A New Tool to Assess Clinician Experience With Patient Care Transitions.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Clinician experience of intrahospital patient care transfers can drive transfer success and safe patient care. Measuring clinician experience can provide insights into opportunities to improve transfer processes that impact patient care. As part of a quality improvement project, we developed a brief survey to gauge clinician experience with patient care transfers that occur within a hospital. METHODS: The survey framework was built upon a previously identified taxonomy of intrahospital transfers that includes categories of transfer activities: disposition, notification, preparation, communication, and coordination. The survey tool was administered twice to physicians, nurses, and other health professionals across a single hospital. Data were analyzed comparing providers sending patients, and those receiving patients. RESULTS: The survey response rate was 33% to 34% across both years. While helpful in demonstrating improving trends in provider experience and engagement with transfer processes, the survey also allowed for differences between the experiences of sending and receiving providers to be revealed. Nurses reported improved preparedness to receive patients and receivers overall reported improved teamwork. Senders' perceptions showed improved trends in all transfer categories. Preliminary data also suggest acceptable reliability across respondent type, item category, and time. Specifically, reliability across sending and receiving clinicians was demonstrated in the categories of timeliness (α = 0.85) and culture (α = 0.72). Responses of sending clinicians were internally consistent within culture (α = 0.82), while responses of receiving clinicians were internally consistent within culture (α = 0.86), timeliness (α = 0.76), notification (α = 0.77), communication (α = 0.73), and teamwork (α = 0.73). CONCLUSIONS: Overall, the survey was feasible to implement and built to optimize content, construct, and response process validity. Survey results drove practical improvement work, such as informing a verbal transfer protocol to improve nursing preparedness to receive patients on general medicine units. As a practical tool, the survey and its results can help hospital administrators to focus on categories of transfer activities that are most problematic for clinicians and to track trends for quality improvement.

A taxonomy and cultural analysis of intra-hospital patient transfers.

Existing research on intra-hospital patient transitions focuses chiefly on handoffs, or exchanges of information, between clinicians. Less is known about patient transfers within hospitals, which include but extend beyond the exchange of information. Using participant observations and interviews at a 1,541-bed, academic, tertiary medical center, we explored the ways in which staff define and understand patient transfers between units. We conducted observations of staff (n = 16) working in four hospital departments and interviewed staff (n = 29) involved in transfers to general medicine floors from either the Emergency Department or the Medical Intensive Care Unit between February and September 2015. The collected data allowed us to understand transfers in the context of several hospital cultural microsystems. Decisions were made through the lens of the specific unit identity to which staff felt they belonged; staff actively strategized to manage workload; and empty beds were treated as a scarce commodity. Staff concepts informed the development of a taxonomy of intra-hospital transfers that includes five categories of activity: disposition, or determining the right floor and bed for the patient; notification to sending and receiving staff of patient assignment, departure and arrival; preparation to send and receive the patient; communication between sending and receiving units; and coordination to ensure that transfer components occur in a timely and seamless manner. This taxonomy widens the study of intra-hospital patient transfers from a communication activity to a complex cultural phenomenon with several categories of activity and views them as part of multidimensional hospital culture, as constructed and understood by staff.

Predictors for patients understanding reason for hospitalization.

OBJECTIVE: To examine predictors for understanding reason for hospitalization. METHODS: This was a retrospective analysis of a prospective, observational cohort study of patients 65 years or older admitted for acute coronary syndrome, heart failure, or pneumonia and discharged home. Primary outcome was complete understanding of diagnosis, based on post-discharge patient interview. Predictors assessed were the following: jargon on discharge instructions, type of medical team, whether outpatient provider knew if the patient was admitted, and whether the patient reported more than one day notice before discharge. RESULTS: Among 377 patients, 59.8% of patients completely understood their diagnosis. Bivariate analyses demonstrated that outpatient provider being aware of admission and having more than a day notice prior to discharge were not associated with patient understanding diagnosis. Presence of jargon was not associated with increased likelihood of understanding in a multivariable analysis. Patients on housestaff and cardiology teams were more likely to understand diagnosis compared to non-teaching teams (OR 2.45, 95% CI 1.30-4.61, p<0.01 and OR 3.83, 95% CI 1.92-7.63, p<0.01, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Non-teaching team patients were less likely to understand their diagnosis. Further investigation of how provider-patient interaction differs among teams may aid in development of tools to improve hospital to community transitions.

Quasi-Experimental Evaluation of the Effectiveness of a Large-Scale Readmission Reduction Program.

