Transitions of Care

When she presents information to hospitalists about the little-known revision to Medicare’s condition of participation for discharge planning by hospitals, most hospitalists have no idea what Amy Boutwell, MD, MPP, is talking about. Even hospitalists who are active in their institutions’ efforts to improve transitions of care out of the hospital setting are unaware of the change, which was published in the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services’ Transmittal 87 and became effective July 19, 2013.

“I just don’t hear hospital professionals talking about it,” says Dr. Boutwell, a hospitalist at Newton-Wellesley Hospital and president of Collaborative Healthcare Strategies in Lexington, Mass. “When I say, ‘There are new rules of the road for discharge planning and evaluation,’ many are not aware of it.”

The revised condition states that the hospital must have a discharge planning process that applies to all patients—not just Medicare beneficiaries. Not every patient needs to have a written discharge plan—although this is recommended—but all patients should be screened and, if indicated, evaluated at an early stage of their hospitalization for risk of adverse post-discharge outcomes. Observation patients are not included in this requirement.

The discharge plan is different from a discharge summary document, which must be completed by the inpatient attending physician, not the hospital, and is not directly addressed in the regulation. The regulation does address the need for transfer of essential information to the next provider of care and says the hospital should have a written policy and procedure in place for discharge planning. The policy and procedure should be developed with input from medical staff and approved by the hospital’s governing body.

Any hospitalist participating with a hospital QI team involved in Project BOOST is helping their hospital comply with this condition of participation.

—Mark Williams, MD, FACP, SFHM, principal investigator of SHM’s Project BOOST

Transmittal 87 represents the first major update of the discharge planning regulation (Standard 482.43) and accompanying interpretive guidelines in more than a decade, Dr. Boutwell says. It consolidates and reorganizes 24 “tags” of regulatory language down to 13 and contains blue advisory boxes recommending best practices in discharge planning, drawn from the suggestions of a technical expert panel convened by CMS.

That panel included many of the country’s recognized thought leaders on improving care transitions, such as Mark Williams, MD, FACP, SFHM, principal investigator of SHM’s Project BOOST; Eric Coleman, MD, MPH, head of the University of Colorado’s division of health care policy and research and creator of the widely-adopted Care Transitions Program (caretransitions.org), and Dr. Boutwell, co-founder of the STAAR initiative (www.ihi.org/engage/Initiatives/completed/STAAR).

The new condition raises baseline expectations for discharge planning and elevates care transitions efforts from a quality improvement issue to the realm of regulatory compliance, Dr. Boutwell says.

“This goes way beyond case review,” she adds. “It represents an evolution from discharge planning case by case to a system for improving transitions of care [for the hospital]. I’m impressed.”

The recommendations are consistent with best practices promoted by Project BOOST, STAAR, Project RED [Re-Engineered Discharge], and other national quality initiatives for improving care transitions.

“Any hospitalist participating with a hospital QI team involved in Project BOOST is helping their hospital comply with this condition of participation,” Dr. Williams says.

In the Byzantine structure of federal regulations, Medicare’s conditions of participation are the regulations providers must meet in order to participate in the Medicare program and bill for their services. Condition-level citations, if not resolved, can cause hospitals to be decertified from Medicare. The accompanying interpretive guidelines, with survey protocols, are the playbook to help state auditors and providers know how to interpret and apply the language of the regulations. The suggestions and examples of best practices contained in the new condition are not required of hospitals but, if followed, could increase their likelihood of achieving better patient outcomes and staying in compliance with the regulations on surveys.

“If hospitals were to actually implement all of the CMS advisory practice recommendations contained in this 35-page document, they’d be in really good shape for effectively managing transitions of care,” says Teresa L. Hamblin, RN, MS, a CMS consultant with Joint Commission Resources. “The government has provided robust practice recommendations that are a model for what hospitals can do. I’d advise doing your best to implement these recommendations. Check your current processes using this detailed document for reference.”

Discharge planning starts at admission, Hamblin says. If the hospitalist assumes that responsibility, it becomes easier to leave a paper trail in the patient’s chart. Other important lessons for hospitalists include participation in a multidisciplinary approach to discharge planning (i.e., interdisciplinary rounding) and development of policies and procedures in this area.

“If the hospital has not elected to do a discharge plan on every patient, request this for your own patients and recommend it as a policy,” Hamblin says. “Go the extra mile, making follow-up appointments for your patients, filling prescriptions in house, and calling the patient 24 to 72 hours after discharge.”

Weekend coverage, when case managers typically are not present, is a particular challenge in care transitions.

“Encourage your hospital to provide reliable weekend coverage for discharge planning. Involve the nurses,” Hamblin says. “Anything the hospitalist can do to help the hospital close this gap is important.”

Larry Beresford is a freelance writer in Alameda, Calif.

When she presents information to hospitalists about the little-known revision to Medicare’s condition of participation for discharge planning by hospitals, most hospitalists have no idea what Amy Boutwell, MD, MPP, is talking about. Even hospitalists who are active in their institutions’ efforts to improve transitions of care out of the hospital setting are unaware of the change, which was published in the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services’ Transmittal 87 and became effective July 19, 2013.

“I just don’t hear hospital professionals talking about it,” says Dr. Boutwell, a hospitalist at Newton-Wellesley Hospital and president of Collaborative Healthcare Strategies in Lexington, Mass. “When I say, ‘There are new rules of the road for discharge planning and evaluation,’ many are not aware of it.”

The revised condition states that the hospital must have a discharge planning process that applies to all patients—not just Medicare beneficiaries. Not every patient needs to have a written discharge plan—although this is recommended—but all patients should be screened and, if indicated, evaluated at an early stage of their hospitalization for risk of adverse post-discharge outcomes. Observation patients are not included in this requirement.

The discharge plan is different from a discharge summary document, which must be completed by the inpatient attending physician, not the hospital, and is not directly addressed in the regulation. The regulation does address the need for transfer of essential information to the next provider of care and says the hospital should have a written policy and procedure in place for discharge planning. The policy and procedure should be developed with input from medical staff and approved by the hospital’s governing body.

Any hospitalist participating with a hospital QI team involved in Project BOOST is helping their hospital comply with this condition of participation.

—Mark Williams, MD, FACP, SFHM, principal investigator of SHM’s Project BOOST

Transmittal 87 represents the first major update of the discharge planning regulation (Standard 482.43) and accompanying interpretive guidelines in more than a decade, Dr. Boutwell says. It consolidates and reorganizes 24 “tags” of regulatory language down to 13 and contains blue advisory boxes recommending best practices in discharge planning, drawn from the suggestions of a technical expert panel convened by CMS.

That panel included many of the country’s recognized thought leaders on improving care transitions, such as Mark Williams, MD, FACP, SFHM, principal investigator of SHM’s Project BOOST; Eric Coleman, MD, MPH, head of the University of Colorado’s division of health care policy and research and creator of the widely-adopted Care Transitions Program (caretransitions.org), and Dr. Boutwell, co-founder of the STAAR initiative (www.ihi.org/engage/Initiatives/completed/STAAR).

The new condition raises baseline expectations for discharge planning and elevates care transitions efforts from a quality improvement issue to the realm of regulatory compliance, Dr. Boutwell says.

“This goes way beyond case review,” she adds. “It represents an evolution from discharge planning case by case to a system for improving transitions of care [for the hospital]. I’m impressed.”

The recommendations are consistent with best practices promoted by Project BOOST, STAAR, Project RED [Re-Engineered Discharge], and other national quality initiatives for improving care transitions.

“Any hospitalist participating with a hospital QI team involved in Project BOOST is helping their hospital comply with this condition of participation,” Dr. Williams says.

In the Byzantine structure of federal regulations, Medicare’s conditions of participation are the regulations providers must meet in order to participate in the Medicare program and bill for their services. Condition-level citations, if not resolved, can cause hospitals to be decertified from Medicare. The accompanying interpretive guidelines, with survey protocols, are the playbook to help state auditors and providers know how to interpret and apply the language of the regulations. The suggestions and examples of best practices contained in the new condition are not required of hospitals but, if followed, could increase their likelihood of achieving better patient outcomes and staying in compliance with the regulations on surveys.

“If hospitals were to actually implement all of the CMS advisory practice recommendations contained in this 35-page document, they’d be in really good shape for effectively managing transitions of care,” says Teresa L. Hamblin, RN, MS, a CMS consultant with Joint Commission Resources. “The government has provided robust practice recommendations that are a model for what hospitals can do. I’d advise doing your best to implement these recommendations. Check your current processes using this detailed document for reference.”

Discharge planning starts at admission, Hamblin says. If the hospitalist assumes that responsibility, it becomes easier to leave a paper trail in the patient’s chart. Other important lessons for hospitalists include participation in a multidisciplinary approach to discharge planning (i.e., interdisciplinary rounding) and development of policies and procedures in this area.

“If the hospital has not elected to do a discharge plan on every patient, request this for your own patients and recommend it as a policy,” Hamblin says. “Go the extra mile, making follow-up appointments for your patients, filling prescriptions in house, and calling the patient 24 to 72 hours after discharge.”

Weekend coverage, when case managers typically are not present, is a particular challenge in care transitions.

“Encourage your hospital to provide reliable weekend coverage for discharge planning. Involve the nurses,” Hamblin says. “Anything the hospitalist can do to help the hospital close this gap is important.”

Larry Beresford is a freelance writer in Alameda, Calif.

When she presents information to hospitalists about the little-known revision to Medicare’s condition of participation for discharge planning by hospitals, most hospitalists have no idea what Amy Boutwell, MD, MPP, is talking about. Even hospitalists who are active in their institutions’ efforts to improve transitions of care out of the hospital setting are unaware of the change, which was published in the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services’ Transmittal 87 and became effective July 19, 2013.

“I just don’t hear hospital professionals talking about it,” says Dr. Boutwell, a hospitalist at Newton-Wellesley Hospital and president of Collaborative Healthcare Strategies in Lexington, Mass. “When I say, ‘There are new rules of the road for discharge planning and evaluation,’ many are not aware of it.”

The revised condition states that the hospital must have a discharge planning process that applies to all patients—not just Medicare beneficiaries. Not every patient needs to have a written discharge plan—although this is recommended—but all patients should be screened and, if indicated, evaluated at an early stage of their hospitalization for risk of adverse post-discharge outcomes. Observation patients are not included in this requirement.

The discharge plan is different from a discharge summary document, which must be completed by the inpatient attending physician, not the hospital, and is not directly addressed in the regulation. The regulation does address the need for transfer of essential information to the next provider of care and says the hospital should have a written policy and procedure in place for discharge planning. The policy and procedure should be developed with input from medical staff and approved by the hospital’s governing body.

Any hospitalist participating with a hospital QI team involved in Project BOOST is helping their hospital comply with this condition of participation.

—Mark Williams, MD, FACP, SFHM, principal investigator of SHM’s Project BOOST

Transmittal 87 represents the first major update of the discharge planning regulation (Standard 482.43) and accompanying interpretive guidelines in more than a decade, Dr. Boutwell says. It consolidates and reorganizes 24 “tags” of regulatory language down to 13 and contains blue advisory boxes recommending best practices in discharge planning, drawn from the suggestions of a technical expert panel convened by CMS.

That panel included many of the country’s recognized thought leaders on improving care transitions, such as Mark Williams, MD, FACP, SFHM, principal investigator of SHM’s Project BOOST; Eric Coleman, MD, MPH, head of the University of Colorado’s division of health care policy and research and creator of the widely-adopted Care Transitions Program (caretransitions.org), and Dr. Boutwell, co-founder of the STAAR initiative (www.ihi.org/engage/Initiatives/completed/STAAR).

