testing at 3 years (37%), 4 years (79%), 5 years (91%), 6 years (80%), 7-12 years (82%), and 13-18 years (80%). Visual acuity thresholds for referring 3- and 4-year-olds were 20/40 (47%, 51%), 20/50 (36%, 32%), or worse than 20/50 (14%, 12%). The majority of pediatricians referred children aged 5 years and older at 20/40, although thresholds worse than 20/40 were reported commonly (18%-33%). Logistic regressions were done to identify factors associated with higher likelihood of performing specific screening tests. Although no factor was consistently associated with use of all screening tests, size of the practice was significant in several regression models. CONCLUSIONS: Many pediatricians do not follow AAP guidelines for vision screening and referral, especially in younger children. Two thirds of pediatricians do not begin visual acuity testing at age 3 years as recommended, and about one fifth do not test until age 5 years. In addition, one fourth do not perform cover tests or stereopsis testing at any age.