Hanson, Gregory J.

Introduction/Objectives: House call programs provide care for homebound patients. We conducted a case-control study to compare hospitalization and/or emergency department (ED) use by patients enrolled in a primary care house call program versus ambulatory (community-dwelling) patients. Methods: Program enrollees (cases) were matched by age and self-reported gender to community-dwelling patients (controls). The primary exposure was the combination of hospitalization and/or ED visits for 1 year before the index date (October 1, 2024). We used unadjusted and adjusted conditional logistic regression to determine differences in health care use. Results: We identified 26 cases (median [range] age, 84 [66-98] years; 16 [62%] female) and 130 controls. All cases had 4 or more chronic diseases, as compared with 87 (67%) of controls ( P = .003). A higher proportion of cases than controls had previous hospitalization and/or ED visits (84.6% vs 27.7%; P < .001). After adjusting for the number of chronic illnesses, no differences in previous hospitalization and/or ED use were identified between groups. Conclusions: Cases had more chronic illnesses and more hospitalizations and/or ED visits than community-dwelling controls. The comorbid health burden of participants in the house call program drove greater health care use and justifies a higher level of care for this medically complex patient population.

Background: Benefits of hospice care, such as improvement in quality of life and reduced costs, depend on duration of enrollment in hospice services, making timely hospice referral essential. Patient-, provider-, and system-level factors associated with hospice referral timing and length of stay (LOS) are unclear. 1 – 6 Objective: To review existing hospice referral patterns to identify patient- and system-level factors associated with hospice LOS. Methods: We performed a retrospective review of all adult patients referred from our institution (located in Rochester, Minnesota, USA) to a nonprofit hospice agency between 2013 and 2017. The primary dependent variable was hospice LOS. Patient-level variables included demographic characteristics, place of residence, and hospice diagnosis. System-level variables included referral setting and provider-specific variables, such as title and gender. Statistical analyses were performed using multivariate logistic regression. Results: A total of 2072 patients were referred to hospice during the study period. Patient-level factors associated with LOS included hospice diagnosis and place of residence. Patients referred for cancer had a higher odds of a long LOS, while patients from long-term care facilities had a higher odds of a short LOS. System-level factors associated with LOS included provider gender and title. Referral by a female provider or by a physician, rather than an advanced practice provider, was associated with a lower odds of a short LOS. Conclusion: Based on a review of hospice referral patterns, the integration of hospice care into subspecialty practices, long-term care facilities, and advanced practice education could be an effective strategy to improve hospice LOS.

Introduction/Objectives: To describe health outcomes of older adults enrolled in the Mayo Clinic Care Transitions (MCCT) program before and during the COVID-19 pandemic compared to unenrolled patients. Methods: We conducted a retrospective cohort study of adults (age >60 years) in the MCCT program compared to a usual care control group from January 1, 2019, to September 20, 2022. The MCCT program involved a home, telephonic, or telemedicine visit by an advanced care provider. Outcomes were 30- and 180-day hospital readmissions, emergency department (ED) visit, and mortality. We performed a subgroup analysis after March 1, 2020 (during the pandemic). We analyzed data with Cox proportional hazards regression models and hazard ratios (HRs) with 95% CIs. Results: Of the 1,012 patients total, 354 were in the MCCT program and 658 were in the usual care group with a mean (SD) age of 81.1 (9.1) years overall. Thirty-day readmission was 16.9% (60 of 354) for MCCT patients and 14.7% (97 of 658) for usual care patients (HR, 1.24; 95% CI, 0.88-1.75). During the pandemic, the 30-day readmission rate was 15.1% (28 of 186) for MCCT patients and 14.9% (68 of 455) for usual care patients (HR, 1.20; 95% CI, 0.75-1.91). There was no difference between groups for 180-day hospitalization, 30- or 180-day ED visit, and 30- or 180-day mortality. Conclusions: Numerous factors involving patients, providers, and health care delivery systems during the pandemic most likely contributed to these findings.

