All Content

Clinical question: Is tamsulosin efficacious as an expulsive therapy for distal ureter stones ≤10 mm in diameter?

Background: Ureteric calculi are a common reason for hospital admission, and use of medical expulsive therapy during observation periods for small caliber stones has gained much attention recently. Specifically, tamsulosin has been suggested as a medical therapy for small stones.

Study design: Randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study.

Setting: Five EDs in Australia.

Synopsis: A total of 403 patients participated in the study, based on inclusion criteria of age older than 18 years with symptoms and CT evidence of ureteric stones Exclusion criteria included fever, glomerular filtration rate <60, and calculi >10 mm. Patients were randomized to placebo or 0.4 mg tamsulosin daily for 28 days. The outcome was stone expulsion demonstrated by absence of calculi on repeat CT. Stone passage in the entire group occurred in 87% of the tamsulosin arm and 81.9% of the placebo, with a 95% CI of -3.0% to 13%, which was not a significant difference with P=0.22.

Interestingly, in a subgroup analysis of larger stones 5–10 mm, 83% of tamsulosin subjects compared to 61% of placebo subjects had stone passage that was significant at a 22% difference and P=.03.

Limitations included compliance in both groups, applicability to other populations given study based in Australia, and the lack of follow-through with CT scan at 28 days in 17% of the original group, resulting in missing outcome data.

Bottom line: Patients with ureteric stones 5–10 mm in size demonstrate increased spontaneous stone expulsion with the addition of tamsulosin and should thus be offered this therapy.

Citation: Furyk J, Chu K, Banks C, et al. Distal ureteric stones and tamsulosin: a double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomized, multicenter trial. Ann Emerg Med. 2016;67(1):86-95.e2.

Short Take

Low Diagnostic Yield of Blood Cultures in Hospitalized Medical Patients

Prospective cohort study of patients hospitalized on a medical service demonstrated a true positive rate of blood cultures that was lower than previously studied. Using objective clinical predictors may improve likelihood of true positive blood cultures.

Citation: Linsenmeyer K, Gupta K, Strymish JM, Dhanani M, Brecher SM, Breu AC. Culture if spikes? Indications and yield of blood cultures in hospitalized medical patients [published online ahead of print January 13, 2016]. J Hosp Med. doi:10.1002/jhm.2541.

Clinical question: Is tamsulosin efficacious as an expulsive therapy for distal ureter stones ≤10 mm in diameter?

Background: Ureteric calculi are a common reason for hospital admission, and use of medical expulsive therapy during observation periods for small caliber stones has gained much attention recently. Specifically, tamsulosin has been suggested as a medical therapy for small stones.

Study design: Randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study.

Setting: Five EDs in Australia.

Synopsis: A total of 403 patients participated in the study, based on inclusion criteria of age older than 18 years with symptoms and CT evidence of ureteric stones Exclusion criteria included fever, glomerular filtration rate <60, and calculi >10 mm. Patients were randomized to placebo or 0.4 mg tamsulosin daily for 28 days. The outcome was stone expulsion demonstrated by absence of calculi on repeat CT. Stone passage in the entire group occurred in 87% of the tamsulosin arm and 81.9% of the placebo, with a 95% CI of -3.0% to 13%, which was not a significant difference with P=0.22.

Interestingly, in a subgroup analysis of larger stones 5–10 mm, 83% of tamsulosin subjects compared to 61% of placebo subjects had stone passage that was significant at a 22% difference and P=.03.

Limitations included compliance in both groups, applicability to other populations given study based in Australia, and the lack of follow-through with CT scan at 28 days in 17% of the original group, resulting in missing outcome data.

Bottom line: Patients with ureteric stones 5–10 mm in size demonstrate increased spontaneous stone expulsion with the addition of tamsulosin and should thus be offered this therapy.

Citation: Furyk J, Chu K, Banks C, et al. Distal ureteric stones and tamsulosin: a double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomized, multicenter trial. Ann Emerg Med. 2016;67(1):86-95.e2.

Short Take

Low Diagnostic Yield of Blood Cultures in Hospitalized Medical Patients

Prospective cohort study of patients hospitalized on a medical service demonstrated a true positive rate of blood cultures that was lower than previously studied. Using objective clinical predictors may improve likelihood of true positive blood cultures.

Citation: Linsenmeyer K, Gupta K, Strymish JM, Dhanani M, Brecher SM, Breu AC. Culture if spikes? Indications and yield of blood cultures in hospitalized medical patients [published online ahead of print January 13, 2016]. J Hosp Med. doi:10.1002/jhm.2541.

Clinical question: Is tamsulosin efficacious as an expulsive therapy for distal ureter stones ≤10 mm in diameter?

Background: Ureteric calculi are a common reason for hospital admission, and use of medical expulsive therapy during observation periods for small caliber stones has gained much attention recently. Specifically, tamsulosin has been suggested as a medical therapy for small stones.

Study design: Randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study.

Setting: Five EDs in Australia.

Synopsis: A total of 403 patients participated in the study, based on inclusion criteria of age older than 18 years with symptoms and CT evidence of ureteric stones Exclusion criteria included fever, glomerular filtration rate <60, and calculi >10 mm. Patients were randomized to placebo or 0.4 mg tamsulosin daily for 28 days. The outcome was stone expulsion demonstrated by absence of calculi on repeat CT. Stone passage in the entire group occurred in 87% of the tamsulosin arm and 81.9% of the placebo, with a 95% CI of -3.0% to 13%, which was not a significant difference with P=0.22.

Interestingly, in a subgroup analysis of larger stones 5–10 mm, 83% of tamsulosin subjects compared to 61% of placebo subjects had stone passage that was significant at a 22% difference and P=.03.

Limitations included compliance in both groups, applicability to other populations given study based in Australia, and the lack of follow-through with CT scan at 28 days in 17% of the original group, resulting in missing outcome data.

Bottom line: Patients with ureteric stones 5–10 mm in size demonstrate increased spontaneous stone expulsion with the addition of tamsulosin and should thus be offered this therapy.

Citation: Furyk J, Chu K, Banks C, et al. Distal ureteric stones and tamsulosin: a double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomized, multicenter trial. Ann Emerg Med. 2016;67(1):86-95.e2.

Short Take

Low Diagnostic Yield of Blood Cultures in Hospitalized Medical Patients

Prospective cohort study of patients hospitalized on a medical service demonstrated a true positive rate of blood cultures that was lower than previously studied. Using objective clinical predictors may improve likelihood of true positive blood cultures.

Citation: Linsenmeyer K, Gupta K, Strymish JM, Dhanani M, Brecher SM, Breu AC. Culture if spikes? Indications and yield of blood cultures in hospitalized medical patients [published online ahead of print January 13, 2016]. J Hosp Med. doi:10.1002/jhm.2541.

The industry’s first certification for home health and hospices that provide top-caliber community-based palliative care services in the patient’s place of residence is being launched by The Joint Commission.

