Characterizing patients hospitalized without an acute care indication: A retrospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Hospitalizations by patients who do not meet acute inpatient criteria are common and overburden healthcare systems. Studies have characterized these alternate levels of care (ALC) but have not delineated prolonged (pALC) versus short ALC (sALC) stays. OBJECTIVE: To descriptively compare pALC and sALC hospitalizations-groups we hypothesize have unique needs. DESIGNS, SETTINGS, AND PARTICIPANTS: A retrospective study of hospitalizations from March-April 2018 at an academic safety-net hospital. MAIN OUTCOME AND MEASURES: Levels of care for pALC (>3 days) and sALC (1-3 days) were determined using InterQual©, an industry standard utilization review tool for determining the clinical appropriateness of hospitalization. We examined sociodemographic and clinical characteristics. RESULTS: Of 2365 hospitalizations, 215 (9.1%) were pALC, 277 (11.7%) were sALC, and 1873 (79.2%) had no ALC days. There were 17,683 hospital days included, and 28.3% (n = 5006) were considered ALC. Compared to patients with sALC, those with pALC were older and more likely to be publicly insured, experience homelessness, and have substance use or psychiatric comorbidities. Patients with pALC were more likely to be admitted for care meeting inpatient criteria (89.3% vs. 66.8%, p < .001), had significantly more ALC days (median 8 vs. 1 day, p < .001), and were less likely to be discharged to the community (p < .001). CONCLUSIONS: Patients with prolonged ALC stays were more likely to be admitted for acute care, had greater psychosocial complexity, significantly longer lengths of stay, and unique discharge needs. Given the complexity and needs for hospitalizations with pALC days, intensive interdisciplinary coordination and resource mobilization are necessary.

Unmet health-related needs of community-dwelling older adults during COVID-19 lockdown in a diverse urban cohort.

BACKGROUND: Shelter-in-place orders during the COVID-19 pandemic created unmet health-related and access-related needs among older adults. We sought to understand the prevalence of these needs among community-dwelling older adults. METHODS: We performed a retrospective chart review of pandemic-related outreach calls to older adults between March and July 2020 at four urban, primary care clinics: a home-based practice, a safety net adult medicine clinic, an academic geriatrics practice, and a safety net clinic for adults living with HIV. Participants included those 60 or older at three sites, and those 65 or older with a chronic health condition at the fourth. We describe unmet health-related needs (the need for medication refills, medical supplies, or food) and access-related needs (ability to perform a telehealth visit, need for a call back from the primary care provider). We performed bivariate and multivariate analyses to examine the association between unmet needs and demographics, medical conditions, and healthcare utilization. RESULTS: Sixty-two percent of people had at least one unmet need. Twenty-six percent had at least one unmet health-related need; 14.0% needed medication refills, 12.5% needed medical supplies, and 3.0% had food insecurity. Among access-related needs, 33% were not ready for video visits, and 36.4% asked for a return call from their provider. Prevalence of any unmet health-related need was the highest among Asian versus White (36.4% vs. 19.1%) and in the highest versus lowest poverty zip codes (30.8% vs. 18.2%). Those with diabetes and COPD had higher unmet health-related needs than those without, and there was no change in healthcare utilization. CONCLUSIONS: During COVID, we found that disruptions in access to services created unmet needs among older adults, particularly for those who self-identified as Asian. We must foreground the needs of this older population group in the response to future public health crises.

Caring for Unbefriended Older Adults and Adult Orphans: A Clinician Survey.