The new condition raises baseline expectations for discharge planning and elevates care transitions efforts from a quality improvement issue to the realm of regulatory compliance, Dr. Boutwell says.

“This goes way beyond case review,” she adds. “It represents an evolution from discharge planning case by case to a system for improving transitions of care [for the hospital]. I’m impressed.”

The recommendations are consistent with best practices promoted by Project BOOST, STAAR, Project RED [Re-Engineered Discharge], and other national quality initiatives for improving care transitions.

“Any hospitalist participating with a hospital QI team involved in Project BOOST is helping their hospital comply with this condition of participation,” Dr. Williams says.

In the Byzantine structure of federal regulations, Medicare’s conditions of participation are the regulations providers must meet in order to participate in the Medicare program and bill for their services. Condition-level citations, if not resolved, can cause hospitals to be decertified from Medicare. The accompanying interpretive guidelines, with survey protocols, are the playbook to help state auditors and providers know how to interpret and apply the language of the regulations. The suggestions and examples of best practices contained in the new condition are not required of hospitals but, if followed, could increase their likelihood of achieving better patient outcomes and staying in compliance with the regulations on surveys.

“If hospitals were to actually implement all of the CMS advisory practice recommendations contained in this 35-page document, they’d be in really good shape for effectively managing transitions of care,” says Teresa L. Hamblin, RN, MS, a CMS consultant with Joint Commission Resources. “The government has provided robust practice recommendations that are a model for what hospitals can do. I’d advise doing your best to implement these recommendations. Check your current processes using this detailed document for reference.”

Discharge planning starts at admission, Hamblin says. If the hospitalist assumes that responsibility, it becomes easier to leave a paper trail in the patient’s chart. Other important lessons for hospitalists include participation in a multidisciplinary approach to discharge planning (i.e., interdisciplinary rounding) and development of policies and procedures in this area.

“If the hospital has not elected to do a discharge plan on every patient, request this for your own patients and recommend it as a policy,” Hamblin says. “Go the extra mile, making follow-up appointments for your patients, filling prescriptions in house, and calling the patient 24 to 72 hours after discharge.”

Weekend coverage, when case managers typically are not present, is a particular challenge in care transitions.

“Encourage your hospital to provide reliable weekend coverage for discharge planning. Involve the nurses,” Hamblin says. “Anything the hospitalist can do to help the hospital close this gap is important.”

Larry Beresford is a freelance writer in Alameda, Calif.

Many potential Project BOOST candidate sites apply, but not all are accepted into the program. What makes for a successful application? Ask one of the founding members of Project BOOST and a current mentor, Dr. Jeffrey Greenwald.

• A strong letter of support. Qualified candidates can demonstrate that the hospital’s leadership is already behind their interest to reduce readmission rates through a program like Project BOOST.
• Demonstrate the existing support of the team. Good applications show that it’s not just a good idea to a few people. Good Project BOOST candidates can illustrate that their hospital has an “institutional prioritization for transitions of care.”
• An honest assessment on organizing change. Project BOOST has helped high-performing sites and beginners alike, but a thoughtful assessment of your site’s prior experience in organizing change and process improvement helps program leaders better understand your needs.

Apply Now Project BOOST is accepting applications now through August 30. Visit www.hospitalmedicine.org/projectboost.

Many potential Project BOOST candidate sites apply, but not all are accepted into the program. What makes for a successful application? Ask one of the founding members of Project BOOST and a current mentor, Dr. Jeffrey Greenwald.

• A strong letter of support. Qualified candidates can demonstrate that the hospital’s leadership is already behind their interest to reduce readmission rates through a program like Project BOOST.
• Demonstrate the existing support of the team. Good applications show that it’s not just a good idea to a few people. Good Project BOOST candidates can illustrate that their hospital has an “institutional prioritization for transitions of care.”
• An honest assessment on organizing change. Project BOOST has helped high-performing sites and beginners alike, but a thoughtful assessment of your site’s prior experience in organizing change and process improvement helps program leaders better understand your needs.

Apply Now Project BOOST is accepting applications now through August 30. Visit www.hospitalmedicine.org/projectboost.

Many potential Project BOOST candidate sites apply, but not all are accepted into the program. What makes for a successful application? Ask one of the founding members of Project BOOST and a current mentor, Dr. Jeffrey Greenwald.

• A strong letter of support. Qualified candidates can demonstrate that the hospital’s leadership is already behind their interest to reduce readmission rates through a program like Project BOOST.
• Demonstrate the existing support of the team. Good applications show that it’s not just a good idea to a few people. Good Project BOOST candidates can illustrate that their hospital has an “institutional prioritization for transitions of care.”
• An honest assessment on organizing change. Project BOOST has helped high-performing sites and beginners alike, but a thoughtful assessment of your site’s prior experience in organizing change and process improvement helps program leaders better understand your needs.

Apply Now Project BOOST is accepting applications now through August 30. Visit www.hospitalmedicine.org/projectboost.

Change doesn’t always come easily to hospitals, but once a catalyst comes along, one positive change can set the stage for the next one—and the one after that. At least that’s the lesson from Houston Methodist Hospital (HMH) and their work with SHM’s Project BOOST, a yearlong, mentored implementation program designed to help hospitals nationwide reduce readmission rates.

As the saying goes, every journey begins with a single step. For hospitals ready to start their journey to reduce readmissions rates and tackle other quality improvement challenges, the first step is the application to Project BOOST, which is due at the end of August. Details on the application and fees are available at www.hospitalmedicine.org/boost.

At Houston Methodist Hospital—a hospital U.S. News & World Report ranked one of “America’s Best Hospitals” in a dozen specialties and designated as a magnet hospital for excellence in nursing—taking that first step toward reducing readmissions by applying to Project BOOST has been well worth it.

“I recommend Project BOOST enthusiastically and unequivocally. If implemented efficiently, it could result in a ‘win-win’ situation for patients, the hospital, and the healthcare providers,” says Manasi Kekan, MD, MS, FACP, who serves as HMH’s medical director. “As a hospitalist, at times, I have found it challenging to ration my times between patient contact and documentation to meet the goals set by the healthcare industry. Being involved in BOOST and watching tangible improvements for my patients has provided me with immense personal and professional gratification!”

In fact, Dr. Kekan and her team have been so pleased with the results, both quantitative and qualitative, from their participation in Project BOOST that they enrolled twice: first in 2012 and again in 2013. She cites the program’s adaptability “that would help us develop a higher quality discharge process for our patients.”

Like many fruitful journeys, though, this one did not find Dr. Kekan and the caregivers at HMH alone: They had a guide who made all the difference.

Change implementation can be difficult, says Houston Methodist’s Janice Finder, RN, MSN. “Everyone knows how they want to design the house, so to speak,” she says, “but if you have someone who has done it before and can lead and direct, it goes much smoother.”

That was the true value of their Project BOOST mentor, Jeffrey Greenwald, MD, SFHM, one of the founding developers of Project BOOST.

“Dr. Greenwald gave us great mentorship and guidance,” Finder says. “The guidance about leadership is essential. If you do not have full support and a person who has ‘been there, done that,’ it is hard to envision.”

From his perspective, Dr. Greenwald saw that HMH had many of the critical elements in place to be successful.

“They had a good set of experiences already. They had the will and leadership and skill on the ground in process improvement,” he says, calling HMH an “incredibly well-oiled machine” with buy-in from the kind of inter-professional team that can make Project BOOST a success.

Overall, Dr. Greenwald calls HMH a “good example of a hospital that has married Project BOOST with the hospital’s existing priorities.”

Other Project BOOST sites start at different levels, in terms of basic interventions and process improvement, Dr. Greenwald explains. Many are able to address more advanced challenges, like how to implement change across broader areas in the hospital, working with leadership, addressing political issues, and improving waning interest in groups.

Dr. Greenwald’s interest in mentorship of Project BOOST sites stems from his own experiences early on—and the need for mentors in quality improvement projects.

“I wish I would have had someone like that when I got started,” says Dr. Greenwald, who tries to fill that role for others now. “Hopefully, each group moves down the path of making sure they have the right stakeholders, the right communications styles and skills in how to look at data and work with front-end staff.”

While Project BOOST focuses teams on reducing readmissions rates, Dr. Kekan has found that the skills learned from Project BOOST have created a blueprint that is applicable to many other team-based challenges in the hospital.

“We describe BOOST as a patient-centric quality initiative that mainly helps improve care transitions and encourages patients to stay informed about their health, which, in turn, helps reduce readmissions,” she says. “BOOST can be used as a framework to enhance other disease-specific discharge initiatives, like CHF [congestive heart failure] and delirium.”

Still, the core elements of reducing readmission rates and making a qualitative impact on her, her team, and the hospital resonate the most with Dr. Kekan.

“Providing a good transition plan to our patients provides satisfaction like none other.”

Brendon Shank is SHM’s associate vice president of communications.

Change doesn’t always come easily to hospitals, but once a catalyst comes along, one positive change can set the stage for the next one—and the one after that. At least that’s the lesson from Houston Methodist Hospital (HMH) and their work with SHM’s Project BOOST, a yearlong, mentored implementation program designed to help hospitals nationwide reduce readmission rates.

As the saying goes, every journey begins with a single step. For hospitals ready to start their journey to reduce readmissions rates and tackle other quality improvement challenges, the first step is the application to Project BOOST, which is due at the end of August. Details on the application and fees are available at www.hospitalmedicine.org/boost.

At Houston Methodist Hospital—a hospital U.S. News & World Report ranked one of “America’s Best Hospitals” in a dozen specialties and designated as a magnet hospital for excellence in nursing—taking that first step toward reducing readmissions by applying to Project BOOST has been well worth it.

“I recommend Project BOOST enthusiastically and unequivocally. If implemented efficiently, it could result in a ‘win-win’ situation for patients, the hospital, and the healthcare providers,” says Manasi Kekan, MD, MS, FACP, who serves as HMH’s medical director. “As a hospitalist, at times, I have found it challenging to ration my times between patient contact and documentation to meet the goals set by the healthcare industry. Being involved in BOOST and watching tangible improvements for my patients has provided me with immense personal and professional gratification!”

In fact, Dr. Kekan and her team have been so pleased with the results, both quantitative and qualitative, from their participation in Project BOOST that they enrolled twice: first in 2012 and again in 2013. She cites the program’s adaptability “that would help us develop a higher quality discharge process for our patients.”

Like many fruitful journeys, though, this one did not find Dr. Kekan and the caregivers at HMH alone: They had a guide who made all the difference.

Change implementation can be difficult, says Houston Methodist’s Janice Finder, RN, MSN. “Everyone knows how they want to design the house, so to speak,” she says, “but if you have someone who has done it before and can lead and direct, it goes much smoother.”

That was the true value of their Project BOOST mentor, Jeffrey Greenwald, MD, SFHM, one of the founding developers of Project BOOST.

“Dr. Greenwald gave us great mentorship and guidance,” Finder says. “The guidance about leadership is essential. If you do not have full support and a person who has ‘been there, done that,’ it is hard to envision.”

From his perspective, Dr. Greenwald saw that HMH had many of the critical elements in place to be successful.

“They had a good set of experiences already. They had the will and leadership and skill on the ground in process improvement,” he says, calling HMH an “incredibly well-oiled machine” with buy-in from the kind of inter-professional team that can make Project BOOST a success.