“As healthcare continues to evolve and the Affordable Care Act is beginning to impact the industry, one of the things that has come to light is that many patients over the years have experienced unnecessary hospitalization admissions when the management of their disease stage really required palliative care,” says Margherita Labson, RN, MSHSA, CPHQ, executive director of The Joint Commission’s Home Care Program. “For those of us in the home care environment in the community, we’ve always tried to manage this, but the current models of care didn’t really meet the needs of these patients because the Medicare benefit is an episodic payment program that’s built for rehab and restoration, not for maintenance.”

The Joint Commission’s new program, she says, provides value to patients, results in a lower rate of a necessary readmission, and contributes to patient satisfaction and improved outcomes of care.

Surveys for Community-Based Palliative Care (CBPC) Certification will begin on July 1. Certification is awarded for a three-year period, and the certification’s framework helps providers design, deliver, and validate patient-centered care and services. Key CBPC certification requirements include:

• A robust interdisciplinary care team
• Customized, comprehensive care plans
• After-hours care and services
• Use of evidence-based clinical practice guidelines
• A defined hand-off communications process

“This helps to address perhaps one of the key frustrations of hospitalists: the repeated readmissions of patients struggling with serious chronic illnesses,” Labson says. “It helps reduce the number of inappropriate hospital admissions and allows the hospitalist to focus on the admission and successful management of those patients that are appropriate for hospital intervention or acute-care intervention at that point.”

The industry’s first certification for home health and hospices that provide top-caliber community-based palliative care services in the patient’s place of residence is being launched by The Joint Commission.

“As healthcare continues to evolve and the Affordable Care Act is beginning to impact the industry, one of the things that has come to light is that many patients over the years have experienced unnecessary hospitalization admissions when the management of their disease stage really required palliative care,” says Margherita Labson, RN, MSHSA, CPHQ, executive director of The Joint Commission’s Home Care Program. “For those of us in the home care environment in the community, we’ve always tried to manage this, but the current models of care didn’t really meet the needs of these patients because the Medicare benefit is an episodic payment program that’s built for rehab and restoration, not for maintenance.”

The Joint Commission’s new program, she says, provides value to patients, results in a lower rate of a necessary readmission, and contributes to patient satisfaction and improved outcomes of care.

Surveys for Community-Based Palliative Care (CBPC) Certification will begin on July 1. Certification is awarded for a three-year period, and the certification’s framework helps providers design, deliver, and validate patient-centered care and services. Key CBPC certification requirements include:

• A robust interdisciplinary care team
• Customized, comprehensive care plans
• After-hours care and services
• Use of evidence-based clinical practice guidelines
• A defined hand-off communications process

“This helps to address perhaps one of the key frustrations of hospitalists: the repeated readmissions of patients struggling with serious chronic illnesses,” Labson says. “It helps reduce the number of inappropriate hospital admissions and allows the hospitalist to focus on the admission and successful management of those patients that are appropriate for hospital intervention or acute-care intervention at that point.”

The industry’s first certification for home health and hospices that provide top-caliber community-based palliative care services in the patient’s place of residence is being launched by The Joint Commission.

“As healthcare continues to evolve and the Affordable Care Act is beginning to impact the industry, one of the things that has come to light is that many patients over the years have experienced unnecessary hospitalization admissions when the management of their disease stage really required palliative care,” says Margherita Labson, RN, MSHSA, CPHQ, executive director of The Joint Commission’s Home Care Program. “For those of us in the home care environment in the community, we’ve always tried to manage this, but the current models of care didn’t really meet the needs of these patients because the Medicare benefit is an episodic payment program that’s built for rehab and restoration, not for maintenance.”

The Joint Commission’s new program, she says, provides value to patients, results in a lower rate of a necessary readmission, and contributes to patient satisfaction and improved outcomes of care.

Surveys for Community-Based Palliative Care (CBPC) Certification will begin on July 1. Certification is awarded for a three-year period, and the certification’s framework helps providers design, deliver, and validate patient-centered care and services. Key CBPC certification requirements include:

• A robust interdisciplinary care team
• Customized, comprehensive care plans
• After-hours care and services
• Use of evidence-based clinical practice guidelines
• A defined hand-off communications process

“This helps to address perhaps one of the key frustrations of hospitalists: the repeated readmissions of patients struggling with serious chronic illnesses,” Labson says. “It helps reduce the number of inappropriate hospital admissions and allows the hospitalist to focus on the admission and successful management of those patients that are appropriate for hospital intervention or acute-care intervention at that point.”

Heart failure patients who had early follow-up (within seven days of discharge) with general medicine or cardiology providers had a lower risk of being readmitted to the hospital within 30 days, according to a study from Kaiser Permanente published in the journal Medical Care.

“We found that follow-up within the first seven days post-discharge—mostly done through in-person clinic visits—was independently associated with a 19% lower chance of readmission, whereas initial follow-up after seven days was not significantly associated with readmission,” says lead researcher Keane K. Lee, MD, MS, a cardiologist and research scientist with Kaiser Permanente. “Perhaps as important, we also observed that telephone visits, mostly done by non-physician providers, within seven days after hospital discharge were associated with a non-statistically significant trend toward lower 30-day readmission rates, even after carefully accounting for potential differences between patients.

“This finding that telephone visits could reduce readmissions has never been reported and has potentially important implications. Contact by telephone with non-physicians may be more convenient for patients and family members and be more practical and cost-effective when implemented on a large scale.”

Dr. Lee suggests hospitalists have a role in creating a system to reliably arrange this follow-up.

“Hospitalists serve as a key part of the process to help patients transition successfully from the hospital back home,” Dr. Lee says.

Reference

1. Lee KK, Yang J, Hernandez AF, Steimle AE, Go S. Post-discharge follow-up characteristics associated with 30-day readmission after heart failure hospitalization. Med Care. 2016;54(4):365-372.

Heart failure patients who had early follow-up (within seven days of discharge) with general medicine or cardiology providers had a lower risk of being readmitted to the hospital within 30 days, according to a study from Kaiser Permanente published in the journal Medical Care.

“We found that follow-up within the first seven days post-discharge—mostly done through in-person clinic visits—was independently associated with a 19% lower chance of readmission, whereas initial follow-up after seven days was not significantly associated with readmission,” says lead researcher Keane K. Lee, MD, MS, a cardiologist and research scientist with Kaiser Permanente. “Perhaps as important, we also observed that telephone visits, mostly done by non-physician providers, within seven days after hospital discharge were associated with a non-statistically significant trend toward lower 30-day readmission rates, even after carefully accounting for potential differences between patients.

“This finding that telephone visits could reduce readmissions has never been reported and has potentially important implications. Contact by telephone with non-physicians may be more convenient for patients and family members and be more practical and cost-effective when implemented on a large scale.”

Dr. Lee suggests hospitalists have a role in creating a system to reliably arrange this follow-up.

“Hospitalists serve as a key part of the process to help patients transition successfully from the hospital back home,” Dr. Lee says.

Reference

1. Lee KK, Yang J, Hernandez AF, Steimle AE, Go S. Post-discharge follow-up characteristics associated with 30-day readmission after heart failure hospitalization. Med Care. 2016;54(4):365-372.

Heart failure patients who had early follow-up (within seven days of discharge) with general medicine or cardiology providers had a lower risk of being readmitted to the hospital within 30 days, according to a study from Kaiser Permanente published in the journal Medical Care.