IMPORTANCE: Feasibility, effectiveness, and sustainability of large-scale readmission reduction efforts are uncertain. The Greater New Haven Coalition for Safe Transitions and Readmission Reductions was funded by the Center for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) to reduce readmissions among all discharged Medicare fee-for-service (FFS) patients. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate whether overall Medicare FFS readmissions were reduced through an intervention applied to high-risk discharge patients. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: This quasi-experimental evaluation took place at an urban academic medical center. Target discharge patients were older than 64 years with Medicare FFS insurance, residing in nearby zip codes, and discharged alive to home or facility and not against medical advice or to hospice; control discharge patients were older than 54 years with the same zip codes and discharge disposition but without Medicare FFS insurance if older than 64 years. High-risk target discharge patients were selectively enrolled in the program. INTERVENTIONS: Personalized transitional care, including education, medication reconciliation, follow-up telephone calls, and linkage to community resources. MEASUREMENTS: We measured the 30-day unplanned same-hospital readmission rates in the baseline period (May 1, 2011, through April 30, 2012) and intervention period (October 1, 2012, through May 31, 2014). RESULTS: We enrolled 10 621 (58.3%) of 18 223 target discharge patients (73.9% of discharge patients screened as high risk) and included all target discharge patients in the analysis. The mean (SD) age of the target discharge patients was 79.7 (8.8) years. The adjusted readmission rate decreased from 21.5% to 19.5% in the target population and from 21.1% to 21.0% in the control population, a relative reduction of 9.3%. The number needed to treat to avoid 1 readmission was 50. In a difference-in-differences analysis using a logistic regression model, the odds of readmission in the target population decreased significantly more than that of the control population in the intervention period (odds ratio, 0.90; 95% CI, 0.83-0.99; P = .03). In a comparative interrupted time series analysis of the difference in monthly adjusted admission rates, the target population decreased an absolute -3.09 (95% CI, -6.47 to 0.29; P = .07) relative to the control population, a similar but nonsignificant effect. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: This large-scale readmission reduction program reduced readmissions by 9.3% among the full population targeted by the CMS despite being delivered only to high-risk patients. However, it did not achieve the goal reduction set by the CMS.

Using the red/yellow/green discharge tool to improve the timeliness of hospital discharges.

BACKGROUND: As part of Yale-New Haven Hospital (Connecticut)'s Safe Patient Flow Initiative, the physician leadership developed the Red/Yellow/Green (RYG) Discharge Tool, an electronic medical record-based prompt to identify likelihood of patients' next-day discharge: green (very likely), yellow (possibly), and red (unlikely). The tool's purpose was to enhance communication with nursing/care coordination and trigger earlier discharge steps for patients identified as "green" or "yellow." METHODS: Data on discharge assignments, discharge dates/ times, and team designation were collected for all adult medicine patients discharged in October-December 2009 (Study Period 1) and October-December 2011 (Study Period 2), between which the tool's placement changed from the sign-out note to the daily progress note. RESULTS: In Study Period 1, 75.9% of the patients had discharge assignments, compared with 90.8% in Period 2 (p < .001). The overall 11 A.M. discharge rate improved from 10.4% to 21.2% from 2007 to 2011. "Green" patients were more likely to be discharged before 11 A.M. than "yellow" or "red" patients (p < .001). Patients with RYG assignments discharged by 11 A.M. had a lower length of stay than those without assignments and did not have an associated increased risk of readmission. Discharge prediction accuracy worsened after the change in placement, decreasing from 75.1% to 59.1% for "green" patients (p < .001), and from 34.5% to 29.2% (p < .001) for "yellow" patients. In both periods, hospitalists were more accurate than house staff in discharge predictions, suggesting that education and/or experience may contribute to discharge assignment. CONCLUSIONS: The RYG Discharge Tool helped facilitate earlier discharges, but accuracy depends on placement in daily work flow and experience.

Electronic handoff instruments: a truly multidisciplinary tool?

The objective was to assess use of a physician handoff tool embedded in the electronic medical record by nurses and other non-physicians. We administered a survey to nurses, physical therapists, discharge planners, social workers, and others to assess integration into daily practice, usefulness, and accuracy of the handoff tool. 231 individuals (61% response) participated. 60% used the tool often or usually/always during a shift. Nurses (46%) used the tool for shift transitions and found it helpful for medical history (79%) but not for acquiring medication, allergy, and responsible physician information. Nurses (96%) and others (75%) rated the tool as accurate. Medical nurses rated the tool more useful than surgical nurses, and pediatric nurses rarely used the tool. The tool was integrated into the daily workflow of non-physicians despite being designed for physician use. Non-physicians should be included in the design and implementation of electronic patient handoff systems.

Quality of discharge practices and patient understanding at an academic medical center.