Overall, Dr. Greenwald calls HMH a “good example of a hospital that has married Project BOOST with the hospital’s existing priorities.”

Other Project BOOST sites start at different levels, in terms of basic interventions and process improvement, Dr. Greenwald explains. Many are able to address more advanced challenges, like how to implement change across broader areas in the hospital, working with leadership, addressing political issues, and improving waning interest in groups.

Dr. Greenwald’s interest in mentorship of Project BOOST sites stems from his own experiences early on—and the need for mentors in quality improvement projects.

“I wish I would have had someone like that when I got started,” says Dr. Greenwald, who tries to fill that role for others now. “Hopefully, each group moves down the path of making sure they have the right stakeholders, the right communications styles and skills in how to look at data and work with front-end staff.”

While Project BOOST focuses teams on reducing readmissions rates, Dr. Kekan has found that the skills learned from Project BOOST have created a blueprint that is applicable to many other team-based challenges in the hospital.

“We describe BOOST as a patient-centric quality initiative that mainly helps improve care transitions and encourages patients to stay informed about their health, which, in turn, helps reduce readmissions,” she says. “BOOST can be used as a framework to enhance other disease-specific discharge initiatives, like CHF [congestive heart failure] and delirium.”

Still, the core elements of reducing readmission rates and making a qualitative impact on her, her team, and the hospital resonate the most with Dr. Kekan.

“Providing a good transition plan to our patients provides satisfaction like none other.”

Brendon Shank is SHM’s associate vice president of communications.

Change doesn’t always come easily to hospitals, but once a catalyst comes along, one positive change can set the stage for the next one—and the one after that. At least that’s the lesson from Houston Methodist Hospital (HMH) and their work with SHM’s Project BOOST, a yearlong, mentored implementation program designed to help hospitals nationwide reduce readmission rates.

As the saying goes, every journey begins with a single step. For hospitals ready to start their journey to reduce readmissions rates and tackle other quality improvement challenges, the first step is the application to Project BOOST, which is due at the end of August. Details on the application and fees are available at www.hospitalmedicine.org/boost.

At Houston Methodist Hospital—a hospital U.S. News & World Report ranked one of “America’s Best Hospitals” in a dozen specialties and designated as a magnet hospital for excellence in nursing—taking that first step toward reducing readmissions by applying to Project BOOST has been well worth it.

“I recommend Project BOOST enthusiastically and unequivocally. If implemented efficiently, it could result in a ‘win-win’ situation for patients, the hospital, and the healthcare providers,” says Manasi Kekan, MD, MS, FACP, who serves as HMH’s medical director. “As a hospitalist, at times, I have found it challenging to ration my times between patient contact and documentation to meet the goals set by the healthcare industry. Being involved in BOOST and watching tangible improvements for my patients has provided me with immense personal and professional gratification!”

In fact, Dr. Kekan and her team have been so pleased with the results, both quantitative and qualitative, from their participation in Project BOOST that they enrolled twice: first in 2012 and again in 2013. She cites the program’s adaptability “that would help us develop a higher quality discharge process for our patients.”

Like many fruitful journeys, though, this one did not find Dr. Kekan and the caregivers at HMH alone: They had a guide who made all the difference.

Change implementation can be difficult, says Houston Methodist’s Janice Finder, RN, MSN. “Everyone knows how they want to design the house, so to speak,” she says, “but if you have someone who has done it before and can lead and direct, it goes much smoother.”

That was the true value of their Project BOOST mentor, Jeffrey Greenwald, MD, SFHM, one of the founding developers of Project BOOST.

“Dr. Greenwald gave us great mentorship and guidance,” Finder says. “The guidance about leadership is essential. If you do not have full support and a person who has ‘been there, done that,’ it is hard to envision.”

From his perspective, Dr. Greenwald saw that HMH had many of the critical elements in place to be successful.

“They had a good set of experiences already. They had the will and leadership and skill on the ground in process improvement,” he says, calling HMH an “incredibly well-oiled machine” with buy-in from the kind of inter-professional team that can make Project BOOST a success.

Overall, Dr. Greenwald calls HMH a “good example of a hospital that has married Project BOOST with the hospital’s existing priorities.”

Other Project BOOST sites start at different levels, in terms of basic interventions and process improvement, Dr. Greenwald explains. Many are able to address more advanced challenges, like how to implement change across broader areas in the hospital, working with leadership, addressing political issues, and improving waning interest in groups.

Dr. Greenwald’s interest in mentorship of Project BOOST sites stems from his own experiences early on—and the need for mentors in quality improvement projects.

“I wish I would have had someone like that when I got started,” says Dr. Greenwald, who tries to fill that role for others now. “Hopefully, each group moves down the path of making sure they have the right stakeholders, the right communications styles and skills in how to look at data and work with front-end staff.”

While Project BOOST focuses teams on reducing readmissions rates, Dr. Kekan has found that the skills learned from Project BOOST have created a blueprint that is applicable to many other team-based challenges in the hospital.

“We describe BOOST as a patient-centric quality initiative that mainly helps improve care transitions and encourages patients to stay informed about their health, which, in turn, helps reduce readmissions,” she says. “BOOST can be used as a framework to enhance other disease-specific discharge initiatives, like CHF [congestive heart failure] and delirium.”

Still, the core elements of reducing readmission rates and making a qualitative impact on her, her team, and the hospital resonate the most with Dr. Kekan.

“Providing a good transition plan to our patients provides satisfaction like none other.”

Brendon Shank is SHM’s associate vice president of communications.

Click here for excerpts of our interview with Porter Storey, MD, executive vice president of the American Academy of Hospice and Palliative Medicine.

Click here for excerpts of our interview with Porter Storey, MD, executive vice president of the American Academy of Hospice and Palliative Medicine.

Click here for excerpts of our interview with Porter Storey, MD, executive vice president of the American Academy of Hospice and Palliative Medicine.

Dr. Danella

10 Things: At A Glance

1. Take out urinary catheters as soon as possible.
2. But don’t carry the Choosing Wisely directive on urinary catheters—and in-house protocols—too far.
3. Beware certain types of medications in vulnerable patients.
4. Don’t discharge patients who are having difficulty voiding.
5. Broach sensitive topics, but do so gently.
6. Call in a urologist, or someone with more experience, when you have difficulty placing a catheter.
7. Diabetic patients require extra attention.
8. Practice good antibiotic stewardship.
9. Determine whether the patient can be seen as an outpatient.
10. Embrace your role as eyes and ears.

1: Intravenous Haloperidol Does Not Prevent ICU Delirium

Urology is an area in which hospitalists might not have much formal training, but because many of these patients undergo highly complicated surgical procedures with great potential for complications, hospitalists can be vital for good outcomes, urologists say.

The use of urinary catheters is a prime area of concern when it comes to quality and safety, making hospitalists’ role in the care of urological patients even more crucial.

The Hospitalist spoke with a half dozen urologists and well-versed HM clinicians about caring for patients with urological disorders. Here are the best nuggets of guidance for hospitalists.

Take out urinary catheters as soon as possible.

John Bulger, DO, FACOI, FACP, SFHM, a hospitalist and chief quality officer at Geisinger Health System in Pennsylvania, says that, all too often, urinary catheters are left in too long. “There’s pretty good data to suggest that there’s a very direct relationship with the length of time the catheter’s in and the chance of it getting infected,” he says. “Upwards to half of the urinary catheters that are in in hospitals right now wouldn’t meet the guidelines of having a urinary catheter in.”

Dr. Bulger is chair of SHM’s Choosing Wisely subcommittee. One of SHM’s Choosing Wisely recommendations warns physicians not to place, or leave in place, catheters for incontinence, convenience, or monitoring of non-critically ill patients.¹

2: But don’t carry the Choosing Wisely directive on urinary catheters—and in-house protocols—too far.

William Steers, MD, chair of urology at the University of Virginia and editor of the Journal of Urology, says there are risks associated with taking catheters out when it’s not appropriate, especially in patients who’ve undergone surgery.

“We’ve seen situations where we’re called into the operating room by another team,” Dr. Steers says. “Let’s say there was a bladder injury of another service. We’ve repaired the bladder with a catheter in for seven to 10 days. It’s taken out day one; the bladder fills and has the potential of causing harm.”

Early removal before the bladder wall heals can cause bladder rupture, requiring emergency surgery.

“So the devil’s in the details,” he says.

Mark Austenfeld, MD, FACS, president of the American Association of Clinical Urologists, which is dedicated to political action, advocacy, and best practice parameters, says catheters should remain in place for patients with mental status changes, or those who are debilitated in some way and can’t get out of bed or don’t have the wherewithal to ask for help from a nurse.

He says he realizes hospitalists are following pay-for-performance protocols, but he adds a caveat.

“Many times these protocols cannot take into account all of these specialized situations,” says Dr. Austenfeld, a urologist with Kansas City Urology Care. He stresses, though, that the hospitalists he’s worked with do high-quality work.

Sanjay Saint, MD, MPH, FHM, hospitalist and professor of internal medicine at the University of Michigan in Ann Arbor, says that even with these issues, early removal should remain a priority when appropriate.

“There’s going to be anecdotal evidence that in some particular patients, when the catheter is removed, it needs to be reinserted when they haven’t urinated for a while,” Dr. Saint explains. “But I think, in general, the studies that have looked at reinsertion have not found a statistically significant increase in reinsertion of the catheter after some type of a stop-order or nurse initiative, protocol, or urinary catheter reminder system has been put in place.”²

Dr. Steers says most agree that urinary catheters are often “overutilized.”

“You do want to get them out as soon as possible,” he says. “But if it’s ever in doubt, there should be communication with the urology team.”

3: Beware certain types of medications in vulnerable patients.

Hospitalists should tread carefully with medications that might be difficult to handle for patients with kidney issues, like stones or obstructive disease, Dr. Bulger says.

“If they only have one kidney that works well, you have to pay particular attention to drugs that are toxic to the kidneys,” he says. He notes that the nature of the patient’s health “will change the doses of some drugs, as well, depending on what the function of their kidney is.”

Dr. Austenfeld says that drugs with anticholinergic side effects, including some cold remedies such as Benadryl, should possibly be avoided in patients who are having trouble emptying their bladders, because they might make it more difficult for a patient to urinate. Some sedatives, such as amitriptyline, have similar effects and should be used cautiously in these patients, Dr. Austenfeld points out.

“That class of drugs—sometimes I see patients on them for a long time, or placed on them, and they do have a little trouble emptying their bladders,” he says.

4: Don’t discharge patients who are having difficulty voiding.

“If patients are in the hospital and they’ve been taking narcotics post-surgically, or they’re a diabetic patient and they’ve had urinary catheter infections, we should be very careful that these patients are emptying their bladders,” says Dennis Pessis, professor of urology at Rush University Medical Center in Chicago and immediate past president of the American Urological Association. “You can do a very simple ultrasound of the bladder to be sure that they’re emptying. Because if they’re not emptying well, and if they’re going to go home, they may not empty their bladders well and may colonize bacteria.”

Dr. Pessis says it’s not common, but it does happen.

“It’s something that’s of concern,” he says. “It happens often enough that we should be very alert to watching for those problems.”

5: Broach sensitive topics, but do so gently.

“Sexual dysfunction is a significant issue,” Dr. Bulger says. “I think that it’s in the best interest of the patient to address that up front. Generally, urologists are pretty good at that as well. Because you’re co-managing with them, they’re going to help out with that. But it’s important to always remember what’s going to concern the patient.”