“We found that follow-up within the first seven days post-discharge—mostly done through in-person clinic visits—was independently associated with a 19% lower chance of readmission, whereas initial follow-up after seven days was not significantly associated with readmission,” says lead researcher Keane K. Lee, MD, MS, a cardiologist and research scientist with Kaiser Permanente. “Perhaps as important, we also observed that telephone visits, mostly done by non-physician providers, within seven days after hospital discharge were associated with a non-statistically significant trend toward lower 30-day readmission rates, even after carefully accounting for potential differences between patients.

“This finding that telephone visits could reduce readmissions has never been reported and has potentially important implications. Contact by telephone with non-physicians may be more convenient for patients and family members and be more practical and cost-effective when implemented on a large scale.”

Dr. Lee suggests hospitalists have a role in creating a system to reliably arrange this follow-up.

“Hospitalists serve as a key part of the process to help patients transition successfully from the hospital back home,” Dr. Lee says.

Reference

1. Lee KK, Yang J, Hernandez AF, Steimle AE, Go S. Post-discharge follow-up characteristics associated with 30-day readmission after heart failure hospitalization. Med Care. 2016;54(4):365-372.

Dear Dr. Hospitalist:

I am a seasoned hospitalist at a large academic medical center in the Northeast and have recently become more bothered by how our group is being coerced to aggressively bill for our services. It seems the current reimbursement environment has pushed some of our leaders to demand more aggressive billing from our hospitalists. How should I respond?

Sincerely,

A Seasoned Hospitalist

Dr. Hospitalist responds:

As another “seasoned” hospitalist, I, too, have seen the wide pendulum swing from when internist inpatient billing was an afterthought and done by others to the current system of billing classes, RVU enticement, and reminders of how to construct the note. Enter the electronic health record, and now instead of clinical notes being used as a form of communication among clinicians, it does seem today to be created more for billing purposes.

How did we get here?

Physicians have to accept some of the blame. I can recall when I was an orderly at our local hospital in the mid 1970s and some physician “rounds” consisted of standing in a patient’s doorway and calling out, “How are you doing today, Mrs. Smith?” I must admit to having no idea how these docs were billing, but I do know that Medicare allowed for twice-daily billing for hospital visits back then. I also recall some of the paltry progress notes that consisted of one-liners like “pt doing well today.”

Like most corrective actions, the response has overshot the intended mark and made the daily progress note more ritualistic than informative. When the first attempts by the American Medical Association and the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services were released in the early 1990s, I’m sure most docs had no idea it would morph into its current level of significance for reimbursement—and that one day docs would be asked to implement, keep up with changes and modifications (think ICD-10), and use daily. Don’t get me wrong: I, like most hospitalists, recognize the clinical utility of a concise and well-written note. But when an otherwise complete H&P gets down-coded from a level 99223 to a 99221 because I leave off the family history of a 95-year-old man, of course I believe something is wrong with the system.

Also, human nature being what it is, I have always felt that if you incentivize people to increase production of an item, whether it’s a widget or an RVU, you will have some who will learn to game the system, consciously or subconsciously. With healthcare spending in the U.S. approaching 20% of gross domestic product, we as physicians should not be placed in positions of increased financial gain at the expense of our country’s economic health and viability. After all, we’re citizens first and physicians second.

You should recognize the need for proper coding and billing as inherent to the hospital’s financial viability, and if done correctly, it should not create an ethical or legal conflict for you. In the vast majority of cases, a well-written note can be properly billed and coded without creating angst.

Good luck! TH

Dear Dr. Hospitalist:

I am a seasoned hospitalist at a large academic medical center in the Northeast and have recently become more bothered by how our group is being coerced to aggressively bill for our services. It seems the current reimbursement environment has pushed some of our leaders to demand more aggressive billing from our hospitalists. How should I respond?

Sincerely,

A Seasoned Hospitalist

Dr. Hospitalist responds:

As another “seasoned” hospitalist, I, too, have seen the wide pendulum swing from when internist inpatient billing was an afterthought and done by others to the current system of billing classes, RVU enticement, and reminders of how to construct the note. Enter the electronic health record, and now instead of clinical notes being used as a form of communication among clinicians, it does seem today to be created more for billing purposes.

How did we get here?

Physicians have to accept some of the blame. I can recall when I was an orderly at our local hospital in the mid 1970s and some physician “rounds” consisted of standing in a patient’s doorway and calling out, “How are you doing today, Mrs. Smith?” I must admit to having no idea how these docs were billing, but I do know that Medicare allowed for twice-daily billing for hospital visits back then. I also recall some of the paltry progress notes that consisted of one-liners like “pt doing well today.”

Like most corrective actions, the response has overshot the intended mark and made the daily progress note more ritualistic than informative. When the first attempts by the American Medical Association and the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services were released in the early 1990s, I’m sure most docs had no idea it would morph into its current level of significance for reimbursement—and that one day docs would be asked to implement, keep up with changes and modifications (think ICD-10), and use daily. Don’t get me wrong: I, like most hospitalists, recognize the clinical utility of a concise and well-written note. But when an otherwise complete H&P gets down-coded from a level 99223 to a 99221 because I leave off the family history of a 95-year-old man, of course I believe something is wrong with the system.

Also, human nature being what it is, I have always felt that if you incentivize people to increase production of an item, whether it’s a widget or an RVU, you will have some who will learn to game the system, consciously or subconsciously. With healthcare spending in the U.S. approaching 20% of gross domestic product, we as physicians should not be placed in positions of increased financial gain at the expense of our country’s economic health and viability. After all, we’re citizens first and physicians second.

You should recognize the need for proper coding and billing as inherent to the hospital’s financial viability, and if done correctly, it should not create an ethical or legal conflict for you. In the vast majority of cases, a well-written note can be properly billed and coded without creating angst.

Good luck! TH

Dear Dr. Hospitalist:

I am a seasoned hospitalist at a large academic medical center in the Northeast and have recently become more bothered by how our group is being coerced to aggressively bill for our services. It seems the current reimbursement environment has pushed some of our leaders to demand more aggressive billing from our hospitalists. How should I respond?

Sincerely,

A Seasoned Hospitalist

Dr. Hospitalist responds:

As another “seasoned” hospitalist, I, too, have seen the wide pendulum swing from when internist inpatient billing was an afterthought and done by others to the current system of billing classes, RVU enticement, and reminders of how to construct the note. Enter the electronic health record, and now instead of clinical notes being used as a form of communication among clinicians, it does seem today to be created more for billing purposes.

How did we get here?

Physicians have to accept some of the blame. I can recall when I was an orderly at our local hospital in the mid 1970s and some physician “rounds” consisted of standing in a patient’s doorway and calling out, “How are you doing today, Mrs. Smith?” I must admit to having no idea how these docs were billing, but I do know that Medicare allowed for twice-daily billing for hospital visits back then. I also recall some of the paltry progress notes that consisted of one-liners like “pt doing well today.”

