RESUMO
INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES: Data about 30-day readmission for patients with chronic liver disease (CLD) and their contribution to CLD healthcare burden are sparse. Patterns, diagnoses, timing and predictors of 30-day readmissions for CLD from 2010-2017 were assessed. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Nationwide Readmission Database (NRD) is an all-payer, all-ages, longitudinal administrative database, representing 35 million discharges in the US population yearly. We identified unique patients discharged with CLD including hepatitis B (HBV) and C (HCV), alcoholic liver disease (ALD) and non-alcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD) from 2010 through 2017. Survey-weight adjusted multivariable analyses were used. RESULTS: From 2010 to 2017, the 30-day readmission rate for CLD decreased from 18.4% to 17.8% (p=.008), while increasing for NAFLD from 17.0% to 19. 9% (p<.001). Of 125,019 patients discharged with CLD (mean age 57.4 years, male 59.0%) in 2017, the most common liver disease was HCV (29.2%), followed by ALD (23.5%), NAFLD (17.5%), and HBV (4.3%). Readmission rates were 20.5% for ALD, 19.9% for NAFLD, 16.8% for HCV and 16.7% for HBV. Compared to other liver diseases, patients with NAFLD had significantly higher risk of 30-day readmission in clinical comorbidities adjusted model (Hazard ratio [HR]=1.08 [95% confidence interval 1.03-1.13]). In addition to ascites, hepatic encephalopathy, higher number of coexisting comorbidities, comorbidities associated with higher risk of 30-day readmission included cirrhosis for NALFD and HCV; acute kidney injury for NAFLD, HCV and ALD; HCC for HCV, and peritonitis for ALD. Cirrhosis and cirrhosis-related complications were the most common reasons for 30-day readmission, followed by sepsis. However, a large proportion of patients (43.7% for NAFLD; 28.4% for HCV, 39.0% for HBV, and 29.1% for ALD) were readmitted for extrahepatic reasons. Approximately 20% of those discharged with CLD were readmitted within 30 days but the majority of readmissions occurred within 15 days of discharge (62.8% for NAFLD, 63.7% for HCV, 74.3% for HBV, and 72.9% for ALD). Among readmitted patients, patients with NAFLD or HCV readmitted ≤30-day had significantly higher costs and risk of in-hospital mortality (NAFLD +5.69% change [95% confidence interval, 2.54%-8.93%] and odds ratio (OR)=1.58 [1.28-1.95]; HCV +9.85% change [95%CI:6.96%-12.82%] and OR=1.31, 1.08-1.59). CONCLUSIONS: Early readmissions for CLD are prevalent causing economic and clinical burden to the US healthcare system, especially NAFLD readmissions. Closer surveillance and attention to both liver and extrahepatic medical conditions immediately after CLD discharge is encouraged.
Assuntos
Carcinoma Hepatocelular , Hepatite C , Hepatopatias Alcoólicas , Neoplasias Hepáticas , Hepatopatia Gordurosa não Alcoólica , Humanos , Masculino , Estados Unidos/epidemiologia , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Readmissão do Paciente , Hepatopatia Gordurosa não Alcoólica/diagnóstico , Hepatopatia Gordurosa não Alcoólica/epidemiologia , Hepatopatia Gordurosa não Alcoólica/complicações , Carcinoma Hepatocelular/complicações , Neoplasias Hepáticas/complicações , Cirrose Hepática/complicações , Hepatopatias Alcoólicas/epidemiologia , Hepatopatias Alcoólicas/complicações , Hepatite C/complicaçõesAssuntos
Gastroenterologia/métodos , Doenças Inflamatórias Intestinais/terapia , Hepatopatias/terapia , Medidas de Resultados Relatados pelo Paciente , Ansiedade/terapia , Doença Crônica/psicologia , Doença Crônica/terapia , Feminino , Nível de Saúde , Humanos , Doenças Inflamatórias Intestinais/psicologia , Hepatopatias/psicologia , Masculino , Manejo da Dor , Aceitação pelo Paciente de Cuidados de Saúde , Angústia Psicológica , Qualidade de Vida , SonoRESUMO
Palliative care (PC) that has evolved from a focus on end-of-life care to an expanded form of holistic care at an early stage for patients with serious illnesses and their families is commonly referred to as nonhospice PC (or early PC). Patients with end-stage liver disease (ESLD) suffer from a high symptom burden and a deteriorated quality of life (QOL), with uncertain prognosis and limited treatment options. Caregivers of these patients also bear an emotional and physical burden similar to that of caregivers for patients with cancer. Despite the proven benefits of nonhospice PC for other serious illnesses and cancer, there are no evidence-based structures and processes to support its integration within the routine care of patients with ESLD and their caregivers. In this article, we review the current state of PC for ESLD and propose key structures and processes to integrate nonhospice PC within routine hepatology practice. Results found that PC is highly underutilized within ESLD care, and limited prospective studies are available to demonstrate methods to integrate PC within routine hepatology practices. Hepatology providers report lack of training to deliver PC along with no clear prognostic criteria on when to initiate PC. A well-informed model with key structures and processes for nonhospice PC integration would allow hepatology providers to improve clinical outcomes and QOL for patients with ESLD and reduce health care costs. Educating hepatology providers about PC principles and developing clear prognostic criteria for when and how to integrate PC on the basis of individual patient needs are the initial steps to inform the integration. The fields of nonhospice PC and hepatology have ample opportunities to partner clinically and academically.
