Careggi Re-Engineered Discharge project: standardize discharge and improve care coordination between healthcare professionals.

BACKGROUND: The hospital discharge process plays a key role in patient care. Careggi Re-Engineered Discharge (CaRED) aimed at establishing a meaningful relationship among general practitioners (GPs) and patients, throughout the discharge process. OBJECTIVE: The aim is to describe the activities and results in the period 2014-17 of the CaRED. METHODS: CaRED is a restructured discharge protocol, which foresees a different, more direct form of communication between hospital and GPs, enabled by an ad hoc electronic medical record. The 30-day hospital readmission rate and/or accesses to the emergency department were evaluated as proxy for effective communication. A pre-post survey was launched to assess the GPs' perceived quality, and patient and family satisfaction. RESULTS: A total of 1549 hospitalizations were included, respectively, 717 in the pre and 832 in the post-intervention period. The 30-day hospital readmission rate decreased significantly in the post-intervention period (14.4% vs. 19.4%, χ2(1) = 8.03, P < 0.05).Eighty-two and 52 GPs participated, respectively, in the pre- and post-survey. In the post-phase the percentage of GPs declaring the discharge letter facilitated the communication on the admission causes (χ2(1) = 0.56, P = 0.03) and on what to do if conditions change (χ2(31) = 19.0, P < 0.01) significantly increased, as well as the perception of an easier contact with the hospitalist (χ2(3) = 19.6, P < 0.01).Two-hundred-eighty and 282 patients were enrolled in the pre- and post-survey. The level of understanding of key parts of the discharge letter (reason for hospitalization, post-discharge therapy, follow-up examinations and how to contact the hospital ward) improved significantly (P < 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: CaRED significantly improved the discharge process and became a benchmark for local improvements in communication patterns with GPs.

Thromboembolic burden, prognostic assessment and outcomes of females compared to males in acute pulmonary embolism.

BACKGROUND: Literature lacks on sex differences in acute pulmonary embolism (PE). Therefore, the aim of our study was to provide information about sex difference in thromboembolic burden, prognostic assessment and outcomes of PE. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We analyzed and compared differences between females and males retrieving data of a multicenter, observational, retrospective, cohort study aimed to analyze characteristics of PE patients admitted in Internal Medicine wards of Tuscany, Italy. RESULTS: 272 (60.1%) of 452 patients enrolled in the study were females. Females were older than males (76.6 ± 12.0 vs. 73.5 ± 13.4 years, p = 0.0005). Mean length of hospital stay was longer in females (11.3 vs. 9.5 days, p = 0053). Reduced mobility was more frequent in females (46.3% vs. 35.5%, p = 0.0322), whereas COPD and active cancer were in males (20% vs. 9.9%, p = 0.0034, and 39.4% vs. 23.8%, p = 0.0004, respectively). Incidental diagnosis of PE was performed more often in males compared to females (19.3% vs. 11.4%, p = 0.0289). No sex difference was found in diagnostic approach, despite females underwent more often to legs ultrasonography compared to males (90.7% vs. 79.4%, p = 0.0008). Both all cause and PE-related mortality were higher in males (12.2 and 8.3% vs. 7.7 and 5.1%, respectively), despite difference was not significant. Females were found to have more likely central PE and distal deep vein thrombosis compared to males (57.7% vs. 43.8%, p = 0.0039, and 22.9% vs. 13.9%, p = 0.0206, respectively). None difference was found in shock index and median simplified PESI score between females and males, whereas according to 2008 ESC prognostic model females were more likely to be categorized at high or intermediate risk than in males (81.5% vs. 71.5%, p = 0.0159). Echocardiographic right heart dysfunction was found more often in females than in males (56.5% vs. 44%, p = 0.0124). No sex difference was found neither on acute treatment nor in prescription of vitamin K antagonists at hospital discharge. Bleeding events were significantly higher in females compared to males (4.7% vs. 0.5%, p = 0.0189). CONCLUSION: Understanding the difference between females and males is of utmost importance for physicians who manage acute PE in clinical practice. Females present major pulmonary thromboembolic burden, more frequently right heart dysfunction and treatment-related bleedings but lower in-hospital mortality than males. Our study could implicate that management of acute PE should be tailored according to sex. Prospective studies are warranted to better clarify this topic.

Diagnostic performance of focused cardiac ultrasound performed by emergency physicians for the assessment of ascending aorta dilation and aneurysm.

OBJECTIVES: The diagnostic performance of transthoracic focused cardiac ultrasound (FoCUS) performed by emergency physicians (EP) to estimate ascending aorta dimensions in the acute setting has not been prospectively studied. The diagnostic accuracy and the interobserver variability of EP-performed FoCUS were investigated to estimate thoracic aortic dilation and aneurysm compared with the results of computed tomography angiography (CTA). METHODS: This was a prospective single-center cohort study of a convenience sample of patients who underwent CTA in the emergency department for suspected aortic pathology. FoCUS was performed before CTA, and the maximum ascending aorta diameter evaluated in parasternal long-axis view. Aorta diameter < 40 mm by visual estimation or by diameter measurement was considered normal. Measurements were recorded in all patients with aorta diameter ≥ 40 mm. Diagnostic accuracy of FoCUS for detection of aortic dilation (diameter ≥ 40 mm) and aneurysm (diameter ≥ 45 mm) were calculated considering the CTA result as reference standard. In a subgroup of patients, a second EP-sonographer performed FoCUS to evaluate interobserver agreement for the diagnosis of ascending aorta dilation. RESULTS: A total of 140 patients were enrolled in the study. Ascending aorta dilation and aneurysm were detected with FoCUS in 50 (35.7%) and in 27 (17.8%) patients, respectively. Sensitivity and specificity of FoCUS were 78.6% (95% confidence interval [CI] = 65.6% to 88.4%) and 92.9% (95% CI = 85.1% to 97.3%), respectively, for ascending aorta dilation and 64.7% (95% CI = 46.5% to 80.2%) and 95.3% (95% CI = 89.3% to 98.4%), respectively, for ascending aorta aneurysm. Interobserver agreement of FoCUS was k = 0.82. CONCLUSIONS: FoCUS performed by EP is specific for ascending aorta dilation and aneurysm when compared to CTA and appears a reproducible technique.