Incontinence can be similarly sensitive but important to discuss.

“I think it helps sometimes if the physician brings it up in an appropriate way and kind of opens the door to be able to have the discussion,” Dr. Bulger said.

[Diabetic patients] may have what we call a diabetic type of neuropathy for the bladder, which means that they don’t have the sensation and they may not empty their bladders. They’re also susceptible to a higher incidence of bladder infection. So if you do have a diabetic patient, be sure they’re not infected before they leave. And be sure they’re emptying their bladders well.

—Dennis Pessis, professor of urology, Rush University Medical Center, Chicago, immediate past president, American Urological Association

6: Call in a urologist, or someone with more experience, when you have difficulty placing a catheter.

One rule of thumb is, if you try twice to put in a urinary catheter without success, call in someone else to do it.

“You don’t want what we call ‘false passages,’” Dr. Pessis says. “If you are having difficulty inserting the catheter, if it’s not moving down the channel well, then you should back off and either consult someone that has more experience in catheterizing or contact the urologist.”

Two reasons the placement might be difficult: strictures like old scar formations, within the urethra, or an enlarged prostate.

Dr. Danella

John Danella, MD, FACS, head of urology for the Geisinger Health System, says a coudé catheter, with a curved tip to help it navigate around the prostate, should be tried on male patients over 50.

“If that’s not successful, then I think you need to call the urologist,” he says. “It’s better to call them before there’s been trauma to the urethra than afterwards.”

Dr. Danella says he understands that attempts by hospitalists in the face of difficulty are made with “best intentions” to save the urologist the time. But when injuries happen, “often times you’re forced to take that patient to the operating room for cystoscopy.”

7: Diabetic patients require extra attention.

“They may have what we call a diabetic type of neuropathy for the bladder, which means that they don’t have the sensation and they may not empty their bladders,” Dr. Pessis explains. “They’re also susceptible to a higher incidence of bladder infection. So if you do have a diabetic patient, be sure they’re not infected before they leave. And be sure they’re emptying their bladders well.”

8: Practice good antibiotic stewardship.

After 72 hours, almost all urine cultures from a catheterized patient are positive. That doesn’t mean they all need antibiotics, Dr. Steers says.

“Unless the patient’s symptomatic, we don’t treat until a catheter comes out,” he says. “The constant use of antibiotics in somebody with an in-dwelling catheter is creating tremendous problems with resistance and biofilms, etc.”

Dr. Steers says hospitalists can be an educational resource for care teams, using the latest infectious disease literature to say, “Hey, this antibiotic should be stopped. You don’t need to continue this many days.”

“One of the problems we’re having with guidelines is every specialty has their own antibiotic prophylaxis guidelines,” he adds. “So it can be very confusing for the hospitalist.”

9: Determine whether the patient can be seen as an outpatient.

Dr. Danella says that determination often is not made carefully enough. After initial treatment, follow-up with the urologist often can be done on an outpatient basis.

“Sometimes, they’re waiting around all day before we’re free and we can come see them. So I think in many cases, at least in our system, it would be helpful if folks could just place a phone call or just send a message and say, ‘Do you need to see this patient or can we send them home?’” Dr. Danella says. “I think it’s better for everybody if we can do that.”

One common example is an elderly patient who comes to the hospital, is put into a bed, and can’t void. Often, the patient would respond to a catheter and an alpha-blocker (if no contraindication), he says. But, that day, there’s nothing the urologist will be able to do to help make them void immediately, he says.

Another example is a patient with a small kidney stone, less than 5 mm, who probably would respond to medical therapy and won’t need an intervention, Dr. Danella says.

There’s going to be anecdotal evidence that in some particular patients, when the catheter is removed, it needs to be reinserted when they haven’t urinated for a while. But I think, in general, the studies that have looked at reinsertion have not found a statistically significant increase in reinsertion of the catheter after some type of a stop-order or nurse initiative, protocol, or urinary catheter reminder system has been put in place.

—Sanjay Saint, MD, MPH, FHM, hospitalist, professor of internal medicine, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor

10: Embrace your role as eyes and ears.

If a surgical patient’s note isn’t changed in three or four days, the hospitalist needs to ask the surgical team about what has changed in the case, Dr. Steers says.

“At the end of the day, it’s communication with urologists and surgeons,” he says. “And most would appreciate that. I think the [attitude from the] old days of ‘untold command of my patient, I want no other input,’ is really short-sighted.”

Hospitalist vigilance is especially important for complicated patients, such as those who’ve undergone radical cystectomy for bladder cancer. That’s the procedure with the highest mortality rate in urology, as patients are generally older, smoke, and often are obese. And they have high readmission rates—nearly 30 percent.³

Dr. Steers says hospitalists are needed to look for early warning signs in these patients.

“We look for that sort of input, especially when it comes to being the early eyes and ears of potential problems or somebody helping in discharge planning,” he says. “It might be a little too early to go home, and being readmitted is not very good for the hospital as a whole, but, more importantly, the patient.”

Tom Collins is a freelance writer in South Florida.

References

1. Society of Hospital Medicine. Five things physicians and patients should question. SHM website. Available at: http://www.hospitalmedicine.org/AM/pdf/SHM-Adult_5things_List_Web.pdf. Accessed October 24, 2013.
2. Loeb M, Hunt D, O’Halloran K, Carusone SC, Dafoe N, Walter SD. Stop orders to reduce inappropriate urinary catheterization in hospitalized patients: a randomized controlled trial. J Gen Intern Med. 2008;23(6):816-820.
3. Stimson CJ, Chang SS, Barocas DA, et al. Early and late perioperative outcomes following radical cystectomy: 90-day readmissions, morbidity and mortality in a contemporary series. J Urol. 2010;184(4):1296-1300.
4. Saint S, Lipsky BA, Goold SD. Indwelling urinary catheters: a one-point restraint? Ann Intern Med. 2002;137(2):125-127.

Dr. Danella

10 Things: At A Glance

1. Take out urinary catheters as soon as possible.
2. But don’t carry the Choosing Wisely directive on urinary catheters—and in-house protocols—too far.
3. Beware certain types of medications in vulnerable patients.
4. Don’t discharge patients who are having difficulty voiding.
5. Broach sensitive topics, but do so gently.
6. Call in a urologist, or someone with more experience, when you have difficulty placing a catheter.
7. Diabetic patients require extra attention.
8. Practice good antibiotic stewardship.
9. Determine whether the patient can be seen as an outpatient.
10. Embrace your role as eyes and ears.

1: Intravenous Haloperidol Does Not Prevent ICU Delirium

Urology is an area in which hospitalists might not have much formal training, but because many of these patients undergo highly complicated surgical procedures with great potential for complications, hospitalists can be vital for good outcomes, urologists say.

The use of urinary catheters is a prime area of concern when it comes to quality and safety, making hospitalists’ role in the care of urological patients even more crucial.

The Hospitalist spoke with a half dozen urologists and well-versed HM clinicians about caring for patients with urological disorders. Here are the best nuggets of guidance for hospitalists.

Take out urinary catheters as soon as possible.

John Bulger, DO, FACOI, FACP, SFHM, a hospitalist and chief quality officer at Geisinger Health System in Pennsylvania, says that, all too often, urinary catheters are left in too long. “There’s pretty good data to suggest that there’s a very direct relationship with the length of time the catheter’s in and the chance of it getting infected,” he says. “Upwards to half of the urinary catheters that are in in hospitals right now wouldn’t meet the guidelines of having a urinary catheter in.”

Dr. Bulger is chair of SHM’s Choosing Wisely subcommittee. One of SHM’s Choosing Wisely recommendations warns physicians not to place, or leave in place, catheters for incontinence, convenience, or monitoring of non-critically ill patients.¹

2: But don’t carry the Choosing Wisely directive on urinary catheters—and in-house protocols—too far.

William Steers, MD, chair of urology at the University of Virginia and editor of the Journal of Urology, says there are risks associated with taking catheters out when it’s not appropriate, especially in patients who’ve undergone surgery.

“We’ve seen situations where we’re called into the operating room by another team,” Dr. Steers says. “Let’s say there was a bladder injury of another service. We’ve repaired the bladder with a catheter in for seven to 10 days. It’s taken out day one; the bladder fills and has the potential of causing harm.”

Early removal before the bladder wall heals can cause bladder rupture, requiring emergency surgery.

“So the devil’s in the details,” he says.

Mark Austenfeld, MD, FACS, president of the American Association of Clinical Urologists, which is dedicated to political action, advocacy, and best practice parameters, says catheters should remain in place for patients with mental status changes, or those who are debilitated in some way and can’t get out of bed or don’t have the wherewithal to ask for help from a nurse.

He says he realizes hospitalists are following pay-for-performance protocols, but he adds a caveat.

“Many times these protocols cannot take into account all of these specialized situations,” says Dr. Austenfeld, a urologist with Kansas City Urology Care. He stresses, though, that the hospitalists he’s worked with do high-quality work.

Sanjay Saint, MD, MPH, FHM, hospitalist and professor of internal medicine at the University of Michigan in Ann Arbor, says that even with these issues, early removal should remain a priority when appropriate.

“There’s going to be anecdotal evidence that in some particular patients, when the catheter is removed, it needs to be reinserted when they haven’t urinated for a while,” Dr. Saint explains. “But I think, in general, the studies that have looked at reinsertion have not found a statistically significant increase in reinsertion of the catheter after some type of a stop-order or nurse initiative, protocol, or urinary catheter reminder system has been put in place.”²

Dr. Steers says most agree that urinary catheters are often “overutilized.”

“You do want to get them out as soon as possible,” he says. “But if it’s ever in doubt, there should be communication with the urology team.”

3: Beware certain types of medications in vulnerable patients.

Hospitalists should tread carefully with medications that might be difficult to handle for patients with kidney issues, like stones or obstructive disease, Dr. Bulger says.

“If they only have one kidney that works well, you have to pay particular attention to drugs that are toxic to the kidneys,” he says. He notes that the nature of the patient’s health “will change the doses of some drugs, as well, depending on what the function of their kidney is.”

Dr. Austenfeld says that drugs with anticholinergic side effects, including some cold remedies such as Benadryl, should possibly be avoided in patients who are having trouble emptying their bladders, because they might make it more difficult for a patient to urinate. Some sedatives, such as amitriptyline, have similar effects and should be used cautiously in these patients, Dr. Austenfeld points out.

“That class of drugs—sometimes I see patients on them for a long time, or placed on them, and they do have a little trouble emptying their bladders,” he says.

4: Don’t discharge patients who are having difficulty voiding.

“If patients are in the hospital and they’ve been taking narcotics post-surgically, or they’re a diabetic patient and they’ve had urinary catheter infections, we should be very careful that these patients are emptying their bladders,” says Dennis Pessis, professor of urology at Rush University Medical Center in Chicago and immediate past president of the American Urological Association. “You can do a very simple ultrasound of the bladder to be sure that they’re emptying. Because if they’re not emptying well, and if they’re going to go home, they may not empty their bladders well and may colonize bacteria.”

Dr. Pessis says it’s not common, but it does happen.

“It’s something that’s of concern,” he says. “It happens often enough that we should be very alert to watching for those problems.”

5: Broach sensitive topics, but do so gently.

“Sexual dysfunction is a significant issue,” Dr. Bulger says. “I think that it’s in the best interest of the patient to address that up front. Generally, urologists are pretty good at that as well. Because you’re co-managing with them, they’re going to help out with that. But it’s important to always remember what’s going to concern the patient.”