Abstract The burden of senescent cells (SnCs), which do not divide but are metabolically active and resistant to death by apoptosis, is increased in older adults and those with chronic diseases. These individuals are also at the greatest risk for morbidity and mortality from SARS‐CoV‐2 infection. SARS‐CoV‐2 complications include cytokine storm and multiorgan failure mediated by the same factors as often produced by SnCs through their senescence‐associated secretory phenotype (SASP). The SASP can be amplified by infection‐related pathogen‐associated molecular profile factors. Senolytic agents, such as Fisetin, selectively eliminate SnCs and delay, prevent, or alleviate multiple disorders in aged experimental animals and animal models of human chronic diseases, including obesity, diabetes, and respiratory diseases. Senolytics are now in clinical trials for multiple conditions linked to SnCs, including frailty; obesity/diabetes; osteoporosis; and cardiovascular, kidney, and lung diseases, which are also risk factors for SARS‐CoV‐2 morbidity and mortality. A clinical trial is underway to test if senolytics decrease SARS‐CoV‐2 progression and morbidity in hospitalized older adults. We describe here a National Institutes of Health‐funded, multicenter, placebo‐controlled clinical trial of Fisetin for older adult skilled nursing facility (SNF) residents who have been, or become, SARS‐CoV‐2 rtPCR‐positive, including the rationale for targeting fundamental aging mechanisms in such patients. We consider logistic challenges of conducting trials in long‐term care settings in the SARS‐CoV‐2 era, including restricted access, consent procedures, methods for obtaining biospecimens and clinical data, staffing, investigational product administration issues, and potential solutions for these challenges. We propose developing a national network of SNFs engaged in interventional clinical trials.

AbstractIntroductionMany evidence‐based programs (EBPs) have been determined in randomized controlled trials to be effective, but few studies explore the real‐world effectiveness of EBPs implemented in the natural community setting. Our study evaluated whether a novel linked infrastructure would enable such insights and continuous improvement as part of a learning healthcare‐community bridged “wellcare” ecosystem.MethodsWe created a secure, web‐based data entry and storage platform with a network of Minnesota community‐based organizations to record EBP participants' demographics and attendance, and program details. We then linked participant's information to their Rochester Epidemiology Project (REP) medical records. With this infrastructure, we conducted a proof of concept, retrospective cohort study by matching EBP participants to REP controls and comparing medical record‐documented outcomes over 1 year follow‐up.ResultsWe successfully linked EBP participant records with medical records in 77.6% of cases, and the infrastructure proved feasible and scalable. Still, key challenges remain in obtaining participant consent for data sharing. Upfront resource investments and the availability of REP‐like warehouses limit generalizability. Optimal learning will be improved by enhancements that better track program fidelity. Our pilot study established a proof‐of‐concept, but sample sizes (n = 99 for falls prevention and n = 97 chronic disease/pain management EBP completers) were too small to detect significant differences in hospital admittance as compared to matched controls for either EBP group, (OR = 0.66[0.36, 1.19]) and (OR = 0.81[0.43, 1.54]), respectively. Events were too rare to gather meaningful information about effects on fall rates.ConclusionsOur pilot demonstrates the feasibility of developing an online infrastructure that connects information from community leaders with medical record documented health outcomes, bridging the knowledge gap between community programs and the health care system. Insights gleaned from our infrastructure can be used to continuously shape community program delivery to reduce the need for formal health care services.

