RESUMO
With the recent change to value-based care, institutions have struggled with the appropriate management of patients under observation. Observation status can have a huge impact on hospital and patient expenses. Institutions have implemented specialized observation units to provide better care for these patients. Starting in January 2020, coinciding with the initiation of daily multidisciplinary rounds, our study focused on patients aged 18 and older admitted to our hospital under observation status. Efforts were built upon prior initiatives at Jersey Shore University Medical Center (JSUMC) to optimize patient care and length of stay (LOS) reduction. The central intervention revolved around the establishment of daily "Observation Huddles"-succinct rounds led by hospital leaders to harmonize care for patients under observation. The primary aim was to assess the impact of daily multidisciplinary rounds (MDR) on LOS, while our secondary aim involved identifying specific barriers and interventions that contributed to the observed reduction. Our study revealed a 9-h reduction in observation time, resulting in approximately USD 187.50 saved per patient. When accounting for the period spanning 2020 to 2022, potential savings totaled USD 828,187.50 in 2020, USD 1,046,062.50 in 2021, and USD 1,243,562.50 in 2022. MDR for observation patients led to a reduction in LOS from 29 h to 20 h (p < 0.001).
RESUMO
(1) Background: Jersey Shore University Medical Center (JSUMC) is a 646-bed tertiary medical center located in central New Jersey. Over the past several years, development and maturation of tertiary services at JSUMC has resulted in tremendous growth, with the inpatient volume increasing by 17% between 2016 and 2018. As hospital floors functioned at maximum capacity, the medical center was frequently forced into crisis mode with substantial increases in emergency department (ED) waiting times and a paradoxical increase in-hospital length of stay (hLOS). Prolonged hLOS can contribute to worse patient outcomes and satisfaction, as well as increased medical costs. (2) Methods: A root cause analysis was conducted to identify the factors leading to delays in providing in-hospital services. Four main bottlenecks were identified by the in-hospital phase sub-committee: incomplete orders, delays in placement to rehabilitation facilities, delays due to testing (mainly imaging), and delays in entering the discharge order. Similarly, the discharge process itself was analyzed, and obstacles were identified. Specific interventions to address each obstacle were implemented. Mean CMI-adjusted hospital LOS (CMI-hLOS) was the primary outcome measure. (3) Results: After interventions, CMI-hLOS decreased from 2.99 in 2017 to 2.84 and 2.76 days in 2018 and 2019, respectively. To correct for aberrations due to the COVID pandemic, we compared June-August 2019 to June-August 2020 and found a further decrease to 2.42 days after full implementation of all interventions. We estimate that the intervention led to an absolute reduction in costs of USD 3 million in the second half of 2019 and more than USD 7 million in 2020. On the other hand, the total expenses, represented by salaries for additional staffing, were USD 2,103,274, resulting in an estimated net saving for 2020 of USD 5,400,000. (4) Conclusions: At JSUMC, hLOS was found to be a complex and costly issue. A comprehensive approach, starting with the identification of all correctable delays followed by interventions to mitigate delays, led to a significant reduction in hLOS along with significant cost savings.
RESUMO
BACKGROUND: Tocilizumab, a monoclonal antibody directed against the interleukin-6 receptor, has been proposed to mitigate the cytokine storm syndrome associated with severe COVID-19. We aimed to investigate the association between tocilizumab exposure and hospital-related mortality among patients requiring intensive care unit (ICU) support for COVID-19. METHODS: We did a retrospective observational cohort study at 13 hospitals within the Hackensack Meridian Health network (NJ, USA). We included patients (aged ≥18 years) with laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 who needed support in the ICU. We obtained data from a prospective observational database and compared outcomes in patients who received tocilizumab with those who did not. We applied a multivariable Cox model with propensity score matching to reduce confounding effects. The primary endpoint was hospital-related mortality. The prospective observational database is registered on ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04347993. FINDINGS: Between March 1 and April 22, 2020, 764 patients with COVID-19 required support in the ICU, of whom 210 (27%) received tocilizumab. Factors associated with receiving tocilizumab were patients' age, gender, renal function, and treatment location. 630 patients were included in the propensity score-matched population, of whom 210 received tocilizumab and 420 did not receive tocilizumab. 358 (57%) of 630 patients died, 102 (49%) who received tocilizumab and 256 (61%) who did not receive tocilizumab. Overall median survival from time of admission was not reached (95% CI 23 days-not reached) among patients receiving tocilizumab and was 19 days (16-26) for those who did not receive tocilizumab (hazard ratio [HR] 0·71, 95% CI 0·56-0·89; p=0·0027). In the primary multivariable Cox regression analysis with propensity matching, an association was noted between receiving tocilizumab and decreased hospital-related mortality (HR 0·64, 95% CI 0·47-0·87; p=0·0040). Similar associations with tocilizumab were noted among subgroups requiring mechanical ventilatory support and with baseline C-reactive protein of 15 mg/dL or higher. INTERPRETATION: In this observational study, patients with COVID-19 requiring ICU support who received tocilizumab had reduced mortality. Results of ongoing randomised controlled trials are awaited. FUNDING: None.
RESUMO
Young neglected children may be at risk for emotion knowledge deficits. Children with histories of neglect or with no maltreatment were initially seen at age 4 and again 1 year later to assess their emotion knowledge. Higher IQ was associated with better emotion knowledge, but neglected children had consistently poorer emotion knowledge over time compared to non-neglected children after controlling for IQ. Because both neglected status and IQ may contribute to deficits in emotional knowledge, both should be assessed when evaluating these children to appropriately design and pace emotion knowledge interventions.