Incontinence can be similarly sensitive but important to discuss.

“I think it helps sometimes if the physician brings it up in an appropriate way and kind of opens the door to be able to have the discussion,” Dr. Bulger said.

[Diabetic patients] may have what we call a diabetic type of neuropathy for the bladder, which means that they don’t have the sensation and they may not empty their bladders. They’re also susceptible to a higher incidence of bladder infection. So if you do have a diabetic patient, be sure they’re not infected before they leave. And be sure they’re emptying their bladders well.

—Dennis Pessis, professor of urology, Rush University Medical Center, Chicago, immediate past president, American Urological Association

6: Call in a urologist, or someone with more experience, when you have difficulty placing a catheter.

One rule of thumb is, if you try twice to put in a urinary catheter without success, call in someone else to do it.

“You don’t want what we call ‘false passages,’” Dr. Pessis says. “If you are having difficulty inserting the catheter, if it’s not moving down the channel well, then you should back off and either consult someone that has more experience in catheterizing or contact the urologist.”

Two reasons the placement might be difficult: strictures like old scar formations, within the urethra, or an enlarged prostate.

Dr. Danella

John Danella, MD, FACS, head of urology for the Geisinger Health System, says a coudé catheter, with a curved tip to help it navigate around the prostate, should be tried on male patients over 50.

“If that’s not successful, then I think you need to call the urologist,” he says. “It’s better to call them before there’s been trauma to the urethra than afterwards.”

Dr. Danella says he understands that attempts by hospitalists in the face of difficulty are made with “best intentions” to save the urologist the time. But when injuries happen, “often times you’re forced to take that patient to the operating room for cystoscopy.”

7: Diabetic patients require extra attention.

“They may have what we call a diabetic type of neuropathy for the bladder, which means that they don’t have the sensation and they may not empty their bladders,” Dr. Pessis explains. “They’re also susceptible to a higher incidence of bladder infection. So if you do have a diabetic patient, be sure they’re not infected before they leave. And be sure they’re emptying their bladders well.”

8: Practice good antibiotic stewardship.

After 72 hours, almost all urine cultures from a catheterized patient are positive. That doesn’t mean they all need antibiotics, Dr. Steers says.

“Unless the patient’s symptomatic, we don’t treat until a catheter comes out,” he says. “The constant use of antibiotics in somebody with an in-dwelling catheter is creating tremendous problems with resistance and biofilms, etc.”

Dr. Steers says hospitalists can be an educational resource for care teams, using the latest infectious disease literature to say, “Hey, this antibiotic should be stopped. You don’t need to continue this many days.”

“One of the problems we’re having with guidelines is every specialty has their own antibiotic prophylaxis guidelines,” he adds. “So it can be very confusing for the hospitalist.”

9: Determine whether the patient can be seen as an outpatient.

Dr. Danella says that determination often is not made carefully enough. After initial treatment, follow-up with the urologist often can be done on an outpatient basis.

“Sometimes, they’re waiting around all day before we’re free and we can come see them. So I think in many cases, at least in our system, it would be helpful if folks could just place a phone call or just send a message and say, ‘Do you need to see this patient or can we send them home?’” Dr. Danella says. “I think it’s better for everybody if we can do that.”

One common example is an elderly patient who comes to the hospital, is put into a bed, and can’t void. Often, the patient would respond to a catheter and an alpha-blocker (if no contraindication), he says. But, that day, there’s nothing the urologist will be able to do to help make them void immediately, he says.

Another example is a patient with a small kidney stone, less than 5 mm, who probably would respond to medical therapy and won’t need an intervention, Dr. Danella says.

There’s going to be anecdotal evidence that in some particular patients, when the catheter is removed, it needs to be reinserted when they haven’t urinated for a while. But I think, in general, the studies that have looked at reinsertion have not found a statistically significant increase in reinsertion of the catheter after some type of a stop-order or nurse initiative, protocol, or urinary catheter reminder system has been put in place.

—Sanjay Saint, MD, MPH, FHM, hospitalist, professor of internal medicine, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor

10: Embrace your role as eyes and ears.

If a surgical patient’s note isn’t changed in three or four days, the hospitalist needs to ask the surgical team about what has changed in the case, Dr. Steers says.

“At the end of the day, it’s communication with urologists and surgeons,” he says. “And most would appreciate that. I think the [attitude from the] old days of ‘untold command of my patient, I want no other input,’ is really short-sighted.”

Hospitalist vigilance is especially important for complicated patients, such as those who’ve undergone radical cystectomy for bladder cancer. That’s the procedure with the highest mortality rate in urology, as patients are generally older, smoke, and often are obese. And they have high readmission rates—nearly 30 percent.³

Dr. Steers says hospitalists are needed to look for early warning signs in these patients.

“We look for that sort of input, especially when it comes to being the early eyes and ears of potential problems or somebody helping in discharge planning,” he says. “It might be a little too early to go home, and being readmitted is not very good for the hospital as a whole, but, more importantly, the patient.”

Tom Collins is a freelance writer in South Florida.

References

1. Society of Hospital Medicine. Five things physicians and patients should question. SHM website. Available at: http://www.hospitalmedicine.org/AM/pdf/SHM-Adult_5things_List_Web.pdf. Accessed October 24, 2013.
2. Loeb M, Hunt D, O’Halloran K, Carusone SC, Dafoe N, Walter SD. Stop orders to reduce inappropriate urinary catheterization in hospitalized patients: a randomized controlled trial. J Gen Intern Med. 2008;23(6):816-820.
3. Stimson CJ, Chang SS, Barocas DA, et al. Early and late perioperative outcomes following radical cystectomy: 90-day readmissions, morbidity and mortality in a contemporary series. J Urol. 2010;184(4):1296-1300.
4. Saint S, Lipsky BA, Goold SD. Indwelling urinary catheters: a one-point restraint? Ann Intern Med. 2002;137(2):125-127.

Dr. Danella

10 Things: At A Glance

1. Take out urinary catheters as soon as possible.
2. But don’t carry the Choosing Wisely directive on urinary catheters—and in-house protocols—too far.
3. Beware certain types of medications in vulnerable patients.
4. Don’t discharge patients who are having difficulty voiding.
5. Broach sensitive topics, but do so gently.
6. Call in a urologist, or someone with more experience, when you have difficulty placing a catheter.
7. Diabetic patients require extra attention.
8. Practice good antibiotic stewardship.
9. Determine whether the patient can be seen as an outpatient.
10. Embrace your role as eyes and ears.

1: Intravenous Haloperidol Does Not Prevent ICU Delirium

Urology is an area in which hospitalists might not have much formal training, but because many of these patients undergo highly complicated surgical procedures with great potential for complications, hospitalists can be vital for good outcomes, urologists say.

The use of urinary catheters is a prime area of concern when it comes to quality and safety, making hospitalists’ role in the care of urological patients even more crucial.

The Hospitalist spoke with a half dozen urologists and well-versed HM clinicians about caring for patients with urological disorders. Here are the best nuggets of guidance for hospitalists.

Take out urinary catheters as soon as possible.

John Bulger, DO, FACOI, FACP, SFHM, a hospitalist and chief quality officer at Geisinger Health System in Pennsylvania, says that, all too often, urinary catheters are left in too long. “There’s pretty good data to suggest that there’s a very direct relationship with the length of time the catheter’s in and the chance of it getting infected,” he says. “Upwards to half of the urinary catheters that are in in hospitals right now wouldn’t meet the guidelines of having a urinary catheter in.”

Dr. Bulger is chair of SHM’s Choosing Wisely subcommittee. One of SHM’s Choosing Wisely recommendations warns physicians not to place, or leave in place, catheters for incontinence, convenience, or monitoring of non-critically ill patients.¹

2: But don’t carry the Choosing Wisely directive on urinary catheters—and in-house protocols—too far.

William Steers, MD, chair of urology at the University of Virginia and editor of the Journal of Urology, says there are risks associated with taking catheters out when it’s not appropriate, especially in patients who’ve undergone surgery.

“We’ve seen situations where we’re called into the operating room by another team,” Dr. Steers says. “Let’s say there was a bladder injury of another service. We’ve repaired the bladder with a catheter in for seven to 10 days. It’s taken out day one; the bladder fills and has the potential of causing harm.”

Early removal before the bladder wall heals can cause bladder rupture, requiring emergency surgery.

“So the devil’s in the details,” he says.

Mark Austenfeld, MD, FACS, president of the American Association of Clinical Urologists, which is dedicated to political action, advocacy, and best practice parameters, says catheters should remain in place for patients with mental status changes, or those who are debilitated in some way and can’t get out of bed or don’t have the wherewithal to ask for help from a nurse.

He says he realizes hospitalists are following pay-for-performance protocols, but he adds a caveat.

“Many times these protocols cannot take into account all of these specialized situations,” says Dr. Austenfeld, a urologist with Kansas City Urology Care. He stresses, though, that the hospitalists he’s worked with do high-quality work.

Sanjay Saint, MD, MPH, FHM, hospitalist and professor of internal medicine at the University of Michigan in Ann Arbor, says that even with these issues, early removal should remain a priority when appropriate.

“There’s going to be anecdotal evidence that in some particular patients, when the catheter is removed, it needs to be reinserted when they haven’t urinated for a while,” Dr. Saint explains. “But I think, in general, the studies that have looked at reinsertion have not found a statistically significant increase in reinsertion of the catheter after some type of a stop-order or nurse initiative, protocol, or urinary catheter reminder system has been put in place.”²

Dr. Steers says most agree that urinary catheters are often “overutilized.”

“You do want to get them out as soon as possible,” he says. “But if it’s ever in doubt, there should be communication with the urology team.”

3: Beware certain types of medications in vulnerable patients.

Hospitalists should tread carefully with medications that might be difficult to handle for patients with kidney issues, like stones or obstructive disease, Dr. Bulger says.

“If they only have one kidney that works well, you have to pay particular attention to drugs that are toxic to the kidneys,” he says. He notes that the nature of the patient’s health “will change the doses of some drugs, as well, depending on what the function of their kidney is.”

Dr. Austenfeld says that drugs with anticholinergic side effects, including some cold remedies such as Benadryl, should possibly be avoided in patients who are having trouble emptying their bladders, because they might make it more difficult for a patient to urinate. Some sedatives, such as amitriptyline, have similar effects and should be used cautiously in these patients, Dr. Austenfeld points out.

“That class of drugs—sometimes I see patients on them for a long time, or placed on them, and they do have a little trouble emptying their bladders,” he says.

4: Don’t discharge patients who are having difficulty voiding.

“If patients are in the hospital and they’ve been taking narcotics post-surgically, or they’re a diabetic patient and they’ve had urinary catheter infections, we should be very careful that these patients are emptying their bladders,” says Dennis Pessis, professor of urology at Rush University Medical Center in Chicago and immediate past president of the American Urological Association. “You can do a very simple ultrasound of the bladder to be sure that they’re emptying. Because if they’re not emptying well, and if they’re going to go home, they may not empty their bladders well and may colonize bacteria.”

Dr. Pessis says it’s not common, but it does happen.

“It’s something that’s of concern,” he says. “It happens often enough that we should be very alert to watching for those problems.”

5: Broach sensitive topics, but do so gently.

“Sexual dysfunction is a significant issue,” Dr. Bulger says. “I think that it’s in the best interest of the patient to address that up front. Generally, urologists are pretty good at that as well. Because you’re co-managing with them, they’re going to help out with that. But it’s important to always remember what’s going to concern the patient.”