BACKGROUNDAlthough posthospitalization care transitions programs (CTP) are highly diverse, their overall program thoroughness is most predictive of their success.OBJECTIVETo identify components of a successful homebased CTP and patient characteristics that are most predictive of reduced 30‐day readmissions.DESIGNRetrospective cohort.PATIENTSA total of 315 community‐dwelling, hospitalized, older adults (≥60 years) at high risk for readmission (Elder Risk Assessment score ≥16), discharged home over the period of January 1, 2011 to June 30, 2013.SETTINGMidwest primary care practice in an integrated health system.INTERVENTIONEnrollment in a CTP during acute hospitalization.MEASUREMENTSThe primary outcome was all‐cause readmission within 30 days of the first CTP evaluation. Logistic regression was used to examine independent variables, including patient demographics, comorbidities, number of medications, completion, and timing of program fidelity measures, and prior utilization of healthcare.RESULTSThe overall 30‐day readmission rate was 17.1%. The intensity of follow‐up varied among patients, with 17.1% and 50.8% of the patients requiring one and ≥3 home visits, respectively, within 30 days. More than half (54.6%) required visits beyond 30 days. Compared with patients who were not readmitted, readmitted patients were less likely to exhibit cognitive impairment (29.6% vs 46.0%; P = .03) and were more likely to have high medication use (59.3% vs 44.4%; P = .047), more emergency department (ED; 0.8 vs 0.4; P = .03) and primary care visits (4.0 vs 3.0; P = .018), and longer cumulative time in the hospital (4.6 vs 2.5 days; P = .03) within 180 days of the index hospitalization. Multivariable analysis indicated that only cognitive impairment and previous ED visits were important predictors of readmission.CONCLUSIONSNo single CTP component reliably predicted reduced readmission risk. Patients with cognitive impairment and polypharmacy derived the most benefit from the program.

Background/Objectives Facing penalties for preventable 30‐day hospital readmissions, many provider groups have implemented programs to remedy this problem, but the cost efficacy and value of such programs are not well delineated. The objective was to compare total cost of care over 30 days of individuals enrolled in the Mayo Clinic Care Transitions ( MCCT ) program and individuals not enrolled. Design Retrospective cohort study using secondary data analysis of a previously published cohort study. Setting Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota. Participants MCCT participants (n = 363) and individuals in a propensity‐matched referent cohort (n = 365). Intervention MCCT program enrollment. Measurements The primary outcome was total cost of care over 30 days after hospital discharge. A 2‐part modeling strategy was used to analyze 30‐day costs: whether individuals had non‐zero costs during the 30 days after discharge and a generalized linear model for individuals who incurred costs. Potential heterogeneous effects of the MCCT program were examined according to decile of 30‐day costs using quantile regression. Results Mean age was 83 in both groups. Adjusted mean 30‐day cost after hospitalization was $3,363 (95% confidence interval ( CI ) = $2,512−4,213) in the MCCT group and $4,161 (95% CI = $3,096−5,226) in the control group ( P = .25). Cost savings of $2,744 ( P = .008) at the eighth decile and $3,388 ( P = .20) at the ninth decile were demonstrated. Thus, the only statistically significant differences were in the post hoc subgroup analysis in the highest‐cost subgroups. Conclusion We did not find a difference in overall mean costs between the MCCT group and the control group, although intervention participants in the upper deciles of costs appeared to experience lower costs than controls. A larger study cohort might better determine the value of the intervention.

Background: Advance care planning (ACP) is an instrumental mechanism aimed at preserving patient autonomy. Numerous interventions have been proposed to facilitate the implementation of ACP; however, rates of completed advance directives (ADs) are universally low. Patient electronic portal messaging is a newer tool in patient–provider communication which has not been studied as a method to promote ACP. In this study, we hypothesized that the use of ACP-specific patient electronic messages would increase rates of AD completion in patients aged 65 years and older in an academic primary care practice. Methods: All primary care patients, aged 65+, who had previously enrolled in a patient electronic messaging system, within an academic primary care practice, were included for randomization. Two hundred patients were randomized to receive an electronic message. The primary outcome was the proportion of patients in each group who completed an AD, 3 months after intervention. Secondary outcomes included clinical utility of the completed ADs and proportion of patients who viewed their electronic messages. Results: The intervention group completed an AD 5.5% of the time when compared to 2% in the control group (odds ratio 3.2 [1.6-6.3]). Up to 74.5% of patients opened their electronic messages. Conclusion: Among primary care patients aged 65 years and older, use of AD-specific electronic messaging statistically significantly increased the rate of AD completion, but the absolute number of completed AD remained relatively low. These data suggest that this valuable communication tool holds opportunities for further improvement. Older, frailer adults were more likely to complete an AD, and prompted directives were more likely to include a written expression of the individual’s health-care values and preference.