IMPORTANCE: With growing national focus on reducing readmissions, there is a need to comprehensively assess the quality of transitional care, including discharge practices, patient perspectives, and patient understanding. OBJECTIVE: To conduct a multifaceted evaluation of transitional care from a patient-centered perspective. DESIGN: Prospective observational cohort study, May 2009 through April 2010. SETTING: Urban, academic medical center. PARTICIPANTS: Patients 65 years and older discharged home after hospitalization for acute coronary syndrome, heart failure, or pneumonia. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Discharge practices, including presence of follow-up appointment and patient-friendly discharge instructions; patient understanding of diagnosis and follow-up appointment; and patient perceptions of and satisfaction with discharge care. RESULTS: The 395 enrolled patients (66.7% of those eligible) had a mean age of 77.2 years. Although 349 patients (95.6%) reported understanding the reason they had been in the hospital, only 218 patients (59.6%) were able to accurately describe their diagnosis in postdischarge interviews. Discharge instructions routinely included symptoms to watch out for (98.4%), activity instructions (97.3%), and diet advice (89.7%) in lay language; however, 99 written reasons for hospitalization (26.3%) did not use language likely to be intelligible to patients. Of the 123 patients (32.6%) discharged with a scheduled primary care or cardiology appointment, 54 (43.9%) accurately recalled details of either appointment. During postdischarge interviews, 118 patients (30.0%) reported receiving less than 1 day's advance notice of discharge, and 246 (66.1%) reported that staff asked whether they would have the support they needed at home before discharge. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Patient perceptions of discharge care quality and self-rated understanding were high, and written discharge instructions were generally comprehensive although not consistently clear. However, follow-up appointments and advance discharge planning were deficient, and patient understanding of key aspects of postdischarge care was poor. Patient perceptions and written documentation do not adequately reflect patient understanding of discharge care.

The revolving hospital door: hospital readmissions among patients who are homeless.

BACKGROUND: National attention is increasingly focused on hospital readmissions. Little prior research has examined readmissions among patients who are homeless. OBJECTIVE: The aim of the study was to determine 30-day hospital readmission rates among patients who are homeless and examine factors associated with hospital readmissions in this population. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective chart review of patients who were homeless and hospitalized at a single urban hospital from May-August 2012. Homelessness was identified by an electronic medical record flag and confirmed by manual chart review. The primary outcome was all-cause hospital readmission to the study hospital within 30 days of hospital discharge. Patient-level and hospitalization-level factors associated with risk for readmission were examined using generalized estimating equations. RESULTS: There were 113 unique patients who were homeless and admitted to the hospital a total of 266 times during the study period. The mean age was 49 years, 27.4% of patients were women, and 75.2% had Medicaid. Half (50.8%) of all hospitalizations resulted in a 30-day hospital inpatient readmission and 70.3% resulted in either an inpatient readmission, observation status stay, or emergency department visit within 30 days of hospital discharge. Most readmissions occurred early after hospital discharge (53.9% within 1 week, 74.8% within 2 weeks). Discharge to the streets or shelter versus other living situations was associated with increased risk for readmission in multivariable analyses. CONCLUSIONS: Patients who were homeless had strikingly high 30-day hospital readmission rates. These findings suggest the urgent need for further research and interventions to improve postdischarge care for patients who are homeless.

Comprehensive quality of discharge summaries at an academic medical center.

BACKGROUND: Discharge summaries are essential for safe transitions from hospital to home. OBJECTIVE: To conduct a comprehensive quality assessment of discharge summaries. DESIGN: Prospective cohort study. SUBJECTS: Three hundred seventy-seven patients discharged home after hospitalization for acute coronary syndrome, heart failure, or pneumonia. MEASURES: Discharge summaries were assessed for timeliness of dictation, transmission of the summary to appropriate outpatient clinicians, and presence of key content including elements required by The Joint Commission and elements endorsed by 6 medical societies in the Transitions of Care Consensus Conference (TOCCC). RESULTS: A total of 376 of 377 patients had completed discharge summaries. A total of 174 (46.3%) summaries were dictated on the day of discharge; 93 (24.7%) were completed more than a week after discharge. A total of 144 (38.3%) discharge summaries were not sent to any outpatient physician. On average, summaries included 5.6 of 6 The Joint Commission elements and 4.0 of 7 TOCCC elements. Summaries dictated by hospitalists were more likely to be timely and to include key content than summaries dictated by housestaff or advanced practice nurses. Summaries dictated on the day of discharge were more likely to be sent to outside physicians and to include key content. No summary met all 3 quality criteria of timeliness, transmission, and content. CONCLUSIONS: Discharge summary quality is inadequate in many domains. This may explain why individual aspects of summary quality such as timeliness or content have not been associated with improved patient outcomes. However, improving discharge summary timeliness may also improve content and transmission.