Like most corrective actions, the response has overshot the intended mark and made the daily progress note more ritualistic than informative. When the first attempts by the American Medical Association and the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services were released in the early 1990s, I’m sure most docs had no idea it would morph into its current level of significance for reimbursement—and that one day docs would be asked to implement, keep up with changes and modifications (think ICD-10), and use daily. Don’t get me wrong: I, like most hospitalists, recognize the clinical utility of a concise and well-written note. But when an otherwise complete H&P gets down-coded from a level 99223 to a 99221 because I leave off the family history of a 95-year-old man, of course I believe something is wrong with the system.

Also, human nature being what it is, I have always felt that if you incentivize people to increase production of an item, whether it’s a widget or an RVU, you will have some who will learn to game the system, consciously or subconsciously. With healthcare spending in the U.S. approaching 20% of gross domestic product, we as physicians should not be placed in positions of increased financial gain at the expense of our country’s economic health and viability. After all, we’re citizens first and physicians second.

You should recognize the need for proper coding and billing as inherent to the hospital’s financial viability, and if done correctly, it should not create an ethical or legal conflict for you. In the vast majority of cases, a well-written note can be properly billed and coded without creating angst.

Good luck! TH

Clinical question: Do claim-prone physicians account for a substantial share of all paid malpractice claims?

Background: Many studies have compared physicians who have multiple malpractice claims against them with colleagues who have few or no claims against them and have identified systemic differences in their age, sex, and specialty. However, only a few published studies have analyzed the nature of maldistribution itself.

Study design: Retrospective cohort study.

Setting: Using data from the National Practitioner Data Bank (NPDB).

Synopsis: The NPDB is a confidential data repository created by Congress in 1986. Information was obtained on all payments reported to the NPDB against physicians in the U.S. between January 1, 2005, and December 31, 2014. The study sample consisted of 66,426 paid claims against 54,099 physicians.

Physicians in four specialty groups accounted for more than half the claims: internal medicine (15%), obstetrics and gynecology (13%), general surgery (12%), and family medicine (11%). One percent of all physicians accounted for 32% of paid claims. Physicians’ risk of future paid claims increased monotonically with their number of previous paid claims. Physicians who had two paid claims had almost twice the risk of having another one (HR, 1.97; 95% CI, 1.86–2.07).

Risk also varied widely according to specialty. Compared with internal medicine physicians, neurosurgeons had approximately double the risk of recurrence (HR, 2.32; 95% CI, 1.77–3.03).

The study has some limitations. Some malpractice payments do not reach the NPDB. The study also focused on paid claims only.

Bottom line: A small group of U.S. physicians accounted for a disproportionately large share of paid malpractice claims. Several physician characteristics, most notably the number of previous claims and physician specialty, were significantly associated with recurrence of claims.

Citation: Studdert DM, Bismark MM, Mello MM, Singh H, Spittal MJ. Prevalence and characteristics of physicians prone to malpractice claims. N Engl J Med. 2016;374(4):354-362. doi:10.1056/nejmsa1506137.

Clinical question: Do claim-prone physicians account for a substantial share of all paid malpractice claims?

Background: Many studies have compared physicians who have multiple malpractice claims against them with colleagues who have few or no claims against them and have identified systemic differences in their age, sex, and specialty. However, only a few published studies have analyzed the nature of maldistribution itself.

Study design: Retrospective cohort study.

Setting: Using data from the National Practitioner Data Bank (NPDB).

Synopsis: The NPDB is a confidential data repository created by Congress in 1986. Information was obtained on all payments reported to the NPDB against physicians in the U.S. between January 1, 2005, and December 31, 2014. The study sample consisted of 66,426 paid claims against 54,099 physicians.

Physicians in four specialty groups accounted for more than half the claims: internal medicine (15%), obstetrics and gynecology (13%), general surgery (12%), and family medicine (11%). One percent of all physicians accounted for 32% of paid claims. Physicians’ risk of future paid claims increased monotonically with their number of previous paid claims. Physicians who had two paid claims had almost twice the risk of having another one (HR, 1.97; 95% CI, 1.86–2.07).

Risk also varied widely according to specialty. Compared with internal medicine physicians, neurosurgeons had approximately double the risk of recurrence (HR, 2.32; 95% CI, 1.77–3.03).

The study has some limitations. Some malpractice payments do not reach the NPDB. The study also focused on paid claims only.

Bottom line: A small group of U.S. physicians accounted for a disproportionately large share of paid malpractice claims. Several physician characteristics, most notably the number of previous claims and physician specialty, were significantly associated with recurrence of claims.

Citation: Studdert DM, Bismark MM, Mello MM, Singh H, Spittal MJ. Prevalence and characteristics of physicians prone to malpractice claims. N Engl J Med. 2016;374(4):354-362. doi:10.1056/nejmsa1506137.

Clinical question: Do claim-prone physicians account for a substantial share of all paid malpractice claims?

Background: Many studies have compared physicians who have multiple malpractice claims against them with colleagues who have few or no claims against them and have identified systemic differences in their age, sex, and specialty. However, only a few published studies have analyzed the nature of maldistribution itself.

Study design: Retrospective cohort study.

Setting: Using data from the National Practitioner Data Bank (NPDB).

Synopsis: The NPDB is a confidential data repository created by Congress in 1986. Information was obtained on all payments reported to the NPDB against physicians in the U.S. between January 1, 2005, and December 31, 2014. The study sample consisted of 66,426 paid claims against 54,099 physicians.

Physicians in four specialty groups accounted for more than half the claims: internal medicine (15%), obstetrics and gynecology (13%), general surgery (12%), and family medicine (11%). One percent of all physicians accounted for 32% of paid claims. Physicians’ risk of future paid claims increased monotonically with their number of previous paid claims. Physicians who had two paid claims had almost twice the risk of having another one (HR, 1.97; 95% CI, 1.86–2.07).

Risk also varied widely according to specialty. Compared with internal medicine physicians, neurosurgeons had approximately double the risk of recurrence (HR, 2.32; 95% CI, 1.77–3.03).

The study has some limitations. Some malpractice payments do not reach the NPDB. The study also focused on paid claims only.

Bottom line: A small group of U.S. physicians accounted for a disproportionately large share of paid malpractice claims. Several physician characteristics, most notably the number of previous claims and physician specialty, were significantly associated with recurrence of claims.

Citation: Studdert DM, Bismark MM, Mello MM, Singh H, Spittal MJ. Prevalence and characteristics of physicians prone to malpractice claims. N Engl J Med. 2016;374(4):354-362. doi:10.1056/nejmsa1506137.

Clinical question: What is the association of preoperative frailty on one-year postoperative mortality?

Background: Frailty is an aggregate expression of susceptibility to poor outcomes owing to age and disease-related deficits that accumulate with multiple domains. Frailty in this study was defined by the Johns Hopkins Adjusted Clinical Groups (ACG) frailty-defining diagnoses indicator. It is a binary variable that uses 12 clusters of frailty-defining diagnoses.

Study design: Population-based retrospective cohort study.

Setting: All hospital and physician services funded through the public health care system in Toronto.