Incontinence can be similarly sensitive but important to discuss.

“I think it helps sometimes if the physician brings it up in an appropriate way and kind of opens the door to be able to have the discussion,” Dr. Bulger said.

[Diabetic patients] may have what we call a diabetic type of neuropathy for the bladder, which means that they don’t have the sensation and they may not empty their bladders. They’re also susceptible to a higher incidence of bladder infection. So if you do have a diabetic patient, be sure they’re not infected before they leave. And be sure they’re emptying their bladders well.

—Dennis Pessis, professor of urology, Rush University Medical Center, Chicago, immediate past president, American Urological Association

6: Call in a urologist, or someone with more experience, when you have difficulty placing a catheter.

One rule of thumb is, if you try twice to put in a urinary catheter without success, call in someone else to do it.

“You don’t want what we call ‘false passages,’” Dr. Pessis says. “If you are having difficulty inserting the catheter, if it’s not moving down the channel well, then you should back off and either consult someone that has more experience in catheterizing or contact the urologist.”

Two reasons the placement might be difficult: strictures like old scar formations, within the urethra, or an enlarged prostate.

Dr. Danella

John Danella, MD, FACS, head of urology for the Geisinger Health System, says a coudé catheter, with a curved tip to help it navigate around the prostate, should be tried on male patients over 50.

“If that’s not successful, then I think you need to call the urologist,” he says. “It’s better to call them before there’s been trauma to the urethra than afterwards.”

Dr. Danella says he understands that attempts by hospitalists in the face of difficulty are made with “best intentions” to save the urologist the time. But when injuries happen, “often times you’re forced to take that patient to the operating room for cystoscopy.”

7: Diabetic patients require extra attention.

“They may have what we call a diabetic type of neuropathy for the bladder, which means that they don’t have the sensation and they may not empty their bladders,” Dr. Pessis explains. “They’re also susceptible to a higher incidence of bladder infection. So if you do have a diabetic patient, be sure they’re not infected before they leave. And be sure they’re emptying their bladders well.”

8: Practice good antibiotic stewardship.

After 72 hours, almost all urine cultures from a catheterized patient are positive. That doesn’t mean they all need antibiotics, Dr. Steers says.

“Unless the patient’s symptomatic, we don’t treat until a catheter comes out,” he says. “The constant use of antibiotics in somebody with an in-dwelling catheter is creating tremendous problems with resistance and biofilms, etc.”

Dr. Steers says hospitalists can be an educational resource for care teams, using the latest infectious disease literature to say, “Hey, this antibiotic should be stopped. You don’t need to continue this many days.”

“One of the problems we’re having with guidelines is every specialty has their own antibiotic prophylaxis guidelines,” he adds. “So it can be very confusing for the hospitalist.”

9: Determine whether the patient can be seen as an outpatient.

Dr. Danella says that determination often is not made carefully enough. After initial treatment, follow-up with the urologist often can be done on an outpatient basis.

“Sometimes, they’re waiting around all day before we’re free and we can come see them. So I think in many cases, at least in our system, it would be helpful if folks could just place a phone call or just send a message and say, ‘Do you need to see this patient or can we send them home?’” Dr. Danella says. “I think it’s better for everybody if we can do that.”

One common example is an elderly patient who comes to the hospital, is put into a bed, and can’t void. Often, the patient would respond to a catheter and an alpha-blocker (if no contraindication), he says. But, that day, there’s nothing the urologist will be able to do to help make them void immediately, he says.

Another example is a patient with a small kidney stone, less than 5 mm, who probably would respond to medical therapy and won’t need an intervention, Dr. Danella says.

There’s going to be anecdotal evidence that in some particular patients, when the catheter is removed, it needs to be reinserted when they haven’t urinated for a while. But I think, in general, the studies that have looked at reinsertion have not found a statistically significant increase in reinsertion of the catheter after some type of a stop-order or nurse initiative, protocol, or urinary catheter reminder system has been put in place.

—Sanjay Saint, MD, MPH, FHM, hospitalist, professor of internal medicine, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor

10: Embrace your role as eyes and ears.

If a surgical patient’s note isn’t changed in three or four days, the hospitalist needs to ask the surgical team about what has changed in the case, Dr. Steers says.

“At the end of the day, it’s communication with urologists and surgeons,” he says. “And most would appreciate that. I think the [attitude from the] old days of ‘untold command of my patient, I want no other input,’ is really short-sighted.”

Hospitalist vigilance is especially important for complicated patients, such as those who’ve undergone radical cystectomy for bladder cancer. That’s the procedure with the highest mortality rate in urology, as patients are generally older, smoke, and often are obese. And they have high readmission rates—nearly 30 percent.³

Dr. Steers says hospitalists are needed to look for early warning signs in these patients.

“We look for that sort of input, especially when it comes to being the early eyes and ears of potential problems or somebody helping in discharge planning,” he says. “It might be a little too early to go home, and being readmitted is not very good for the hospital as a whole, but, more importantly, the patient.”

Tom Collins is a freelance writer in South Florida.

References

1. Society of Hospital Medicine. Five things physicians and patients should question. SHM website. Available at: http://www.hospitalmedicine.org/AM/pdf/SHM-Adult_5things_List_Web.pdf. Accessed October 24, 2013.
2. Loeb M, Hunt D, O’Halloran K, Carusone SC, Dafoe N, Walter SD. Stop orders to reduce inappropriate urinary catheterization in hospitalized patients: a randomized controlled trial. J Gen Intern Med. 2008;23(6):816-820.
3. Stimson CJ, Chang SS, Barocas DA, et al. Early and late perioperative outcomes following radical cystectomy: 90-day readmissions, morbidity and mortality in a contemporary series. J Urol. 2010;184(4):1296-1300.
4. Saint S, Lipsky BA, Goold SD. Indwelling urinary catheters: a one-point restraint? Ann Intern Med. 2002;137(2):125-127.

Dr. Bekanich

Dr. Bekanich

After nine years in practice as a hospitalist in community and academic settings, Leonard Noronha, MD, applied for and in July 2012 became the inaugural, full-year, full-time fellow in hospice and palliative medicine (HPM) at the University of New Mexico in Albuquerque, one of approximately 200 such positions nationwide. The fellowship training qualifies him to sit for HPM subspecialty medical board certification.

Dr. Noronha says he was casually acquainted with the concept of palliative care from residency but didn’t know “when to ask for a palliative care consultation or what they offered.”

“I also had a sense that discussions about feeding tubes, for example, could happen better and easier than they typically did,” he says.

His interest piqued as he learned more about palliative care at hospitalist meetings.

“I grew more excited about it and came to realize that it is something I’d find rewarding and enjoyable, if I could get good at it,” Dr. Noronha says. “Over time, I found more satisfaction in palliative care encounters with patients—and became less comfortable with what I perceived as occasionally inappropriate and excessive testing and treatment [for some hospitalized patients who weren’t offered palliative care].”

Palliative care is a medical specialty that focuses on comfort, relief of symptoms, and clarifying patients’ treatment goals. It is commonly provided as an interdisciplinary consultation service in hospitals. Advocates say it can be offered concurrently with other medical therapies for any seriously ill patient, particularly when there are physical, psychosocial, or spiritual complications, and it is not limited to patients approaching death.

Experienced clinicians say palliative care maximizes quality of life and empowers patients and their families to make treatment decisions more in line with their hopes and values. They also say palliative care gives an emotional lift to providers, while reducing hospital expenditures. Some also suggest that palliative care is an additional tool for enhancing care transitions, potentially affecting readmission rates.

For Dr. Noronha, the one-year fellowship required a significant cut in pay, but he was prepared for the financial hardship.

“It was a great decision for me,” he says. “Some of my colleagues had encouraged me to think about using the experiential pathway to HPM board certification, but I knew I’d do better in the structured environment of a fellowship.

“There have been times when I’ve been outside of my comfort zone, sometimes feeling like the least experienced person in the room. But I knew the fellowship would help—and it did.”

He says the training gives him a better appreciation for things like illness trajectories, the nuances of goal clarification, and the benefit of an extra set of eyes and ears to assess the patient.

After completing his fellowship, Dr. Noronha became UNM’s second full-time palliative medicine faculty. He encourages hospitalists to talk to the palliative care service at their institutions and request consultations for complex, seriously ill patients who might benefit.

As for his new career path, he says that often he is asked if palliative care is depressing. “Some of these situations can be tragic, but I find the work very rewarding,” he says.

Service Models

In some settings, palliative care is incorporated into the hospitalist service. Hospitalists are scheduled for palliative care shifts or have palliative care visits incorporated into daily rounds. Such blended positions could be a recruiting incentive for some physicians who want to do both.

In other settings, palliative care is a separate service. Consultations are ordered as needed by hospitalists and other physicians.

Advocates like Marianne Novelli, MD, FHM, FACP, say hospitalists play a pivotal role in providing the basics of palliative care for seriously ill, hospitalized patients.

“Palliative care is part and parcel of what we do as hospitalists with the people we serve—who by definition are very sick, even to get into the hospital,” says Dr. Novelli, formerly the chief of the division of hospital medicine at Kaiser Permanente in Denver, Colo. She rotated off that leadership position in 2011 and has since divided her time between hospital medicine and palliative care shifts in the hospital, although she now does palliative care exclusively.

Initially, she watched palliative care consults and asked for mentorship from the palliative care team. Although it took time to get used to the advisory role of the consultant, and to working with a team, she eventually became board certified in HPM.

“Palliative care is incredibly intense but richly rewarding work,” she says. “The patients you see are never simple. It allows us to practice the type of medicine we originally set out to do, with people at the most vulnerable times in their lives.”

Workforce, Fellowship, Board Certification

In October 2012, 3,356 physicians passed the hospice and palliative medicine subspecialty board exams offered by the American Board of Medical Specialties and 10 of its constituent specialty boards, with the lion’s share of them certified by the American Board of Internal Medicine. That more than doubled the number of physicians earning the HPM credential since its inception in 2008.

Even with the surge in palliative care training, workforce studies suggest the U.S. is woefully short of credentialed palliative care physicians. And many think hospitalists can help fill that void.

The Center to Advance Palliative Care (CAPC, www.capc.org) counts 1,400 hospital-based palliative care programs in the U.S., while the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) recognizes about 3,500 Medicare-certified hospice programs. A 2010 estimate by Dale Lupu and the American Academy of Hospice and Palliative Medicine (AAHPM), however, suggested a need for between 4,487 and 10,810 palliative care physician FTEs just to staff existing programs at appropriate levels—without considering growth for the field or its spread into outpatient settings.¹

In the past, mid-career physicians had an experiential pathway to the HPM board exam, based on hours worked with a hospice or palliative care team, but physicians now must complete an HPM fellowship of at least one year in order to sit for the boards. And, according to AAHPM, only 234 HPM fellowship positions are offered nationwide by 85 approved fellowship programs.

Dr. Bekanich

A one-year fellowship is a big commitment for an established hospitalist, according to Stephen Bekanich, MD, co-director of Seton Palliative Care at Seton Healthcare, an 11-hospital system in Austin, Texas. A former hospitalist, Dr. Bekanich says that in his region a fellow stipend is about $70,000, whereas typical hospitalist compensation is in the mid- to upper-$200,000s.

