Burton, M. Caroline

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.

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.

AbstractBackgroundThe early phase of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID‐19) pandemic had a negative impact on the wellness of hospitalists and hospital medicine advanced practice providers (APPs). However, the burden of the pandemic has evolved and the change in hospitalist and hospital medicine APP wellness is unknown.ObjectiveTo evaluate the longitudinal trend in wellness of hospitalists and hospital medicine APPs during the COVID‐19 pandemic and guide wellness interventions.Design, Setting and ParticipantsBetween May 4, 2020, and June 6, 2021, we administered three surveys to Internal Medicine hospitalists (physicians) and hospital medicine APPs (nurse practitioners and physician assistants) at 16 Mayo Clinic hospitals in four U.S. states.MeasurementsWe evaluated the association of hospitalist and hospital medicine APP characteristics with PROMIS® measures of global wellbeing‐mental health, global wellbeing‐social activities and relationships, anxiety, social isolation, and emotional support, using logistic and linear regression models.ResultsThe response rates were 52.2% (n=154/295; May 2020), 37.1% (n=111/299; October 2020) and 35.5% (n=114/321; May 2021). In mixed models that included hospitalist and hospital medicine APP characteristics and survey period, APPs, compared with physicians, had lower odds of top global wellbeing‐social activities and relationships (adjusted odds ratio 0.42 [0.22–0.82]; p = .01), whereas survey period showed no association. The survey period showed an independent association with higher anxiety (May 2020 vs. others) and higher social isolation (October 2020 vs. others), whereas profession showed no association. Concern about contracting COVID‐19 at work was significantly associated with lower odds of top global wellbeing‐mental health and global wellbeing‐social activities and relationships, and with higher anxiety and social isolation. Hospitalist and hospital medicine APP characteristics showed no association with levels of emotional support.ConclusionsIn this longitudinal assessment of hospitalists and hospital medicine APPs, concern about contracting COVID‐19 at work remained a determinant of wellness. The trend for global wellbeing, anxiety, and social isolation may guide wellness interventions.

Previous studies show that patient complaints can identify gaps in quality of care, but it is difficult to identify trends without categorization. We conducted a review of complaints relating to admissions on hospital internal medicine (HIM) services over a 26-month period. Data were collected on person characteristics and key features of the complaint. The complaints were also categorized into a previously published taxonomy. Seventy-six unsolicited complaints were identified, (3.5 per 1000 hospital admissions). Complaints were more likely on resident services. The mean duration between encounter and complaint was 18 days, and it took an average of 12 days to resolve the complaint. Most patients (59%) had a complaint in the Relationship domain. Thirty-nine percent of complaints mentioned a specific clinician. When a clinician was mentioned, complaints regarding communication and humaneness predominated (68%). The results indicate that the efforts to reduce patient complaints in HIM should focus on the Relationships domain.