Synopsis: The study had 202,980 patients who underwent major elective non-cardiac surgery. Frailty-defining diagnoses were present in 6,289 patients (3.1%). Mean age for the frail population was about 77 years. Joint replacements were the most common procedures for the frail and non-frail groups. Knee replacements were more prevalent in the non-frail group. One year after surgery, 855 frail patients (13.6%) and 9,433 non-frail patients (4.8%) died (unadjusted hazard ratio [HR], 2.98; 95% CI, 2.78–3.20). When adjusted for age, sex, neighborhood income quintile, and procedure, one-year mortality risk remained significantly higher in the frail group. One-year risk of death was significantly higher in frail patients for all surgical procedures, especially with total joint arthroplasty.

The relative hazard ratio of mortality in frail versus non-frail was extremely high in the early postoperative period, most notably at postoperative day three.

One major weakness of the study is that there is no universal definition of frailty, plus the results are difficult to generalize across populations.

Bottom line: Presence of preoperative frailty-defining diagnoses is associated with increased risk for one-year postoperative mortality; the risk appears to be very high in the early postoperative period.

Citation: McIsaac D, Bryson G, van Walraven C. Association of frailty and 1-year postoperative mortality following major elective noncardiac surgery: a population-based cohort study [published online ahead of print January 20, 2016]. JAMA Surg. doi:10.1001/jamasurg.2015.5085.

Short Take

Early Discharge Associated with Longer Length of Stay

Retrospective analysis showed early discharge before noon was associated with longer length of stay, especially among emergent admissions. However, multiple metrics should be used to measure true effectiveness of an early discharge program.

Citation: Rajkomar A, Valencia V, Novelero M, Mourad M, Auerbach A. The association between discharge before noon and length of stay in medical and surgical patients [published online ahead of print December 30, 2015]. J Hosp Med. doi:10.1002/jhm.2529.

Clinical question: What is the association of preoperative frailty on one-year postoperative mortality?

Background: Frailty is an aggregate expression of susceptibility to poor outcomes owing to age and disease-related deficits that accumulate with multiple domains. Frailty in this study was defined by the Johns Hopkins Adjusted Clinical Groups (ACG) frailty-defining diagnoses indicator. It is a binary variable that uses 12 clusters of frailty-defining diagnoses.

Study design: Population-based retrospective cohort study.

Setting: All hospital and physician services funded through the public health care system in Toronto.

Synopsis: The study had 202,980 patients who underwent major elective non-cardiac surgery. Frailty-defining diagnoses were present in 6,289 patients (3.1%). Mean age for the frail population was about 77 years. Joint replacements were the most common procedures for the frail and non-frail groups. Knee replacements were more prevalent in the non-frail group. One year after surgery, 855 frail patients (13.6%) and 9,433 non-frail patients (4.8%) died (unadjusted hazard ratio [HR], 2.98; 95% CI, 2.78–3.20). When adjusted for age, sex, neighborhood income quintile, and procedure, one-year mortality risk remained significantly higher in the frail group. One-year risk of death was significantly higher in frail patients for all surgical procedures, especially with total joint arthroplasty.

The relative hazard ratio of mortality in frail versus non-frail was extremely high in the early postoperative period, most notably at postoperative day three.

One major weakness of the study is that there is no universal definition of frailty, plus the results are difficult to generalize across populations.

Bottom line: Presence of preoperative frailty-defining diagnoses is associated with increased risk for one-year postoperative mortality; the risk appears to be very high in the early postoperative period.

Citation: McIsaac D, Bryson G, van Walraven C. Association of frailty and 1-year postoperative mortality following major elective noncardiac surgery: a population-based cohort study [published online ahead of print January 20, 2016]. JAMA Surg. doi:10.1001/jamasurg.2015.5085.

Short Take

Early Discharge Associated with Longer Length of Stay

Retrospective analysis showed early discharge before noon was associated with longer length of stay, especially among emergent admissions. However, multiple metrics should be used to measure true effectiveness of an early discharge program.

Citation: Rajkomar A, Valencia V, Novelero M, Mourad M, Auerbach A. The association between discharge before noon and length of stay in medical and surgical patients [published online ahead of print December 30, 2015]. J Hosp Med. doi:10.1002/jhm.2529.

Clinical question: What is the association of preoperative frailty on one-year postoperative mortality?

Background: Frailty is an aggregate expression of susceptibility to poor outcomes owing to age and disease-related deficits that accumulate with multiple domains. Frailty in this study was defined by the Johns Hopkins Adjusted Clinical Groups (ACG) frailty-defining diagnoses indicator. It is a binary variable that uses 12 clusters of frailty-defining diagnoses.

Study design: Population-based retrospective cohort study.

Setting: All hospital and physician services funded through the public health care system in Toronto.

Synopsis: The study had 202,980 patients who underwent major elective non-cardiac surgery. Frailty-defining diagnoses were present in 6,289 patients (3.1%). Mean age for the frail population was about 77 years. Joint replacements were the most common procedures for the frail and non-frail groups. Knee replacements were more prevalent in the non-frail group. One year after surgery, 855 frail patients (13.6%) and 9,433 non-frail patients (4.8%) died (unadjusted hazard ratio [HR], 2.98; 95% CI, 2.78–3.20). When adjusted for age, sex, neighborhood income quintile, and procedure, one-year mortality risk remained significantly higher in the frail group. One-year risk of death was significantly higher in frail patients for all surgical procedures, especially with total joint arthroplasty.

The relative hazard ratio of mortality in frail versus non-frail was extremely high in the early postoperative period, most notably at postoperative day three.

One major weakness of the study is that there is no universal definition of frailty, plus the results are difficult to generalize across populations.

Bottom line: Presence of preoperative frailty-defining diagnoses is associated with increased risk for one-year postoperative mortality; the risk appears to be very high in the early postoperative period.

Citation: McIsaac D, Bryson G, van Walraven C. Association of frailty and 1-year postoperative mortality following major elective noncardiac surgery: a population-based cohort study [published online ahead of print January 20, 2016]. JAMA Surg. doi:10.1001/jamasurg.2015.5085.

Short Take

Early Discharge Associated with Longer Length of Stay

Retrospective analysis showed early discharge before noon was associated with longer length of stay, especially among emergent admissions. However, multiple metrics should be used to measure true effectiveness of an early discharge program.

Citation: Rajkomar A, Valencia V, Novelero M, Mourad M, Auerbach A. The association between discharge before noon and length of stay in medical and surgical patients [published online ahead of print December 30, 2015]. J Hosp Med. doi:10.1002/jhm.2529.

The State of Hospital Medicine (SoHM) report is the most comprehensive survey of hospital medicine in the country and provides current data on hospitalist compensation and production and also covers practice demographics, staffing levels, staff growth, and compensation models.

“The SoHM report is an indispensable tool for hospital medicine group directors,” says Andrew White, MD, SFHM, a member of SHM’s Practice Analysis Committee. “It has helped us to evaluate and benchmark the support we receive from our hospital. I really appreciate the breakdown by characteristics, such as region of the country, academic practice, pediatrics, family medicine, and the involvement of NP and PA providers.

“The SoHM represents an excellent value—it has a ton of information in an easy-to-read format.”

Don’t miss out on getting your copy when it becomes available. Sign up to be notified when the report is released in September 2016 at www.hospitalmedicine.org/Survey.

Brett Radler is SHM’s communications coordinator.