Republished: Defining impact of a rapid response team: qualitative study with nurses, physicians and hospital administrators.

OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to qualitatively describe the impact of a Rapid Response Team (RRT) at a 944-bed, university-affiliated hospital. METHODS: We analysed 49 open-ended interviews with administrators, primary team attending physicians, trainees, RRT attending hospitalists, staff nurses, nurses and respiratory technicians. RESULTS: Themes elicited were categorised into the domains of (1) morale and teamwork, (2) education, (3) workload, (4) patient care, and (5) hospital administration. Positive implications beyond improved care for acutely ill patients were: increased morale and empowerment among nurses, real-time redistribution of workload for nurses (reducing neglect of non-acutely ill patients during emergencies), and immediate access to expert help. Negative implications were: increased tensions between nurses and physician teams, a burden on hospitalist RRT members, and reduced autonomy for trainees. CONCLUSIONS: The RRT provides advantages that extend well beyond a reduction in rates of transfers to intensive care units or codes but are balanced by certain disadvantages. The potential impact from these multiple sources should be evaluated to understand the utility of any RRT programme.

An institution-wide handoff task force to standardise and improve physician handoffs.

BACKGROUND: Transfers of care have become increasingly frequent and complex with shorter inpatient stays and changes in work hour regulations. Potential hazards exist with transfers. There are few reports of institution-wide efforts to improve handoffs. METHODS: An institution-wide physician handoff task force was developed to proactively address issues surrounding handoffs and to ensure a consistent approach to handoffs across the institution. RESULTS: This report discusses the authors' experiences with handoff standardisation, provider utilisation of a new electronic medical record-based handoff tool, and implementation of an educational curriculum; future work in developing hospital-wide policies and procedures for transfers; and the authors' consensus on the best methods for monitoring and evaluation of trainee handoffs. CONCLUSION: The handoff task force infrastructure has enabled the authors to take an institution-wide approach to improving handoffs. The task force has improved patient care by addressing handoffs systematically and consistently and has helped create new strategies for minimising risk in handoffs.

Defining impact of a rapid response team: qualitative study with nurses, physicians and hospital administrators.

OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to qualitatively describe the impact of a Rapid Response Team (RRT) at a 944-bed, university-affiliated hospital. METHODS: We analysed 49 open-ended interviews with administrators, primary team attending physicians, trainees, RRT attending hospitalists, staff nurses, nurses and respiratory technicians. RESULTS: Themes elicited were categorised into the domains of (1) morale and teamwork, (2) education, (3) workload, (4) patient care, and (5) hospital administration. Positive implications beyond improved care for acutely ill patients were: increased morale and empowerment among nurses, real-time redistribution of workload for nurses (reducing neglect of non-acutely ill patients during emergencies), and immediate access to expert help. Negative implications were: increased tensions between nurses and physician teams, a burden on hospitalist RRT members, and reduced autonomy for trainees. CONCLUSIONS: The RRT provides advantages that extend well beyond a reduction in rates of transfers to intensive care units or codes but are balanced by certain disadvantages. The potential impact from these multiple sources should be evaluated to understand the utility of any RRT programme.

When a patient refuses life-saving care: issues raised when treating a Jehovah's Witness.

Patients who are Jehovah's Witnesses frequently cross the path of nephrologists when they are acutely ill in the intensive care unit and stable in the long-term setting. It is important that we as a group have a rudimentary understanding of their philosophy about blood transfusion so that we can be proactive in their management. We use a case as a launching point to discuss the origins of the faith and the decision to refuse blood, as well as potential therapeutic strategies that can be used to improve the care of these patients. Improvement in our understanding as physicians will facilitate a more productive conversation with our patients about a complex and emotional issue.

Evaluation of an asynchronous physician voicemail sign-out for emergency department admissions.