Objectives: Unbefriended older adults are those who lack the capacity to make medical decisions and do not have a completed advance directive that can guide treatment decisions or a surrogate decision maker. Adult orphans are those who retain medical decision-making capacity but are at risk of becoming unbefriended due to lack of a completed advance health care directive and lack of a surrogate decision maker. In a follow-up to the 2016 American Geriatrics Society (AGS) position statement on unbefriended older adults, we examined clinicians' experiences in caring for unbefriended older adults and adult orphans.Methods: Clinicians recruited through the AGS (N = 122) completed an online survey about their experiences with unbefriended older adults regarding the perceived frequency of contact, clinical concerns, practice strategies, and terminology; and also with adult orphans regarding the perceived frequency of contact, methods of identification, and terminology.Results: Almost all inpatient (95.9%) and outpatient (86.4%) clinicians in this sample encounter unbefriended older adults at least quarterly and 92.2% of outpatient clinicians encounter adult orphans at least quarterly. Concerns about safety (95.9%), medication self-management (90.4%), and advance care planning (86.3%) bring unbefriended older adults to outpatient clinicians' attention "sometimes" to "frequently." Prolonged hospital stays (87.7%) and delays in transitioning to end-of-life care (85.7%) bring unbefriended older adults to inpatient clinicians' attention "sometimes" to "frequently." Clinicians apply a wide range of practice strategies to these populations. Participants suggested alternative terminology to replace "unbefriended" and "adult orphan."Conclusions: This study suggests that unbefriended older adults are frequently encountered in geriatrics practice, both in the inpatient and outpatient settings, and that there is widespread awareness of adult orphans in the outpatient setting. Clinicians' awareness of both groups suggests avenues for intervention and prevention.Clinical Implications: Health care professionals in geriatric settings will likely encounter older adults in need of advocates. Clinicians, attorneys, and policymakers should collaborate to improve early detection and to meet the needs of this vulnerable population.

Ethical Challenges in Caring for Unrepresented Adults: A Qualitative Study of Key Stakeholders.

The decision-making process on behalf of unrepresented adults (ie, those who lack capacity to make medical decisions and have no identifiable surrogate) is at risk for not incorporating their interests, raising ethical concerns. We performed semistructured interviews with key stakeholders across multiple sectors in an urban county who participate in the care of or decision-making process for unrepresented adults. This included a safety net healthcare system, social services, and legal services. Participants were healthcare, social service, and legal professionals who worked with unrepresented adults (n = 25). Our interview questions explored the current process for proxy decision making in cases of unrepresented adults and potential alternatives. We recorded, transcribed, and analyzed interviews using the constant comparative method to identify major themes related to ethical challenges if they were raised. Participants grappled with multiple ethical challenges around the care of unrepresented adults. Themes described by participants were: (1) prioritizing autonomy; (2) varying safety thresholds; (3) distributing resources fairly; and (4) taking a moral toll on stakeholders. In conclusion, all stakeholders identified ethical challenges in caring for unrepresented adults. An applied ethical framework that takes these dilemmas into account could improve ethical practice for unrepresented adults and lessen the emotional toll on stakeholders. J Am Geriatr Soc 67:1724-1729, 2019.

Hospitalization-Associated Disability in Adults Admitted to a Safety-Net Hospital.

BACKGROUND: Little is known about hospitalization-associated disability (HAD) in older adults who receive care in safety-net hospitals. OBJECTIVES: To describe HAD and to examine its association with age in adults aged 55 and older hospitalized in a safety-net hospital. DESIGN: Secondary post hoc analysis of a prospective cohort from a discharge intervention trial, the Support from Hospital to Home for Elders. SETTING: Medicine, cardiology, and neurology inpatient services of San Francisco General Hospital, a safety-net hospital. PARTICIPANTS: A total of 583 participants 55 and older who spoke English, Spanish, or Chinese. We determined the incidence of HAD 30 days post-hospitalization and ORs for HAD by age group. MEASUREMENTS: The outcome measure was death or HAD at 30 days after hospital discharge. HAD is defined as a new or additional disability in one or more activities of daily living (ADL) that is present at hospital discharge compared to baseline. Participants' functional status at baseline (2 weeks prior to admission) and 30 days post-discharge was ascertained by self-report of ADL function. RESULTS: Many participants (75.3 %) were functionally independent at baseline. By age group, HAD occurred as follows: 27.4 % in ages 55-59, 22.2 % in ages 60-64, 17.4 % in ages 65-69, 30.3 % in ages 70-79, and 61.7 % in ages 80 or older. Compared to the youngest group, only the adjusted OR for HAD in adults over 80 was significant, at 2.45 (95 % CI 1.17, 5.15). CONCLUSIONS: In adults at a safety-net hospital, HAD occurred in similar proportions among adults aged 55-59 and those aged 70-79, and was highest in the oldest adults, aged ≥ 80. In safety-net hospitals, interventions to reduce HAD among patients 70 years and older should consider expanding age criteria to adults as young as 55.