The State of Hospital Medicine (SoHM) report is the most comprehensive survey of hospital medicine in the country and provides current data on hospitalist compensation and production and also covers practice demographics, staffing levels, staff growth, and compensation models.

“The SoHM report is an indispensable tool for hospital medicine group directors,” says Andrew White, MD, SFHM, a member of SHM’s Practice Analysis Committee. “It has helped us to evaluate and benchmark the support we receive from our hospital. I really appreciate the breakdown by characteristics, such as region of the country, academic practice, pediatrics, family medicine, and the involvement of NP and PA providers.

“The SoHM represents an excellent value—it has a ton of information in an easy-to-read format.”

Don’t miss out on getting your copy when it becomes available. Sign up to be notified when the report is released in September 2016 at www.hospitalmedicine.org/Survey.

Brett Radler is SHM’s communications coordinator.

The State of Hospital Medicine (SoHM) report is the most comprehensive survey of hospital medicine in the country and provides current data on hospitalist compensation and production and also covers practice demographics, staffing levels, staff growth, and compensation models.

“The SoHM report is an indispensable tool for hospital medicine group directors,” says Andrew White, MD, SFHM, a member of SHM’s Practice Analysis Committee. “It has helped us to evaluate and benchmark the support we receive from our hospital. I really appreciate the breakdown by characteristics, such as region of the country, academic practice, pediatrics, family medicine, and the involvement of NP and PA providers.

“The SoHM represents an excellent value—it has a ton of information in an easy-to-read format.”

Don’t miss out on getting your copy when it becomes available. Sign up to be notified when the report is released in September 2016 at www.hospitalmedicine.org/Survey.

Brett Radler is SHM’s communications coordinator.

Question: What attracted you to become involved with SHM?

Q: How has your experience with SHM brought value to your professional career?

A: Not long after I joined, I realized that SHM features a very welcoming body of members, and it encourages regular conversation about how to solve complex problems in our continuously evolving world of healthcare delivery. What I find so valuable is that SHM provides members with ample avenues to share results, success stories, challenges, and more—whether that is at the annual meetings or through the Journal of Hospital Medicine, The Hospitalist, the Hospital Medicine Exchange (HMX), social media, and more.

As a result of this culture of inclusivity, I accepted a role on the Practice Administrators Committee and subsequently on the Practice Analysis Committee as a way to further engage with SHM and network with other hospital medicine professionals. Two SHM resources I refer to on a regular basis are the Key Principles and Characteristics of an Effective Hospital Medicine Group and the biannual State of Hospital Medicine survey. Having access to key recommendations and research about hospital medicine is critical, but knowing that it was endorsed by the society dedicated to hospital medicine added extra emphasis to its relevance.

Q: How has CHI used these resources to inform decisions about hospitalist practice and leadership?

A: The list of key principles and characteristics is especially helpful with our hospitalist dyad leadership model at CHI, in which we pair strong medical and business leaders together to collectively lead and improve each division. The two key principles we always come back to are the first two: effective leadership and engaged hospitalists. The foundation of high-quality care and financial success is engaged hospitalists, requiring a meaningful relationship between hospitalists and hospital leaders. Both strategic business and medical leadership are essential to sustaining performance. For example, by having strong leadership and engaged hospitalists, we have been able to develop and implement clinical standards based on primary evidence to improve patient outcomes. By incorporating recommendations from the key principles and characteristics, we continue to advance and evolve our model to best meet our hospitalists’—and our communities’—needs.

The State of Hospital Medicine survey is a valuable asset when we’re evaluating care teams and staffing models. Reviewing data that cover what others have done—whether it is about incorporating advanced practice clinicians (NPs and PAs) into the hospital medicine group, evaluating a nocturnist model, or looking at how others have handled differentiation of schedules—ensures we not only incorporate these best practices into our decision-making process but also allows us to consider how our processes compare to others. Tie this back in with the key characteristics, and you can understand what staffing model and resources you need to build the hospital medicine group that best fits your hospital and its local needs.

Q: SHM is celebrating the 20th anniversary of hospital medicine with the “Year of the Hospitalist.” Why do you think hospital medicine continues to experience such unparalleled growth and success?

A: Hospital medicine continues to grow because it has been proven that with a focused team of caregivers, outcomes can be much better. Everyone in the industry is trying to improve quality outcomes, optimizing the right care in the right place at the right time while accomplishing this with the highest of patient satisfaction. As a result, the bar continues to be raised. There is an increasing demand for subspecialty hospitalists, and hospitalists are also in high demand in the continuum of care, outside the walls of the hospital, to care for patients in pre- and post-acute-care settings. All of this, in addition to the shift to payment for value versus volume, increases the demand for hospitalists. TH

Brett Radler is SHM’s communications coordinator.

Question: What attracted you to become involved with SHM?

Q: How has your experience with SHM brought value to your professional career?

A: Not long after I joined, I realized that SHM features a very welcoming body of members, and it encourages regular conversation about how to solve complex problems in our continuously evolving world of healthcare delivery. What I find so valuable is that SHM provides members with ample avenues to share results, success stories, challenges, and more—whether that is at the annual meetings or through the Journal of Hospital Medicine, The Hospitalist, the Hospital Medicine Exchange (HMX), social media, and more.

As a result of this culture of inclusivity, I accepted a role on the Practice Administrators Committee and subsequently on the Practice Analysis Committee as a way to further engage with SHM and network with other hospital medicine professionals. Two SHM resources I refer to on a regular basis are the Key Principles and Characteristics of an Effective Hospital Medicine Group and the biannual State of Hospital Medicine survey. Having access to key recommendations and research about hospital medicine is critical, but knowing that it was endorsed by the society dedicated to hospital medicine added extra emphasis to its relevance.

Q: How has CHI used these resources to inform decisions about hospitalist practice and leadership?

A: The list of key principles and characteristics is especially helpful with our hospitalist dyad leadership model at CHI, in which we pair strong medical and business leaders together to collectively lead and improve each division. The two key principles we always come back to are the first two: effective leadership and engaged hospitalists. The foundation of high-quality care and financial success is engaged hospitalists, requiring a meaningful relationship between hospitalists and hospital leaders. Both strategic business and medical leadership are essential to sustaining performance. For example, by having strong leadership and engaged hospitalists, we have been able to develop and implement clinical standards based on primary evidence to improve patient outcomes. By incorporating recommendations from the key principles and characteristics, we continue to advance and evolve our model to best meet our hospitalists’—and our communities’—needs.

The State of Hospital Medicine survey is a valuable asset when we’re evaluating care teams and staffing models. Reviewing data that cover what others have done—whether it is about incorporating advanced practice clinicians (NPs and PAs) into the hospital medicine group, evaluating a nocturnist model, or looking at how others have handled differentiation of schedules—ensures we not only incorporate these best practices into our decision-making process but also allows us to consider how our processes compare to others. Tie this back in with the key characteristics, and you can understand what staffing model and resources you need to build the hospital medicine group that best fits your hospital and its local needs.

Q: SHM is celebrating the 20th anniversary of hospital medicine with the “Year of the Hospitalist.” Why do you think hospital medicine continues to experience such unparalleled growth and success?

