Hamadi, Hanadi

Background . Despite the potential of palliative care (PC) to enhance the quality of life for patients with advanced dementia, there is limited knowledge of its inpatient utilization patterns. This study investigated inpatient PC consultation utilization patterns and evaluated its impact on hospital length of stay (LOS) and medical costs among older patients diagnosed with Alzheimer’s Disease and Related Dementia who were at a high risk of mortality (ADRD-HRM). Methods . Using the 2016-2019 National Inpatient Sample database, we conducted multivariable logistic regression analyses to identify individual and hospital characteristics influencing PC consultation utilization. We subsequently performed generalized linear models to estimate LOS (using Poisson distribution) and hospital charges (via log-transformation). Results . Our sample encompassed 965,644 hospital discharges (weighted n = 4,828,219) of patients aged 65 years and above with ADRD-HRM. Among them, 14.6% received inpatient PC. There was a notable uptrend in PC consultation utilization from 13.3% in 2016 to 16.3% in 2019 ( p trend<.001). Factors positively influencing and associated with PC utilization included patients that are older, non-Hispanic White, with higher income, receiving care from teaching hospitals, and facilitated with greater bed capacity (all P < .05). Although patients who received PC were more likely to have 3.0% longer LOS ( P < .001), they had 19.2% lower hospital charges ( P < .001). Conclusions . PC substantially reduced hospital expenditures for older patients with ADRD-HRM, but the prevalence remained low at 14.6% in the study period. Future studies should explore the unmet needs of patients with lower sociodemographic status and those in rural hospitals to further increase their PC consultation utilization.

Hospitals and health systems are forming partnerships to develop an integrated social network of services that better address the needs of their surrounding communities and their social determinants of health (SDOH). There is little research on the association of these partnered services with hospital outcomes. This study examined the association between hospital social need partnerships and activities to improve hospital and community outcomes. A secondary cross-sectional design to analyze 2021 census data of nonfederal short-term acute care hospitals in the United States was utilized. Data were obtained from the American Hospital Association. Four multilevel logistic regression models were used to analyze data from 1005 hospitals. The authors found that hospital partnership type differed in association to social need outcomes. They found that hospitals with a partnership with health insurance providers were more likely to have better health outcomes. Hospitals partnered with health insurance providers, local organizations addressing housing insecurity, local businesses, or chambers of commerce were more likely to have decreased health care costs. Hospitals partnered with health care providers, health insurance providers, local organizations providing legal assistance, or law enforcement/safety forces were more likely to have decreased utilization of hospital services. However, hospitals partnered with other local or state government or social service organizations were less likely to indicate decreased utilization of services. Many hospitals and health systems across the United States are screening for SDOH and are advancing health care delivery and improving the community's overall health and well-being by identifying unmet social needs and partnering with the community to address them.

The United States has one of the highest cumulative mortalities of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) and has reached 1 million deaths as of May 19th, 2022. Understanding which community and hospital factors contributed to disparities in COVID-19 mortality is important to inform public health strategies. This study aimed to explore the potential relationship between hospital service area (1) community (ie, health professional shortage areas, market competition, and uninsured percentage) and (2) hospital (ie, teaching, system, and ownership status) characteristics (2013–2018) on publicly available COVD-19 (February to October 2020) mortality data. The study included 2514 health service areas and used multilevel mixed-effects linear model to account for the multilevel data structure. The outcome measure was the number of COVID-19 deaths. This study found that public health, as opposed to acute care provision, was associated with community health and, ultimately, COVID-19 mortality. The study found that population characteristics including more uninsured greater proportion of those over 65 years, more diverse populations, and larger populations were all associated with a higher rate of death. In addition, communities with fewer hospitals were associated with a lower rate of death. When considering region in the United States, the west region showed a higher rate of death than all other regions. The association between some community characteristics and higher COVID-19 deaths demonstrated that access to health care, either for COVID-19 infection or worse health from higher disease burden, is strongly associated with COVID-19 deaths. Thus, to be better prepared for potential future pandemics, a greater emphasis on public health infrastructure is needed.

Abstract Aims To assess the impact of community‐level characteristics on the role of magnet designation in relation to hospital value‐based purchasing quality scores, as health disparities associated with geographical location could confound hospitals' ability to meet outcome metrics. Design This cross‐sectional study was carried out between October 2021 and March 2022 using data from 2016 to 2021. Methods Propensity score analysis was used to match hospital and community‐level characteristics, implementing nearest neighbour matching to adjust for pre‐treatment differences between magnet and non‐magnet hospitals to account for multi‐level differences. Secondary data were obtained from all operational acute‐care facilities in the United States that participated in the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services' hospital value‐based purchasing (HVBP) program. Dependent variables were the four value‐based purchasing domains that comprise the Total Performance Score (TPS; Clinical Care, Person and Community Engagement, Safety, and Efficiency and Cost Reduction). Results Magnet hospitals had increased odds for better scores in the HVBP domains of Clinical Care and Person and Community Engagement, and decreased odds for having better Safety. However, no statistically significant difference was found for the Efficiency domain or the TPS. Conclusion Measuring performance equitably across organizations of various sizes serving diverse communities remains a key factor in ensuring distributive justice. Analysing the TPS components can identify complex influences of community‐level characteristics not evident at the composite level. More research is needed where community and nurse‐level factors may indirectly affect patient safety. Impact This study's findings on the role of community contexts can inform policymakers designing value‐based care programs and healthcare management administrators deliberating on magnet certification investments across diverse community settings. No patient or public contribution For this study of US hospitals' organizational performance, we did not engage members of the patient population nor the general public. However, the multi‐disciplinary research team does include diverse perspectives.