Journalists, district attorneys and researchers: why IRBs should get in the middle.

BACKGROUND: Federal regulations in the United States have shaped Institutional Review Boards (IRBs) to focus on protecting individual human subjects. Health services research studies focusing on healthcare institutions such as hospitals or clinics do not have individual human subjects. Since U.S. federal regulations are silent on what type of review, if any, these studies require, different IRBs may approach similar studies differently, resulting in undesirable variation in the review of studies focusing on healthcare institutions. Further, although these studies do not focus on individual human subjects, they may pose risks to participating institutions, as well as individuals who work at those institutions, if identifying information becomes public. DISCUSSION: Using two recent health services research studies conducted in the U.S. as examples, we discuss variations in the level of IRB oversight for studies focusing on institutions rather than individual human subjects. We highlight how lack of IRB guidance poses challenges for researchers who wish to both protect their subjects and work appropriately with the public, journalists or the legal system in the U.S. Competing interests include the public's interest in transparency, the researcher's interest in their science, and the research participants' interests in confidentiality. Potential solutions that may help guide health services researchers to balance these competing interests include: 1) creating consensus guidelines and standard practices that address confidentiality risk to healthcare institutions and their employees; and 2) expanding the IRB role to conduct a streamlined review of health services research studies focusing on healthcare institutions to balance the competing interest of stakeholders on a case-by-case basis. SUMMARY: For health services research studies focusing on healthcare institutions, we outline the competing interests of researchers, healthcare institutions and the public. We propose solutions to decrease undesirable variations in the review of these studies.

Older jail inmates and community acute care use.

OBJECTIVES: We examined older jail inmates' predetainment acute care use (emergency department or hospitalization in the 3 months before arrest) and their plans for using acute care after release. METHODS: We performed a cross-sectional study of 247 jail inmates aged 55 years or older assessing sociodemographic characteristics, health, and geriatric conditions associated with predetainment and anticipated postrelease acute care use. RESULTS: We found that 52% of older inmates reported predetainment acute care use and 47% planned to use the emergency department after release. In modified Poisson regression, homelessness was independently associated with predetainment use (relative risk = 1.42; 95% confidence interval = 1.10, 1.83) and having a primary care provider was inversely associated with planned use (relative risk = 0.69; 95% confidence interval = 0.53, 0.89). CONCLUSIONS: The Affordable Care Act has expanded Medicaid eligibility to all persons leaving jail in an effort to decrease postrelease acute care use in this high-risk population. Jail-to-community transitional care models that address the health, geriatric, and social factors prevalent in older adults leaving jail, and that focus on linkages to housing and primary care, are needed to enhance the impact of the act on acute care use for this population.

Effect of board certification on antihypertensive treatment intensification in patients with diabetes mellitus.

BACKGROUND: Regular recertification is mandatory to maintain board certification status in all specialties. However, the evidence that physicians' performance decreases with time since initial certification is limited. We therefore carried out a study to determine whether the frequency of antihypertensive treatment intensification for diabetic patients changes with time since their physicians' last board certification. METHODS AND RESULTS: In this retrospective cohort study, we analyzed treatment of 8127 hypertensive patients with diabetes mellitus treated by 301 internists at primary care practices affiliated with 2 large academic hospitals. Patient visits with documented blood pressure > or = 130/85 mm Hg between January 1, 2000, and August 31, 2005, were studied. The association between the number of years since the physician's last board certification and the probability of pharmacological antihypertensive treatment intensification at a given visit was analyzed. Frequency of treatment intensification decreased from 26.7% for physicians who were board certified the previous year to 6.9% for physicians who were board certified 31 years before the visit. Treatment intensification rate was 22.5% for physicians certified < or = 10 years ago versus 16.9% for physicians last certified > 10 years ago (P<0.0001). Multivariable analysis adjusted for patient and visit characteristics and physician age showed that for every decade since the physician's last board certification, the probability of treatment intensification decreased by 21.3% (P=0.0097). CONCLUSIONS: Physician intensification of pharmacological therapy for blood pressure levels above the recommended treatment goals decreases with time since the last board certification. This finding supports the current policy of mandatory recertification.