Assuntos
Doença Hepática Terminal , Gastroenterologia/métodos , Qualidade de Vida , Atenção à Saúde , Doença Hepática Terminal/psicologia , Doença Hepática Terminal/terapia , Humanos , Cuidados Paliativos/métodosRESUMO
OBJECTIVE: We used an emergency department (ED)-based method to provide targeted, individualized consultation; community notification; and public disclosure and collect data regarding willingness to participate in prospective resuscitation research requiring waiver of consent. METHODS: We conducted a prospective survey of convenience cohort in an urban ED. We targeted the community of ED patients with pulmonary disease for individualized notification and public disclosure using a 1) large poster, 2) scripted oral presentation describing an emergency intubation clinical trial, and 3) video demonstration. RESULTS: Approximately 10% of our annual ED census, 6,936 subjects, enrolled. Of that total, 29 were also subjects in a prospective coincident endotracheal resuscitation intubation study, which enrolled a total of 262 subjects. ED community notification was provided to 22 of the 29 (75.9%) subjects prior to the visit during which they were intubated (13 agreed to participate, six declined, and three undecided) and seven of the 29 subjects subsequent to enrollment in the intubation study (five agreed to participate and two undecided). Fourteen of the 29 patients who participated in both projects had undergone endotracheal intubation at least once prior to community notification: 10 agreed to participate in the study, two declined, and two were undecided. CONCLUSIONS: Emergency department-based community notification and public disclosure is a viable way to provide information to a target population and collect data about the success of the notification. Feedback data collection is critical to an ethical understanding of the success of community notification for the institutional review board and investigators. Collection of feedback data should be required as a subject protection for exception from informed consent in emergency settings.
Assuntos
Pesquisa Biomédica/métodos , Coleta de Dados/métodos , Consentimento Livre e Esclarecido/ética , Revelação/ética , Serviço Hospitalar de Emergência , Feminino , Humanos , Masculino , Estudos ProspectivosRESUMO
Answer questions and earn CME/CNE Screening to detect polyps or cancer at an early stage has been shown to produce better outcomes in colorectal cancer (CRC). Programs with a population-based approach can reach a large majority of the eligible population and can offer cost-effective interventions with the potential benefit of maximizing early cancer detection and prevention using a complete follow-up plan. The purpose of this review was to summarize the key features of population-based programs to increase CRC screening in the United States. A search was conducted in the SCOPUS, OvidSP, and PubMed databases. The authors selected published reports of population-based programs that met at least 5 of the 6 International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) criteria for cancer prevention and were known to the National Colorectal Cancer Roundtable. Interventions at the level of individual practices were not included in this review. IARC cancer prevention criteria served as a framework to assess the effective processes and elements of a population-based program. Eight programs were included in this review. Half of the programs met all IARC criteria, and all programs led to improvements in screening rates. The rate of colonoscopy after a positive stool test was heterogeneous among programs. Different population-based strategies were used to promote these screening programs, including system-based, provider-based, patient-based, and media-based strategies. Treatment of identified cancer cases was not included explicitly in 4 programs but was offered through routine medical care. Evidence-based methods for promoting CRC screening at a population level can guide the development of future approaches in health care prevention. The key elements of a successful population-based approach include adherence to the 6 IARC criteria and 4 additional elements (an identified external funding source, a structured policy for positive fecal occult blood test results and confirmed cancer cases, outreach activities for recruitment and patient education, and an established rescreening process).