Gallagher, Kennedy E.

Transfers are high-risk events, and outside hospital admissions lack standardized processes to ensure timely delivery of essential clinical information. We piloted a novel, standardized process for outside admissions to a single academic medical center’s resident- and hospital medicine-attending-based medicine services. Following literature review, Epic UserWeb review, and frontline physician input, a workflow and templated electronic health record accept note were developed to centralize outside admission documentation. Completed by physicians during real-time communication with outside physicians, the template captures key clinical data and incorporates a communication checklist. Physician education was delivered electronically and in person. Subjective attending and resident perceptions were assessed via electronic prepost surveys administered 1 week before and 90 days after implementation. Secondarily, exploratory patient clinical outcomes were assessed through 90-day prepost manual retrospective chart review. Survey responses were obtained from 60/38 residents and 12/7 attendings (pre/post). Documentation sufficiency on patient arrival was directionally promising among residents (21.7% vs 39.5%, P = 0.062). Satisfaction with the admission process and perceived patient safety improved significantly among residents and attendings ( P ≤ 0.036). Most respondents rated the note as useful or very useful (84% residents; 86% attendings), and attendings reported reduced time managing outside admissions. The intervention was associated with exploratory, nonsignificant reductions in rapid response team activation, intensive care unit transfer, 30-day readmission, mortality, and length of stay compared with preintervention patients. A standardized documentation and communication process improved physician satisfaction and perceived patient safety, with promising exploratory patient outcomes. Further study is warranted to assess impact at scale.

Objectives: To evaluate the association of a templated interhospital transfer (IHT) note on transfer appropriateness and clinical outcomes. Methods: We conducted a retrospective, single-center study of 100 IHTs to the Department of Medicine services between May and June 2023. The exposure was the type of documentation at the time of transfer, categorized as templated note, nontemplated note, or no note. The primary outcome was appropriateness of transfer, determined by 2 independent adjudicators using a standardized framework developed as part of the POINT Study. Documentation type by clinical specialty and reason for transfer were assessed, with statistical analyses of clinical outcomes limited to those with an incidence >5% (ie, escalation/downgrade in level of care within 24 h of transfer and 30 d mortality). Results: Among 100 transfers, 81 (81%) were deemed appropriate and 19 (19%) were deemed inappropriate. Documentation was present in 59%, including templated (35%) and nontemplated notes (24%). IHTs without documentation had the highest appropriateness rate (87.8%, 36/41), compared with templated notes (29/35, 82.9%; P =0.15) and nontemplated notes (66.7%, 16/24; P =0.042). Downgrades were more common in inappropriate transfers with nontemplated notes (50.0%, 4/8) than in appropriate transfers with templated notes (10.3%, 3/29; P =0.012). Conclusions: Structured IHT documentation was inconsistently used and did not predict the appropriateness of transfer. Transfers without documentation were most often appropriate, suggesting straightforward cases may not require formal notes. In contrast, nontemplated notes in inappropriate transfers showed high downgrade rates, implying that unstructured documentation may inflate perceived acuity. Further evaluation of documentation strategies is needed to support appropriate transfer decision-making.