Implementation and Feasibility of the Re-Engineered Discharge for Surgery (RED-S) Intervention: A Pilot Study.

INTRODUCTION: Adapting Project Re-Engineered Discharge (Project RED), an intervention for reducing internal medicine hospital readmissions, is a promising option for reducing colorectal surgery readmissions. METHODS: We conducted a pilot study for the adaptation and implementation of Project RED with patients admitted for colectomy at a regional VA tertiary care center between July 2014 and January 2015. Implementation was evaluated using adherence to intervention components and results from the Survey of Healthcare Experiences of Patients. The adapted Project RED for Surgery has five components: surgical wound/ostomy-care education, scheduled follow-up appointments, medication reconciliation, an After Hospital Care Plan, and postdischarge phone calls. RESULTS: All (n = 21) participants received postoperative wound care education, and 77% of ostomy patients received education. Follow-up appointments were scheduled for 76% with surgery clinic and 67% with primary care. Half received pharmacist-led medication reconciliation. Seventy-five percent received a postdischarge phone call. Ninety five percent of participants reported positive or satisfactory care transitions versus less than 60% of a comparison group of surgery patients from the same institution. We summarized lessons learned from this intervention study to facilitate future dissemination efforts. CONCLUSION: The lessons learned from this pilot can guide quality improvement teams seeking to implement the Re-Engineered Discharge for Surgery intervention within their existing workflows.

Comparing Utilization and Costs of Care in Freestanding Emergency Departments, Hospital Emergency Departments, and Urgent Care Centers.

STUDY OBJECTIVE: We compare utilization, price per visit, and the types of care delivered across freestanding emergency departments (EDs), hospital-based EDs, and urgent care centers in Texas. METHODS: We analyzed insurance claims processed by Blue Cross Blue Shield of Texas from 2012 to 2015 for patient visits to freestanding EDs, hospital-based EDs, or urgent care centers in 16 Texas metropolitan statistical areas containing 84.1% of the state's population. We calculated the aggregate number of visits, average price per visit, proportion of price attributable to facility and physician services, and proportion of price billed to Blue Cross Blue Shield of Texas versus out of pocket, by facility type. Prices for the top 20 diagnoses and procedures by facility type are compared. RESULTS: Texans use hospital-based EDs and urgent care centers much more than freestanding EDs, but freestanding ED utilization increased 236% between 2012 and 2015. The average price per visit was lower for freestanding EDs versus hospital-based EDs in 2012 ($1,431 versus $1,842), but prices in 2015 were comparable ($2,199 versus $2,259). Prices for urgent care centers were only $164 and $168 in 2012 and 2015. Out-of-pocket liability for consumers for all these facilities increased slightly from 2012 to 2015. There was 75% overlap in the 20 most common diagnoses at freestanding EDs versus urgent care centers and 60% overlap for hospital-based EDs and urgent care centers. However, prices for patients with the same diagnosis were on average almost 10 times higher at freestanding and hospital-based EDs relative to urgent care centers. CONCLUSION: Utilization of freestanding EDs is rapidly expanding in Texas. Higher prices at freestanding and hospital-based EDs relative to urgent care centers, despite substantial overlap in services delivered, imply potential inefficient use of emergency facilities.

Patient experience with discharge instructions in postdischarge recovery: a qualitative study.

OBJECTIVES: We examined the role of discharge instructions in postoperative recovery for patients undergoing colorectal surgery and report themes related to patient perceptions of discharge instructions and postdischarge experience. DESIGN: Semistructured interviews were conducted as part of a formative evaluation of a Project Re-Engineered Discharge intervention adapted for surgical patients. SETTING: Michael E. DeBakey VA Medical Center, a tertiary referral centre in Houston, Texas. PARTICIPANTS: Twelve patients undergoing elective colorectal surgery. Interviews were conducted at the two-week postoperative appointment. RESULTS: Participants demonstrated understanding of the content in the discharge instructions. During the interviews, participants reported several positive roles for discharge instructions in their postdischarge care: a sense of security, a reminder of inhospital education, a living document and a source of empowerment. Despite these positive associations, participants reported that the instructions provided insufficient information to promote access to care that effectively addressed acute issues following discharge. Participants noted difficulty reaching providers after discharge, which resulted in the adoption of workarounds to overcome system barriers. CONCLUSIONS: Despite concerted efforts to provide patient-centred instructions, the discharge instructions did not provide enough context to effectively guide postdischarge interactions with the healthcare system. Insufficient information on how to access and communicate with the most appropriate personnel in the healthcare system is an important barrier to patients receiving high-quality postdischarge care. Tools and strategies from team training programmes, such as team strategies and tools to enhance performance and patient safety, could be adapted to include patients and provide them with structured methods for communicating with healthcare providers post discharge.

Complex antithrombotic therapy: determinants of patient preference and impact on medication adherence.

PURPOSE: For years, older patients have been prescribed multiple blood-thinning medications (complex antithrombotic therapy [CAT]) to decrease their risk of cardiovascular events. These therapies, however, increase risk of adverse bleeding events. We assessed patient-reported trade-offs between cardioprotective benefit, gastrointestinal bleeding risk, and burden of self-management using adaptive conjoint analysis (ACA). As ACA could be a clinically useful tool to obtain patient preferences and guide future patient-centered care, we examined the clinical application of ACA to obtain patient preferences and the impact of ACA on medication adherence. PATIENTS AND METHODS: An electronic ACA survey led 201 respondents through medication risk-benefit trade-offs, revealing patients' preferences for the CAT risk/benefit profile they valued most. The post-ACA prescription regimen was categorized as concordant or discordant with elicited preferences. Adherence was measured using VA pharmacy refill data to measure persistence of use prior to and 1 year following preference-elicitation. Additionally, we analyzed qualitative interviews of 56 respondents regarding their perception of the ACA and the preference elicitation experience. RESULTS: Participants prioritized 5-year cardiovascular benefit over preventing adverse events. Medication side effects, medication-associated activity restrictions, and regimen complexity were less important than bleeding risk and cardioprotective benefit. One year after the ACA survey, a 15% increase in adherence was observed in patients prescribed a preference-concordant CAT strategy. An increase of only 6% was noted in patients prescribed a preference-discordant strategy. Qualitative interviews showed that the ACA exercise contributed to increase inpatient activation, patient awareness of preferences, and patient engagement with clinicians about treatment decisions. CONCLUSION: By working through trade-offs, patients actively clarified their preferences, learning about CAT risks, benefits, and self-management. Patients with medication regimens concordant with their preferences had increased medication adherence at 1 year compared to those with discordant medication regimens. The ACA task improved adherence through enhanced patient engagement regarding treatment preferences.