STUDY OBJECTIVE: Communication failures contribute to errors in the transfer of patients from the emergency department (ED) to inpatient medicine units. Oral (synchronous) communication has numerous benefits but is costly and time consuming. Taped (asynchronous) communication may be more reliable and efficient but lacks interaction. We evaluate a new asynchronous physician-physician sign-out compared with the traditional synchronous sign-out. METHODS: A voicemail-based, semistructured sign-out for routine ED admissions to internal medicine was implemented in October 2007 at an urban, academic medical center. Outcomes were obtained by pre- and postintervention surveys of ED and internal medicine house staff, physician assistants, and hospitalist attending physicians and by examination of access logs and administrative data. Outcome measures included utilization; physician perceptions of ease, accuracy, content, interaction, and errors; and rate of transfers to the ICU from the floor within 24 hours of ED admission. Results were analyzed both quantitatively and qualitatively with standard qualitative analytic techniques. RESULTS: During September to October 2008 (1 year postintervention), voicemails were recorded about 90.3% of medicine admissions; 69.7% of these were accessed at least once by admitting physicians. The median length of each sign-out was 2.6 minutes (interquartile range 1.9 to 3.5). We received 117 of 197 responses (59%) to the preintervention survey and 113 of 206 responses (55%) to the postintervention survey. A total of 73 of 101 (72%) respondents reported dictated sign-out was easier than oral sign-out and 43 of 101 (43%) reported it was more accurate. However, 70 of 101 (69%) reported that interaction among participants was worse. There was no change in the rate of ICU transfer within 24 hours of admission from the ED in April to June 2007 (65/6,147; 1.1%) versus April to June 2008 (70/6,263; 1.1%); difference of 0%, 95% confidence interval -0.4% to 0.3%. The proportion of internists reporting at least 1 perceived adverse event relating to transfer from the ED decreased a nonsignificant 10% after the intervention (95% confidence interval -27% to 6%), from 44% preintervention (32/72) to 34% postintervention (23/67). CONCLUSION: Voicemail sign-out for ED-internal medicine communication was easier than oral sign-out without any change in early ICU transfers or the perception of major adverse events. However, interaction among participants was reduced. Voicemail sign-out may be an efficient means of improving sign-out communication for stable ED admissions.

Dropping the baton: a qualitative analysis of failures during the transition from emergency department to inpatient care.

STUDY OBJECTIVE: We identify, describe, and categorize vulnerabilities in emergency department (ED) to internal medicine patient transfers. METHODS: We surveyed all emergency medicine house staff, emergency physician assistants, internal medicine house staff and hospitalists at an urban, academic medical center. Respondents were asked to describe any adverse events occurring because of inadequate communication between emergency medicine and the admitting physician. We analyzed the open-ended responses with standard qualitative analysis techniques. RESULTS: Of 139 of 264 survey respondents (53%), 40 (29%) reported that a patient of theirs had experienced an adverse event or near miss after ED to inpatient transfer. These 40 respondents described 36 specific incidents of errors in diagnosis (N=13), treatment (N=14), and disposition (N=13), after which patients experienced harm or a near miss event. Six patients required an upgrade in care from the floor to the ICU. Although we asked respondents to describe communication failures, analysis of responses identified numerous contributors to error: inaccurate or incomplete information, particularly of vital signs; cultural and professional conflicts; crowding; high workload; difficulty in accessing key information such as vital signs, pending data, ED notes, ED orders, and identity of responsible physician; nonlinear patient flow; "boarding" in the ED; and ambiguous responsibility for sign-out or follow-up. CONCLUSION: The transfer of a patient from the ED to internal medicine can be associated with adverse events. Specific vulnerable areas include communication, environment, workload, information technology, patient flow, and assignment of responsibility. Systems-based interventions could ameliorate many of these and potentially improve patient safety.

Timing in the communication of pain among nursing home residents, nursing staff, and clinicians.

BACKGROUND: The management of nursing home (NH) residents' pain requires adequate nursing assessment and clinician knowledge of pain therapies. However, the timely communication of pain from residents to nurses and from nurses to clinicians is equally necessary. Using a 4-step model (nursing assessment of pain, notification of clinicians regarding pain assessment, clinicians' assessment of pain and intervention), and nursing reassessment following an intervention, we describe the timing with which each of these steps occur. METHODS: In a telephone survey of directors of nursing from 63 of the 68 nursing homes in New Haven County, Connecticut, we determined (1) how often nurses assess pain in residents, (2) when nurses notify clinicians about residents' pain, (3) how often clinicians assess pain, and (4) when nurses reassess pain after a clinician's intervention. RESULTS: Whereas in 76% of NHs nurses assessed pain in residents without pain at least "quarterly," only in 46% of NHs was pain assessed in residents with pain at least "every shift." In 42% of NHs nurses notified clinicians at least when the regimen was "ineffective." Only 55% of directors of nursing reported that clinicians assessed pain at least every 30 to 60 days. Finally, in 73% of NHs nursing reassessment occurred at least 1 hour after intervention. CONCLUSIONS: There is considerable variability in how frequently nurses and clinicians assess pain, when clinicians are notified about pain, and how frequently nurses reassess pain. Studies are needed to determine optimal timing in the communication process of pain to allow better pain management outcomes and quality of care for NH residents.