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.

AbstractThe Baby‐Friendly Hospital Initiative is a global health promotion intervention that outlines the Ten Steps hospitals should implement to support newborns' breastfeeding. This US‐based study aimed to determine which hospital characteristics and community factors are associated with hospitals' attainment of Baby‐Friendly designation. We used a cross‐sectional design and used 2018 data from the Baby‐Friendly, USA Inc. designation program merged with the American Hospital Association annual survey data set. Multilevel logistic regression analysis was used to assess hospital characteristics of interest among the sample consisting of 312 Baby‐Friendly hospitals and 1449 non‐Baby‐Friendly. Our results show that Baby‐Friendly hospitals are more likely to be government nonfederal hospitals, in the Midwest or South regions, serve communities with higher birth totals, and reside in competitive markets. Based on the results of this study, hospitals should seek further and examine their community's characteristics and structures to identify opportunities and encourage the attainment of improved breastfeeding initiatives such as Baby‐Friendly designation.

Objective A key quality indicator in any health system is its ability to reduce morbidity and mortality. In recent years, healthcare organizations in the United States have been held to stricter measures of accountability to provide safe, quality care. This study aimed to explore the contextual factors driving racial disparities in hospital-acquired conditions incident rates among Medicare recipients in Magnet and non-Magnet hospitals. Methods A cross-sectional observational study was performed using data from Hospital-Acquired Condition Reduction Program. Performance from 1823 hospitals were used to examine the association between Magnet recognition and community’s racial and ethnic differences in hospital performance on the Hospital-Acquired Condition Reduction Program. The unit of analysis was the hospital level. A propensity score matching approach was used to take into account differences in baseline characteristics when comparing Magnet and non-Magnet hospitals. The outcome measures were risk-standardized hospital performance on the Hospital-Acquired Condition Reduction Program domains and overall performance. Results Study findings show that Magnet hospitals had decreased methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) rate (β = −0.22; 95% confidence interval, −0.36 to −0.08) compared with non-Magnet hospitals. No other statistical difference was identified. Conclusions Results from this study show community’s racial and ethnic differences in hospital-acquired conditions occurrence differ between Magnet and non-Magnet hospitals for MRSA, indicating its association with nursing practice. However, because this improvement is limited to only MRSA, there are likely opportunities for Magnet hospitals to continue process improvements focused on additional Hospital-Acquired Condition Reduction Program measures.

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.

Abstract Aims To determine if there is an association between better County Health Rankings and the increased odds of a hospital gaining Magnet designation in subsequent years (2014–2019) compared with counties with lower rankings. Background The Magnet hospital model is recognized to have a great effect on nurses, patients and organizational outcomes. Although Magnet hospital designation is a well‐established structural marker for nursing excellence, the effect of County Health Rankings and subsequent hospital achievement of Magnet status is unknown. Design A descriptive, cross‐sectional quantitative approach was adopted for this study. Methods Data were derived from 2010 to 2019 U.S. County Health Rankings, American Hospital Association, and American Nursing Credentialing Center databases. Logistic regression models were utilized to determine associations between county rankings for health behaviours, clinical care, social and economic factors, physical environment and counties with a new Magnet hospital after 2014. Results Counties with the worst rankings for clinical care and socio‐economic status had reduced odds of obtaining a Magnet hospital designation compared with best‐ranking counties. While middle‐ranking counties for the physical environment ranking had increased odds of having Magnet designation compared with best‐ranking counties. Additionally, having an increased percent of government non‐federal hospital or a higher percentage of critical access hospitals in the county reduced the odds of having a Magnet‐designated facility after 2014. Conclusion The findings underscore the important associations between Magnet‐designated facilities’ location and the health of its surrounding counties. This study is the first to examine the relationship between County Health Rankings and a hospital's likelihood of obtaining Magnet status and points to the need for future research to explore outcomes of care previously identified as improved in Magnet‐designated hospitals. Implications Recognizing the benefits of Magnet facilities, it is important for health care leaders and policy makers to seek opportunities to promote centres of excellence in higher need communities through policy and financial intervention.