A: Hospital medicine continues to grow because it has been proven that with a focused team of caregivers, outcomes can be much better. Everyone in the industry is trying to improve quality outcomes, optimizing the right care in the right place at the right time while accomplishing this with the highest of patient satisfaction. As a result, the bar continues to be raised. There is an increasing demand for subspecialty hospitalists, and hospitalists are also in high demand in the continuum of care, outside the walls of the hospital, to care for patients in pre- and post-acute-care settings. All of this, in addition to the shift to payment for value versus volume, increases the demand for hospitalists. TH

Brett Radler is SHM’s communications coordinator.

Question: What attracted you to become involved with SHM?

Q: How has your experience with SHM brought value to your professional career?

A: Not long after I joined, I realized that SHM features a very welcoming body of members, and it encourages regular conversation about how to solve complex problems in our continuously evolving world of healthcare delivery. What I find so valuable is that SHM provides members with ample avenues to share results, success stories, challenges, and more—whether that is at the annual meetings or through the Journal of Hospital Medicine, The Hospitalist, the Hospital Medicine Exchange (HMX), social media, and more.

As a result of this culture of inclusivity, I accepted a role on the Practice Administrators Committee and subsequently on the Practice Analysis Committee as a way to further engage with SHM and network with other hospital medicine professionals. Two SHM resources I refer to on a regular basis are the Key Principles and Characteristics of an Effective Hospital Medicine Group and the biannual State of Hospital Medicine survey. Having access to key recommendations and research about hospital medicine is critical, but knowing that it was endorsed by the society dedicated to hospital medicine added extra emphasis to its relevance.

Q: How has CHI used these resources to inform decisions about hospitalist practice and leadership?

A: The list of key principles and characteristics is especially helpful with our hospitalist dyad leadership model at CHI, in which we pair strong medical and business leaders together to collectively lead and improve each division. The two key principles we always come back to are the first two: effective leadership and engaged hospitalists. The foundation of high-quality care and financial success is engaged hospitalists, requiring a meaningful relationship between hospitalists and hospital leaders. Both strategic business and medical leadership are essential to sustaining performance. For example, by having strong leadership and engaged hospitalists, we have been able to develop and implement clinical standards based on primary evidence to improve patient outcomes. By incorporating recommendations from the key principles and characteristics, we continue to advance and evolve our model to best meet our hospitalists’—and our communities’—needs.

The State of Hospital Medicine survey is a valuable asset when we’re evaluating care teams and staffing models. Reviewing data that cover what others have done—whether it is about incorporating advanced practice clinicians (NPs and PAs) into the hospital medicine group, evaluating a nocturnist model, or looking at how others have handled differentiation of schedules—ensures we not only incorporate these best practices into our decision-making process but also allows us to consider how our processes compare to others. Tie this back in with the key characteristics, and you can understand what staffing model and resources you need to build the hospital medicine group that best fits your hospital and its local needs.

Q: SHM is celebrating the 20th anniversary of hospital medicine with the “Year of the Hospitalist.” Why do you think hospital medicine continues to experience such unparalleled growth and success?

A: Hospital medicine continues to grow because it has been proven that with a focused team of caregivers, outcomes can be much better. Everyone in the industry is trying to improve quality outcomes, optimizing the right care in the right place at the right time while accomplishing this with the highest of patient satisfaction. As a result, the bar continues to be raised. There is an increasing demand for subspecialty hospitalists, and hospitalists are also in high demand in the continuum of care, outside the walls of the hospital, to care for patients in pre- and post-acute-care settings. All of this, in addition to the shift to payment for value versus volume, increases the demand for hospitalists. TH

Brett Radler is SHM’s communications coordinator.

Drs. Vineet Arora and Hyung "Harry" Cho offer  insight on how mentorship—giving, and receiving—is an essential part of all stages of an hospitalist career, in academic or community-based HM.

Drs. Vineet Arora and Hyung "Harry" Cho offer  insight on how mentorship—giving, and receiving—is an essential part of all stages of an hospitalist career, in academic or community-based HM.

Drs. Vineet Arora and Hyung "Harry" Cho offer  insight on how mentorship—giving, and receiving—is an essential part of all stages of an hospitalist career, in academic or community-based HM.

(Reuters Health) - Patients in the emergency room who don't speak English well are slightly more likely to return within days, suggesting their care the first time was not as good as it could have been, researchers say.

In a study in one New York hospital, about 4 percent of English speakers made an unplanned return to the ER within three days, compared to 5 percent of people with limited English.

Low use of professional translators may partly explain the disparity in care, the researchers report in the Annals of Emergency Medicine.

"There's a necessary but not sufficient step to providing care for people with low English proficiency . . . having a good interpreter or healthcare provider who can speak to them in their language," said Dr. Elizabeth Jacobs of the University of Wisconsin-Madison, who was not part of the new study.

The study team, led by Dr. Ka Ming Ngai of the Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai in New York, analyzed 2012 data from the Mount Sinai emergency department. More than 32,000 adult patients and 45,000 ER visits were included. The study did not include patients with psychiatric or substance-related

complaints, those who were nonverbal or had altered mental status, and those with a history of frequent ER visits.

Almost 3,000 patients had limited English proficiency, and in about half of cases someone served as an interpreter. Usually, this was a family member or an ER staff member. Only 527 visits in this group, 24 percent, involved a professional interpreter.

More than a quarter of patients were admitted to the hospital and 1,380 patients had an unplanned return to the ER within three days.

After accounting for age, sex, insurance, race, ethnicity, triage category and other health problems, having limited English proficiency was not tied to greater risk of being admitted to the hospital.

But those with limited English proficiency were about 24 percent more likely to return to the ER unexpectedly.

Ngai told Reuters Health by email that he has been studying the problem of language barriers for the past six years and over time has seen some improvements.

"New medical students are now routinely educated to use interpreter phones during their clinical simulation . . .however, there are still many barriers including access to interpreters and interpreter phones, time constraints, and (doctors) trying to 'get by' with their own language skills," he said.

Ngai said regulatory bodies require hospitals to make language services available. In New York State, for example, upon a request to the hospital administration by the patient, the patient's family or representative, or the provider of medical care, hospitals must provide translation services in inpatient and outpatient settings within 20 minutes and in emergency settings with 10 minutes.

Most New York Hospitals use an interpreter phone service, he said.

Patients who struggle to speak the local language are "a really important population to study and think about how we can improve their care," Jacobs said.

A 5 percent rather than 4 percent rate of return to the ER is not a large difference, but that could be due to the large number of patients excluded from the study, and because there was no validated measure of English proficiency, Jacobs said.

"That might be why we didn't see large differences, if some people considered low English proficiency actually spoke English well, or were getting good interpretive services," she said. "If you took them out, the difference might be larger."

Patients who do not speak English may struggle in other areas of the health system more than at the ER, she added.

But even having an interpreter at the hospital won't help patients deal with insurance providers, she noted.

"There are contextual issues that you may not be able to fully adequately address unless you can understand the nuances," Jacobs said.

"When dealing with immigrant population, it is almost always more than 'just' language," Ngai agreed. There can be cultural issues, too.

In addition, people with low English proficiency may also be less able to take days off of work, and to agree to be admitted to the hospital when necessary, than others, Jacobs said.

