Dunn, Ajani N.

Abstract Background Hospital‐at‐home programs (HaH) in the United States have evolved to include a virtual‐hybrid delivery model, where all physician encounters are virtual and partnered with a home care team. Objective To examine whether a virtual hybrid HaH program enabled by technology has similar clinical outcomes to traditional brick‐and‐mortar (B&M) hospital care. Methods We conducted a pragmatic trial at three hospitals, randomizing 1150 acutely ill patients requiring hospital care between July 10, 2023, and October 31, 2023 one‐to‐one into two groups: intervention (HaH) and control (B&M). The primary analysis was an intention‐to‐treat non‐inferiority analysis of the primary outcome, which was a composite of 30‐day all‐cause mortality and unplanned readmissions. Secondary outcomes included 30‐day readmission, all‐cause mortality, and patient experience. Results The mean age was 67.8 (standard deviation [SD] 16.3) years, and 52.2% were female. The primary outcome occurred in 99 (17.3%) HaH patients and 114 (19.8%) B&M patients (odds ratio [OR] 0.85, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.63–1.14, p = .28), meeting the non‐inferiority criterion. Thirty‐day unplanned readmission occurred in 84 (14.7%) HaH patients and 101 (17.5%) B&M patients (OR 0.81, 95% CI 0.59–1.11, p = .19). Thirty‐day all‐cause mortality occurred in 25 (4.4%) HaH patients and 19 (3.3%) B&M patients (OR 1.34, 95% CI 0.73–2.46, p = .35). No HaH patients died while receiving their hospital care at home. HaH program was associated with a higher likelihood of patients reporting feeling extremely comfortable or very comfortable (84.4% HaH; 60.9% B&M, p = .001). Conclusion A hybrid HaH model is a safe and comfortable alternative to traditional B&M hospital care.

AbstractIntroductionAs healthcare organizations examine the associated benefits of employing a larger hospitalist workforce, there is a need to better understand the association with patients' quality, experience, and efficiency. However, there is a lack of information regarding how hospital use of hospitalists over time influences hospital scoring on quality programs, such as the Center for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) Hospital Inpatient Value‐Based Purchasing (HVBP) Program. This study examines the association between hospitalist staffing between 2014 and 2019 and HVBP scores.MethodsWe used a cross‐sectional panel study design. Total Performance Score (TPS) and its domains were obtained from CMS from 2014 to 2019 and merged with the American Hospital Association Annual Survey Database. We utilized random‐effects multivariable panel regression models and zero‐inflated negative binomial regression to examine the association between the hospitalist‐staffing ratio and the HVBP Program. All models were adjusted for hospital characteristics.ResultsA total of 2126 hospitals were included in the study. The average ratio of hospitalists per staffed bed was 0.06, with a standard deviation of 0.15. This study suggests that hospitals that employ a higher percentage of hospitalists see improvement in their overall TPS (β = 5.40; p < .001), Patient Experience (β = 2.49; p <.05), and Efficiency (incidence‐rate ratio= 1.41; p < .001) domain. However, the Clinical Care domain was no different in organizations employing more hospitalists.ConclusionThere are benefits associated with TPS, Patient Experience, and Efficiency from employing hospitalists. Managers should seek opportunities to leverage hospitalists' expertise in providing care, particularly in improving care processes.

AbstractStudy RationaleThe swift progression of the COVID‐19 pandemic appeared to facilitate the increase in telehealth utilization. However, it is clear neither how telehealth was offered by providers nor how it was used by patients during this time of unusual and rapid change within the health industry.AimTo investigates the telehealth utilization patterns of Medicare beneficiaries during the height of the COVID‐19 pandemic.Methods and MaterialsA cross‐sectional study design was used to examine the responses of 9686 Medicare beneficiaries to the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) Medicare Current Beneficiary Survey, Fall 2020 COVID‐19 Supplement. Multiple logistic regression analyses were conducted to examine the relationship between telehealth offering and beneficiaries' sociodemographic variables.ResultsOver half (58%) of primary care providers provided telehealth services, while only 26%–28% of specialists did. Less than 8% of Medicare beneficiaries reported that they were unable to obtain care because of COVID‐19.ConclusionsThis research found that changes in Medicare policy, associated with CMS' declaration of telehealth waivers during the Public Health Emergency (PHE), likely increased the proliferation and utilization of telehealth services during the COVID‐19 pandemic, providing important access to care for certain populations. With the impending conclusion of the PHE, policymakers must 1) ascertain which elements of the new telehealth landscape will be retained, 2) modernize the regulatory, accreditation and reimbursement framework to maintain pace with care model innovation and 3) address disparities in access to broadband connectivity with a particular focus on rural and underserved communities.