Keuseman, Rachel L

Introduction Optimal hospital bed utilization requires innovative patient care models. We studied a novel hospitalist model utilizing telemedicine to facilitate collaboration with affiliated emergency departments (EDs) and support medical triage and care of ED patients with high likelihood of hospital admission. Methods Telehospitalists based at a tertiary care facility collaborated with four community EDs in the same healthcare network between January 1, 2022, and April 30, 2023. Telehospitalists supported ED clinicians in medical care decisions and facilitated patient disposition. Emergency department length of stay (LOS) and disposition were evaluated, as were hospital LOS, 30-day readmission, and in-hospital mortality. For patients discharged from the ED, 7-day ED readmission and subsequent hospitalization were evaluated. Results Telehospitalists discussed 550 “admit-likely” patients with ED clinicians: 105 patients (19.1%) discharged from the ED and avoided admission; 322 patients (58.5%) were admitted to local or nearby community hospitals; 123 patients (22.4%) transferred to the tertiary care facility. Emergency department LOS differed significantly among disposition groups, including patients discharged home (10.2 h), admitted to local hospitals (12.6 h), and transferred to tertiary care hospitalist services (14.9 h; p < 0.001). Hospital LOS and in-hospital mortality were not significantly different among disposition groups. Patients admitted locally had lower 30-day readmission compared to those transferred to tertiary care facility (odds ratio = 0.59 [0.36, 0.99], p = 0.048). Discussion Telehospitalists as triage clinicians is an innovative approach to support local ED clinicians and patients. Telehospitalists optimized hospital bed utilization and healthcare system resources by facilitating safe discharges to home and expediting tertiary care transfers when necessary.

Introduction: Hospitalists have been shown to have shorter lengths of stays than physicians with concurrent outpatient practices. However, hospitalists at academic medical centers may be less aware of local resources that can support the hospital to home transition for local primary care patients. We hypothesized that local family medicine patients admitted to a family medicine inpatient service have shorter length of stay than those admitted to general hospitalist services which also care for tertiary patients at an academic medical center. Methods: A retrospective cohort study was conducted at an academic medical center with a department of family medicine providing primary care to over 80 000 local patients. A total of 3100 consecutive family medicine patients admitted to either the family medicine inpatient service or a general medicine inpatient service over 3 years were studied. The primary outcome was length of stay, which was adjusted using multivariate linear regression for demographics, prior utilization, diagnosis, and disease severity. Results: Adjusted length of stay was 33% longer (95% CI 24%-44%) for local family medicine patients admitted to general medicine inpatient services as compared with the family medicine inpatient service. Readmission rates within 30 days were not different (19% vs 16%, P = .14). Conclusions: Local primary care patients were safely discharged from the hospital sooner on the family medicine inpatient service than on general medicine inpatient services. This is likely because the family physicians staffing their inpatient service are more familiar with outpatient resources that can be effectively marshaled to help local patients with the transition from hospital to home.