We've made tremendous progress in assuring interpreters are more available," in person, over the phone or by video, Jacobs said.

But, she said, "we are very imperfect at getting patients the services they need. It's important for providers to be educated on these issues and to understand how to access these services."

It would be ideal to try to match patients with providers by language and culture, but in the meantime, "language is a good start," Ngai said.

(Reuters Health) - Patients in the emergency room who don't speak English well are slightly more likely to return within days, suggesting their care the first time was not as good as it could have been, researchers say.

In a study in one New York hospital, about 4 percent of English speakers made an unplanned return to the ER within three days, compared to 5 percent of people with limited English.

Low use of professional translators may partly explain the disparity in care, the researchers report in the Annals of Emergency Medicine.

"There's a necessary but not sufficient step to providing care for people with low English proficiency . . . having a good interpreter or healthcare provider who can speak to them in their language," said Dr. Elizabeth Jacobs of the University of Wisconsin-Madison, who was not part of the new study.

The study team, led by Dr. Ka Ming Ngai of the Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai in New York, analyzed 2012 data from the Mount Sinai emergency department. More than 32,000 adult patients and 45,000 ER visits were included. The study did not include patients with psychiatric or substance-related

complaints, those who were nonverbal or had altered mental status, and those with a history of frequent ER visits.

Almost 3,000 patients had limited English proficiency, and in about half of cases someone served as an interpreter. Usually, this was a family member or an ER staff member. Only 527 visits in this group, 24 percent, involved a professional interpreter.

More than a quarter of patients were admitted to the hospital and 1,380 patients had an unplanned return to the ER within three days.

After accounting for age, sex, insurance, race, ethnicity, triage category and other health problems, having limited English proficiency was not tied to greater risk of being admitted to the hospital.

But those with limited English proficiency were about 24 percent more likely to return to the ER unexpectedly.

Ngai told Reuters Health by email that he has been studying the problem of language barriers for the past six years and over time has seen some improvements.

"New medical students are now routinely educated to use interpreter phones during their clinical simulation . . .however, there are still many barriers including access to interpreters and interpreter phones, time constraints, and (doctors) trying to 'get by' with their own language skills," he said.

Ngai said regulatory bodies require hospitals to make language services available. In New York State, for example, upon a request to the hospital administration by the patient, the patient's family or representative, or the provider of medical care, hospitals must provide translation services in inpatient and outpatient settings within 20 minutes and in emergency settings with 10 minutes.

Most New York Hospitals use an interpreter phone service, he said.

Patients who struggle to speak the local language are "a really important population to study and think about how we can improve their care," Jacobs said.

A 5 percent rather than 4 percent rate of return to the ER is not a large difference, but that could be due to the large number of patients excluded from the study, and because there was no validated measure of English proficiency, Jacobs said.

"That might be why we didn't see large differences, if some people considered low English proficiency actually spoke English well, or were getting good interpretive services," she said. "If you took them out, the difference might be larger."

Patients who do not speak English may struggle in other areas of the health system more than at the ER, she added.

But even having an interpreter at the hospital won't help patients deal with insurance providers, she noted.

"There are contextual issues that you may not be able to fully adequately address unless you can understand the nuances," Jacobs said.

"When dealing with immigrant population, it is almost always more than 'just' language," Ngai agreed. There can be cultural issues, too.

In addition, people with low English proficiency may also be less able to take days off of work, and to agree to be admitted to the hospital when necessary, than others, Jacobs said.

We've made tremendous progress in assuring interpreters are more available," in person, over the phone or by video, Jacobs said.

But, she said, "we are very imperfect at getting patients the services they need. It's important for providers to be educated on these issues and to understand how to access these services."

It would be ideal to try to match patients with providers by language and culture, but in the meantime, "language is a good start," Ngai said.

(Reuters Health) - Patients in the emergency room who don't speak English well are slightly more likely to return within days, suggesting their care the first time was not as good as it could have been, researchers say.

In a study in one New York hospital, about 4 percent of English speakers made an unplanned return to the ER within three days, compared to 5 percent of people with limited English.

Low use of professional translators may partly explain the disparity in care, the researchers report in the Annals of Emergency Medicine.

"There's a necessary but not sufficient step to providing care for people with low English proficiency . . . having a good interpreter or healthcare provider who can speak to them in their language," said Dr. Elizabeth Jacobs of the University of Wisconsin-Madison, who was not part of the new study.

The study team, led by Dr. Ka Ming Ngai of the Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai in New York, analyzed 2012 data from the Mount Sinai emergency department. More than 32,000 adult patients and 45,000 ER visits were included. The study did not include patients with psychiatric or substance-related

complaints, those who were nonverbal or had altered mental status, and those with a history of frequent ER visits.

Almost 3,000 patients had limited English proficiency, and in about half of cases someone served as an interpreter. Usually, this was a family member or an ER staff member. Only 527 visits in this group, 24 percent, involved a professional interpreter.

More than a quarter of patients were admitted to the hospital and 1,380 patients had an unplanned return to the ER within three days.

After accounting for age, sex, insurance, race, ethnicity, triage category and other health problems, having limited English proficiency was not tied to greater risk of being admitted to the hospital.

But those with limited English proficiency were about 24 percent more likely to return to the ER unexpectedly.

Ngai told Reuters Health by email that he has been studying the problem of language barriers for the past six years and over time has seen some improvements.

"New medical students are now routinely educated to use interpreter phones during their clinical simulation . . .however, there are still many barriers including access to interpreters and interpreter phones, time constraints, and (doctors) trying to 'get by' with their own language skills," he said.

Ngai said regulatory bodies require hospitals to make language services available. In New York State, for example, upon a request to the hospital administration by the patient, the patient's family or representative, or the provider of medical care, hospitals must provide translation services in inpatient and outpatient settings within 20 minutes and in emergency settings with 10 minutes.

Most New York Hospitals use an interpreter phone service, he said.

Patients who struggle to speak the local language are "a really important population to study and think about how we can improve their care," Jacobs said.

A 5 percent rather than 4 percent rate of return to the ER is not a large difference, but that could be due to the large number of patients excluded from the study, and because there was no validated measure of English proficiency, Jacobs said.

"That might be why we didn't see large differences, if some people considered low English proficiency actually spoke English well, or were getting good interpretive services," she said. "If you took them out, the difference might be larger."

Patients who do not speak English may struggle in other areas of the health system more than at the ER, she added.

But even having an interpreter at the hospital won't help patients deal with insurance providers, she noted.

"There are contextual issues that you may not be able to fully adequately address unless you can understand the nuances," Jacobs said.

"When dealing with immigrant population, it is almost always more than 'just' language," Ngai agreed. There can be cultural issues, too.

In addition, people with low English proficiency may also be less able to take days off of work, and to agree to be admitted to the hospital when necessary, than others, Jacobs said.

We've made tremendous progress in assuring interpreters are more available," in person, over the phone or by video, Jacobs said.

But, she said, "we are very imperfect at getting patients the services they need. It's important for providers to be educated on these issues and to understand how to access these services."

It would be ideal to try to match patients with providers by language and culture, but in the meantime, "language is a good start," Ngai said.