AAHPM is exploring other approaches to expanding the workforce with mid-career physicians. One approach, authored by Timothy Quill, MD, and Amy Abernethy, MD, the past and current AAHPM board presidents, is to develop a two-tiered system in which palliative medicine specialists teach basic palliative care techniques and approaches to primary care physicians, hospitalists, and such specialists as oncologists.² The article also suggested equipping clinicians with the tools to recognize when more specialized help is needed.

“As in any medical discipline, some core elements of palliative care, such as aligning treatment with a patient’s goals and basic symptom management, should be routine aspects of care delivered by any practitioner,” Drs. Quill and Abernethy wrote. “Other skills are more complex and take years of training to learn and apply, such as negotiating a difficult family meeting, addressing veiled existential distress, and managing refractory symptoms.”

Dr. Bekanich is trying the two-tiered approach at Seton Healthcare. At facilities with no palliative care service, he is transplanting palliative-trained nurse practitioners in hospital medicine groups.

“This model is locked into our budget for fiscal year 2014,” Dr. Bekanich says. “We’ll train folks, starting with hospitalists and primary care physicians.”

The training will start with a pair of three-hour sessions on palliative care techniques for hospitalists and PCPs, followed by homework assignments. “Then we’ll meet again in three months to do some role plays,” he says.

Two final rounds of training will focus on skills, philosophy, values, and practice.

Palliative care is incredibly intense but richly rewarding work. The patients you see are never simple. It allows us to practice the type of medicine we originally set out to do, with people at the most vulnerable times in their lives.

—Marianne Novelli, MD, FHM, FACP, former chief of the division of hospital medicine, Kaiser Permanente, Denver, Colo.

On-the-Job Training

David Weissman, MD, FACP, a palliative care specialist in Milwaukee, Wis., and consultant to the CAPC, recommends hospitalists do what they can to improve their knowledge and skills. “There are a lot of opportunities for palliative care training out there,” he says.

HM conferences often include palliative care content. AAHPM and CAPC offer annual conferences that immerse participants in content, with opportunities to mingle with palliative care colleagues. AAHPM also offers specific content through its “Unipac” series of nine self-study training modules (www.aahpm.org/resources/default/unipac-4th-edition.html.)

Dr. Weissman

On the job, Dr. Weissman says hospitalists should ask for consults for patients with complex needs. Also pay attention to how the service works and what it recommends. Taking a couple of days to round with the palliative care service could be very educational. It may be possible to take a part-time position with the team, providing weekend or vacation coverage. Hospitalists can participate on planning or advisory committees for palliative care in their hospitals or on quality improvement projects.

“If there isn’t a palliative care service, advocate for developing one,” he says.

Local hospice programs, especially those with inpatient hospice facilities that need daily physician coverage, might have part-time staff positions, which could be a great moonlighting opportunity for hospitalists and a way to learn a lot very quickly.

“I can tell the difference between physicians who have spent time working in a hospice, where you can learn about caring for people at the end of life because most of the patients are so sick, and those who have not,” says Porter Storey, MD, FACP, AAHPM’s executive vice president and a practicing palliative care physician in Colorado. “You can learn how to use the medications to get someone comfortable quickly and how to talk to families in crisis. It can be some of the most rewarding work you can possibly do—especially when you have the time and training to do it well for some of the most challenging of patients and families.”

Dr. Storey recommends that hospitalists join AAHPM, use its professional materials, attend its annual meetings, and, if they feel a calling, consider fellowship training as the next big step.

“Palliative care programs are growing in number and size but are chronically understaffed,” says Steven Pantilat, MD, SFHM, hospitalist and director of the Palliative Care Program at the University of California at San Francisco. “This creates a great opportunity for hospitalists. I have heard of places that were having trouble recruiting palliative care physicians but were willing to sponsor a hospitalist to go and do a fellowship, supplementing their salary as an incentive—and a reasonable one—for a hospitalist interested in making a career move.”

He says that palliative care, like hospital medicine, has been a significant value-add in many hospitals and health systems. More importantly, it correlates to positive patient outcomes (see “Research Highlights Palliative Care Contributions,”).

Dr. Pantilat

“What’s new is how it connects to current issues like improved care transitions and readmissions reduction,” Dr. Pantilat says.

Advocates say palliative care helps to match medical services to patient preferences, thereby improving patient satisfaction scores, especially for those who aren’t likely to achieve good outcomes. Dr. Pantilat says it puts plans in place for patients to get the right services for the post-discharge period and for responding to anticipated problems like chest pain.

“It’s not just how to get patients out of the hospital as quickly as possible,” he says, “but to do that with a plan that sets them up to succeed at home.”

Larry Beresford is a freelance writer in San Francisco.

References

1. Lupu D. American Academy of Hospice and Palliative Medicine Workforce Task Force. Estimate of current hospice and palliative medicine physician workforce shortage. J Pain Symptom Manage. 2010;40(6):899-911.
2. Quill TE, Abernethy AP. Generalist plus specialist palliative care—creating a more sustainable model. N Engl J Med. 2013;368(13):1173-1175.
3. Morrison RS, Penrod JD, Cassel JB, et al. Palliative Care Leadership Centers' Outcomes Group. Cost savings associated with US hospital palliative care consultation programs. Arch Intern Med. 2008;168(16):1783-1790.
4. Penrod JD, Deb P, Dellenbaugh C, et al. Hospital-based palliative care consultation: effects on hospital cost. J Palliat Med. 2010;13(8):973-979.
5. Gelfman LP, Meier DE, Morrison RS. Does palliative care improve quality? A survey of bereaved family members. J Pain Symptom Manage. 2008;36(1):22-28.
6. Temel JS, Greer JA, Muzikansky A, et al. Early palliative care for patients with metastatic non-small-cell lung cancer. N Engl J Med. 2010;363(8):733-742.
7. Irwin KE, Greer JA, Khatib J, Temel JS, Pirl WF. Early palliative care and metastatic non-small cell lung cancer: potential mechanisms of prolonged survival. Chron Respir Dis. 2013;10(1):35-47.
8. Von Roenn JN, Temel J. The integration of palliative care and oncology: the evidence. Oncology. 2011;25(13):1258-1260,1262,1264-1265.
9. Yoong J, Park ER, Greer JA, etc. Early palliative care in advanced lung cancer: a qualitative study. JAMA Intern Med. 2013;173(4):283-290.
10. Enguidanos S, Vesper E, Lorenz K. 30-day readmissions among seriously ill older adults. J Palliat Med. 2012;15(12):1356-1361.
11. Eti S, O’Mahony S, McHugh M, Guilbe R, Blank A, Selwyn P. Outcomes of the acute palliative care unit in an academic medical center [published online ahead of print May 10, 2013]. Am J Hosp Palliat Care. PMID: 23666616.
12. Smith AK, Thai JN, Bakitas MA, et al. The diverse landscape of palliative care clinics. J Palliat Med. 2013;16(6):661-668.

Dr. Bekanich

Dr. Bekanich

After nine years in practice as a hospitalist in community and academic settings, Leonard Noronha, MD, applied for and in July 2012 became the inaugural, full-year, full-time fellow in hospice and palliative medicine (HPM) at the University of New Mexico in Albuquerque, one of approximately 200 such positions nationwide. The fellowship training qualifies him to sit for HPM subspecialty medical board certification.

Dr. Noronha says he was casually acquainted with the concept of palliative care from residency but didn’t know “when to ask for a palliative care consultation or what they offered.”

“I also had a sense that discussions about feeding tubes, for example, could happen better and easier than they typically did,” he says.

His interest piqued as he learned more about palliative care at hospitalist meetings.

“I grew more excited about it and came to realize that it is something I’d find rewarding and enjoyable, if I could get good at it,” Dr. Noronha says. “Over time, I found more satisfaction in palliative care encounters with patients—and became less comfortable with what I perceived as occasionally inappropriate and excessive testing and treatment [for some hospitalized patients who weren’t offered palliative care].”

Palliative care is a medical specialty that focuses on comfort, relief of symptoms, and clarifying patients’ treatment goals. It is commonly provided as an interdisciplinary consultation service in hospitals. Advocates say it can be offered concurrently with other medical therapies for any seriously ill patient, particularly when there are physical, psychosocial, or spiritual complications, and it is not limited to patients approaching death.

Experienced clinicians say palliative care maximizes quality of life and empowers patients and their families to make treatment decisions more in line with their hopes and values. They also say palliative care gives an emotional lift to providers, while reducing hospital expenditures. Some also suggest that palliative care is an additional tool for enhancing care transitions, potentially affecting readmission rates.

For Dr. Noronha, the one-year fellowship required a significant cut in pay, but he was prepared for the financial hardship.

“It was a great decision for me,” he says. “Some of my colleagues had encouraged me to think about using the experiential pathway to HPM board certification, but I knew I’d do better in the structured environment of a fellowship.

“There have been times when I’ve been outside of my comfort zone, sometimes feeling like the least experienced person in the room. But I knew the fellowship would help—and it did.”

He says the training gives him a better appreciation for things like illness trajectories, the nuances of goal clarification, and the benefit of an extra set of eyes and ears to assess the patient.

After completing his fellowship, Dr. Noronha became UNM’s second full-time palliative medicine faculty. He encourages hospitalists to talk to the palliative care service at their institutions and request consultations for complex, seriously ill patients who might benefit.

As for his new career path, he says that often he is asked if palliative care is depressing. “Some of these situations can be tragic, but I find the work very rewarding,” he says.

Service Models

In some settings, palliative care is incorporated into the hospitalist service. Hospitalists are scheduled for palliative care shifts or have palliative care visits incorporated into daily rounds. Such blended positions could be a recruiting incentive for some physicians who want to do both.

In other settings, palliative care is a separate service. Consultations are ordered as needed by hospitalists and other physicians.

Advocates like Marianne Novelli, MD, FHM, FACP, say hospitalists play a pivotal role in providing the basics of palliative care for seriously ill, hospitalized patients.

“Palliative care is part and parcel of what we do as hospitalists with the people we serve—who by definition are very sick, even to get into the hospital,” says Dr. Novelli, formerly the chief of the division of hospital medicine at Kaiser Permanente in Denver, Colo. She rotated off that leadership position in 2011 and has since divided her time between hospital medicine and palliative care shifts in the hospital, although she now does palliative care exclusively.

Initially, she watched palliative care consults and asked for mentorship from the palliative care team. Although it took time to get used to the advisory role of the consultant, and to working with a team, she eventually became board certified in HPM.

“Palliative care is incredibly intense but richly rewarding work,” she says. “The patients you see are never simple. It allows us to practice the type of medicine we originally set out to do, with people at the most vulnerable times in their lives.”

Workforce, Fellowship, Board Certification

In October 2012, 3,356 physicians passed the hospice and palliative medicine subspecialty board exams offered by the American Board of Medical Specialties and 10 of its constituent specialty boards, with the lion’s share of them certified by the American Board of Internal Medicine. That more than doubled the number of physicians earning the HPM credential since its inception in 2008.

Even with the surge in palliative care training, workforce studies suggest the U.S. is woefully short of credentialed palliative care physicians. And many think hospitalists can help fill that void.

The Center to Advance Palliative Care (CAPC, www.capc.org) counts 1,400 hospital-based palliative care programs in the U.S., while the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) recognizes about 3,500 Medicare-certified hospice programs. A 2010 estimate by Dale Lupu and the American Academy of Hospice and Palliative Medicine (AAHPM), however, suggested a need for between 4,487 and 10,810 palliative care physician FTEs just to staff existing programs at appropriate levels—without considering growth for the field or its spread into outpatient settings.¹

In the past, mid-career physicians had an experiential pathway to the HPM board exam, based on hours worked with a hospice or palliative care team, but physicians now must complete an HPM fellowship of at least one year in order to sit for the boards. And, according to AAHPM, only 234 HPM fellowship positions are offered nationwide by 85 approved fellowship programs.

