Fischer, Karen M.

Background Patient admissions at a U.S. tertiary care hospital occur via the emergency department (ED), or transfer center. We aim to compare the clinical outcomes of patients admitted from the ED to admissions coordinated by the transfer center. Methods Admissions to Mayo Clinic Hospital, Rochester, MN, between July 2019 to June 2021 were identified in this retrospective study and categorized into two cohorts—transfer center and ED. The two cohorts were then matched for age, sex, admitting service, and Charlson Comorbidity Index. Univariate and multivariate analyses were performed to compare hospital length of stay (LOS), mortality, 30-day mortality, and 30-day readmissions between the two cohorts. Results 73,685 admissions were identified, of which 24,262 (33%) were transfer center admissions. In the matched cohorts (n = 19,093, each), in-hospital mortality (2.4% versus 1.9%), 30-day mortality (5.4% versus 3.9%), 30-day readmission (12.7% versus 7.2%), and LOS (6.4 days versus 5.1 days) were significantly higher (P < 0.001) among the admissions coordinated by transfer center. A higher palliative care consultation rate (9.4% versus 6.2%, P < 0.001), and a lower proportion of home discharges home (76.2% versus 82.5%, P < 0.001) among transfer center admissions was observed. Similar findings were noted in multivariate analysis, even when adjusting for LOS. Conclusions Transfer center admissions had higher in-hospital mortality, LOS, 30-day mortality, and 30-day readmission compared to ED admissions. This study also highlights new considerations for palliative care consultation before transfer acceptance, especially to avoid futile transfers. Additional studies analyzing factors behind the outcomes of transfer center admissions are required.

Abstract Background Older adults presenting with trauma have worse outcomes than younger adults. Starting in 2016, we provided geriatrics consultation (GC) to older adults admitted to the trauma service. We aimed to analyze the impact of GC on patient outcomes. Methods We performed a retrospective pre–post study and year‐matched cohort study. We identified patients from the trauma registry at our level 1 trauma center. In the pre–post study, we compared patients who received GC (2016–2022) with controls (2011–2015). In the cohort study (2016–2022), we compared patients who received GC with controls. We matched for age, race, sex, and injury severity score (ISS) in both studies, as well as admission year in the cohort study. Outcome variables included mortality (in‐hospital, 30‐day, 90‐day), length of stay (LOS), discharge disposition, and hospital readmission rates (30‐day, 90‐day). Results We analyzed 1968 patients in the pre–post study and 2544 patients in the cohort study. Patients were similar in age, race, and sex. GC patients had a slightly higher ISS score and a higher rate of ICU stay. Delirium occurrence was lower among GC patients. GC patients had lower in‐hospital mortality compared to controls (pre–post OR 0.27, p < 0.001; cohort OR 0.31, p < 0.001) and increased LOS (6 days vs 4 days, p < 0.001; both studies). GC patients in the cohort study also had lower 30‐ and 90‐day mortality (OR 0.52 and 0.65, p < 0.01) and were less likely to return home (OR 0.81, p < 0.01); similar trends, though not statistically significant, were noted in the pre–post study. Lower readmission rates (statistically non‐significant) were noted in the GC group across both studies. Conclusions GC in older adults with trauma has proven benefit with reduced mortality and a trend toward lower readmission rates but was associated with increased LOS and higher rates of discharge to skilled facility.

Objectives: To assess clinicians’ prescribing practices for anticoagulation in older adults with atrial fibrillation or atrial flutter (AF/F) and determine factors common among those without anticoagulation. Methods: We performed a community-based retrospective cohort study of adults aged 65 years and older with a history of nonvalvular AF/F to determine the rate of oral anticoagulation utilization. We also assessed for associations between anticoagulation use and comorbid conditions and common geriatric syndromes. Results: A total of 3832 patients with a diagnosis of nonvalvular AF/F were included (mean [SD] age, 79.9 [8.4] years), 2693 (70.3%) of whom were receiving anticoagulation (51.7%, a vitamin K antagonist; 48.1%, a direct-acting oral anticoagulant). Patients with higher Elderly Risk Assessment index (ERA) scores, a surrogate for health vulnerability, received anticoagulation less often than patients with lower scores. The percentage of patients with a history of falling was higher among those who did not receive anticoagulation than among those who did (44.4% vs 32.8%; P < .001). Similarly, a diagnosis of dementia was more common in the no-anticoagulation group than the anticoagulation group (18.5% vs 12.7%; P < .001). Conclusions: A substantial proportion of older adults with AF/F do not receive anticoagulation. Those without anticoagulation had higher risk of health deterioration based on higher ERA scores and had a higher incidence of dementia and fall history. This suggests that the presence of geriatric syndromes may influence the decision to withhold anticoagulation.

Background: Residency is a time of personal and professional growth. Resident assessment and feedback are an integral part of that process. However, assessment may be influenced by various types of bias, including gender bias. Women are less likely than men to be identified by their professional titles in many settings. The use of professional titles for residents in written assessments is unknown and may be a marker of bias. Objective: To assess for differences and trends regarding the use of professional and personal titles in formal resident assessments related to gender-based resident–faculty pairs. Methods: Electronic assessments of postgraduate year 1 (PGY1) internal medicine residents from the 2019–2020 academic year were used. Professional title use was analyzed, as it relates to resident–faculty gendered dyads, among other variables. The primary outcome of professional title usage was split into a binary variable by professional versus other titles and analyzed using logistic regression and random-effects model. Results: We analyzed 1,363 unique electronic assessments (37.8% from female faculty). Female residents were more likely to be addressed by a professional title than their male colleagues (odds ratio [OR], 1.7; confidence interval [CI], 1.2–2.4; p = 0.02). We found no difference in professional title usage based on resident–faculty gendered dyads. After adjusting for repeated faculty and resident encounters with random-effects model, secondary analysis found no significant difference in evaluation of word count between gendered dyads. Conclusions: The analysis found no significant difference in professional title usage based on resident–faculty dyads. In our analysis, female residents were significantly more likely to have their professional title used on assessments than male residents.

Prolonged QT interval is an independent risk factor for all-cause mortality. However, evaluation of mortality associated to the implementation of a clinical decision support system to increase awareness and provide management recommendations has been challenging. Here we present our attempt to develop a model using only electronic data and different control groups.

This retrospective cohort study investigated the longer-term hyperglycemic effects of intra-articular corticosteroid (IACS) administration by evaluating changes in A1C after large joint IACS injection. Among 1,169 patients (mean age 66.1 ± 12.2 years, 52.8% female), 184 (15.7%) experienced a greater-than-expected rise in A1C (actual A1C ≥0.5% above predicted) after IACS. Greater-than-expected rise in A1C was associated solely with baseline A1C (odds ratio [OR] 1.84, 95% CI 1.08–3.13 for baseline A1C of 7.0–8.0% compared with &lt;7.0% and OR 4.79, 95% CI 2.83–8.14 for baseline A1C &gt;8.0% compared with &lt;7.0%). Although most patients do not experience an increase in A1C after IACS, clinicians should counsel patients with suboptimally controlled diabetes about risks of further hyperglycemia after IACS administration.