Dr. Bekanich

A one-year fellowship is a big commitment for an established hospitalist, according to Stephen Bekanich, MD, co-director of Seton Palliative Care at Seton Healthcare, an 11-hospital system in Austin, Texas. A former hospitalist, Dr. Bekanich says that in his region a fellow stipend is about $70,000, whereas typical hospitalist compensation is in the mid- to upper-$200,000s.

AAHPM is exploring other approaches to expanding the workforce with mid-career physicians. One approach, authored by Timothy Quill, MD, and Amy Abernethy, MD, the past and current AAHPM board presidents, is to develop a two-tiered system in which palliative medicine specialists teach basic palliative care techniques and approaches to primary care physicians, hospitalists, and such specialists as oncologists.² The article also suggested equipping clinicians with the tools to recognize when more specialized help is needed.

“As in any medical discipline, some core elements of palliative care, such as aligning treatment with a patient’s goals and basic symptom management, should be routine aspects of care delivered by any practitioner,” Drs. Quill and Abernethy wrote. “Other skills are more complex and take years of training to learn and apply, such as negotiating a difficult family meeting, addressing veiled existential distress, and managing refractory symptoms.”

Dr. Bekanich is trying the two-tiered approach at Seton Healthcare. At facilities with no palliative care service, he is transplanting palliative-trained nurse practitioners in hospital medicine groups.

“This model is locked into our budget for fiscal year 2014,” Dr. Bekanich says. “We’ll train folks, starting with hospitalists and primary care physicians.”

The training will start with a pair of three-hour sessions on palliative care techniques for hospitalists and PCPs, followed by homework assignments. “Then we’ll meet again in three months to do some role plays,” he says.

Two final rounds of training will focus on skills, philosophy, values, and practice.

Palliative care is incredibly intense but richly rewarding work. The patients you see are never simple. It allows us to practice the type of medicine we originally set out to do, with people at the most vulnerable times in their lives.

—Marianne Novelli, MD, FHM, FACP, former chief of the division of hospital medicine, Kaiser Permanente, Denver, Colo.

On-the-Job Training

David Weissman, MD, FACP, a palliative care specialist in Milwaukee, Wis., and consultant to the CAPC, recommends hospitalists do what they can to improve their knowledge and skills. “There are a lot of opportunities for palliative care training out there,” he says.

HM conferences often include palliative care content. AAHPM and CAPC offer annual conferences that immerse participants in content, with opportunities to mingle with palliative care colleagues. AAHPM also offers specific content through its “Unipac” series of nine self-study training modules (www.aahpm.org/resources/default/unipac-4th-edition.html.)

Dr. Weissman

On the job, Dr. Weissman says hospitalists should ask for consults for patients with complex needs. Also pay attention to how the service works and what it recommends. Taking a couple of days to round with the palliative care service could be very educational. It may be possible to take a part-time position with the team, providing weekend or vacation coverage. Hospitalists can participate on planning or advisory committees for palliative care in their hospitals or on quality improvement projects.

“If there isn’t a palliative care service, advocate for developing one,” he says.

Local hospice programs, especially those with inpatient hospice facilities that need daily physician coverage, might have part-time staff positions, which could be a great moonlighting opportunity for hospitalists and a way to learn a lot very quickly.

“I can tell the difference between physicians who have spent time working in a hospice, where you can learn about caring for people at the end of life because most of the patients are so sick, and those who have not,” says Porter Storey, MD, FACP, AAHPM’s executive vice president and a practicing palliative care physician in Colorado. “You can learn how to use the medications to get someone comfortable quickly and how to talk to families in crisis. It can be some of the most rewarding work you can possibly do—especially when you have the time and training to do it well for some of the most challenging of patients and families.”

Dr. Storey recommends that hospitalists join AAHPM, use its professional materials, attend its annual meetings, and, if they feel a calling, consider fellowship training as the next big step.

“Palliative care programs are growing in number and size but are chronically understaffed,” says Steven Pantilat, MD, SFHM, hospitalist and director of the Palliative Care Program at the University of California at San Francisco. “This creates a great opportunity for hospitalists. I have heard of places that were having trouble recruiting palliative care physicians but were willing to sponsor a hospitalist to go and do a fellowship, supplementing their salary as an incentive—and a reasonable one—for a hospitalist interested in making a career move.”

He says that palliative care, like hospital medicine, has been a significant value-add in many hospitals and health systems. More importantly, it correlates to positive patient outcomes (see “Research Highlights Palliative Care Contributions,”).

Dr. Pantilat

“What’s new is how it connects to current issues like improved care transitions and readmissions reduction,” Dr. Pantilat says.

Advocates say palliative care helps to match medical services to patient preferences, thereby improving patient satisfaction scores, especially for those who aren’t likely to achieve good outcomes. Dr. Pantilat says it puts plans in place for patients to get the right services for the post-discharge period and for responding to anticipated problems like chest pain.

“It’s not just how to get patients out of the hospital as quickly as possible,” he says, “but to do that with a plan that sets them up to succeed at home.”

Larry Beresford is a freelance writer in San Francisco.

References

1. Lupu D. American Academy of Hospice and Palliative Medicine Workforce Task Force. Estimate of current hospice and palliative medicine physician workforce shortage. J Pain Symptom Manage. 2010;40(6):899-911.
2. Quill TE, Abernethy AP. Generalist plus specialist palliative care—creating a more sustainable model. N Engl J Med. 2013;368(13):1173-1175.
3. Morrison RS, Penrod JD, Cassel JB, et al. Palliative Care Leadership Centers' Outcomes Group. Cost savings associated with US hospital palliative care consultation programs. Arch Intern Med. 2008;168(16):1783-1790.
4. Penrod JD, Deb P, Dellenbaugh C, et al. Hospital-based palliative care consultation: effects on hospital cost. J Palliat Med. 2010;13(8):973-979.
5. Gelfman LP, Meier DE, Morrison RS. Does palliative care improve quality? A survey of bereaved family members. J Pain Symptom Manage. 2008;36(1):22-28.
6. Temel JS, Greer JA, Muzikansky A, et al. Early palliative care for patients with metastatic non-small-cell lung cancer. N Engl J Med. 2010;363(8):733-742.
7. Irwin KE, Greer JA, Khatib J, Temel JS, Pirl WF. Early palliative care and metastatic non-small cell lung cancer: potential mechanisms of prolonged survival. Chron Respir Dis. 2013;10(1):35-47.
8. Von Roenn JN, Temel J. The integration of palliative care and oncology: the evidence. Oncology. 2011;25(13):1258-1260,1262,1264-1265.
9. Yoong J, Park ER, Greer JA, etc. Early palliative care in advanced lung cancer: a qualitative study. JAMA Intern Med. 2013;173(4):283-290.
10. Enguidanos S, Vesper E, Lorenz K. 30-day readmissions among seriously ill older adults. J Palliat Med. 2012;15(12):1356-1361.
11. Eti S, O’Mahony S, McHugh M, Guilbe R, Blank A, Selwyn P. Outcomes of the acute palliative care unit in an academic medical center [published online ahead of print May 10, 2013]. Am J Hosp Palliat Care. PMID: 23666616.
12. Smith AK, Thai JN, Bakitas MA, et al. The diverse landscape of palliative care clinics. J Palliat Med. 2013;16(6):661-668.

Dr. Bekanich

Dr. Bekanich

After nine years in practice as a hospitalist in community and academic settings, Leonard Noronha, MD, applied for and in July 2012 became the inaugural, full-year, full-time fellow in hospice and palliative medicine (HPM) at the University of New Mexico in Albuquerque, one of approximately 200 such positions nationwide. The fellowship training qualifies him to sit for HPM subspecialty medical board certification.

Dr. Noronha says he was casually acquainted with the concept of palliative care from residency but didn’t know “when to ask for a palliative care consultation or what they offered.”

“I also had a sense that discussions about feeding tubes, for example, could happen better and easier than they typically did,” he says.

His interest piqued as he learned more about palliative care at hospitalist meetings.

“I grew more excited about it and came to realize that it is something I’d find rewarding and enjoyable, if I could get good at it,” Dr. Noronha says. “Over time, I found more satisfaction in palliative care encounters with patients—and became less comfortable with what I perceived as occasionally inappropriate and excessive testing and treatment [for some hospitalized patients who weren’t offered palliative care].”

Palliative care is a medical specialty that focuses on comfort, relief of symptoms, and clarifying patients’ treatment goals. It is commonly provided as an interdisciplinary consultation service in hospitals. Advocates say it can be offered concurrently with other medical therapies for any seriously ill patient, particularly when there are physical, psychosocial, or spiritual complications, and it is not limited to patients approaching death.

Experienced clinicians say palliative care maximizes quality of life and empowers patients and their families to make treatment decisions more in line with their hopes and values. They also say palliative care gives an emotional lift to providers, while reducing hospital expenditures. Some also suggest that palliative care is an additional tool for enhancing care transitions, potentially affecting readmission rates.

For Dr. Noronha, the one-year fellowship required a significant cut in pay, but he was prepared for the financial hardship.

“It was a great decision for me,” he says. “Some of my colleagues had encouraged me to think about using the experiential pathway to HPM board certification, but I knew I’d do better in the structured environment of a fellowship.

“There have been times when I’ve been outside of my comfort zone, sometimes feeling like the least experienced person in the room. But I knew the fellowship would help—and it did.”

He says the training gives him a better appreciation for things like illness trajectories, the nuances of goal clarification, and the benefit of an extra set of eyes and ears to assess the patient.

After completing his fellowship, Dr. Noronha became UNM’s second full-time palliative medicine faculty. He encourages hospitalists to talk to the palliative care service at their institutions and request consultations for complex, seriously ill patients who might benefit.

As for his new career path, he says that often he is asked if palliative care is depressing. “Some of these situations can be tragic, but I find the work very rewarding,” he says.

Service Models

In some settings, palliative care is incorporated into the hospitalist service. Hospitalists are scheduled for palliative care shifts or have palliative care visits incorporated into daily rounds. Such blended positions could be a recruiting incentive for some physicians who want to do both.

In other settings, palliative care is a separate service. Consultations are ordered as needed by hospitalists and other physicians.

Advocates like Marianne Novelli, MD, FHM, FACP, say hospitalists play a pivotal role in providing the basics of palliative care for seriously ill, hospitalized patients.

“Palliative care is part and parcel of what we do as hospitalists with the people we serve—who by definition are very sick, even to get into the hospital,” says Dr. Novelli, formerly the chief of the division of hospital medicine at Kaiser Permanente in Denver, Colo. She rotated off that leadership position in 2011 and has since divided her time between hospital medicine and palliative care shifts in the hospital, although she now does palliative care exclusively.

Initially, she watched palliative care consults and asked for mentorship from the palliative care team. Although it took time to get used to the advisory role of the consultant, and to working with a team, she eventually became board certified in HPM.

“Palliative care is incredibly intense but richly rewarding work,” she says. “The patients you see are never simple. It allows us to practice the type of medicine we originally set out to do, with people at the most vulnerable times in their lives.”

Workforce, Fellowship, Board Certification

In October 2012, 3,356 physicians passed the hospice and palliative medicine subspecialty board exams offered by the American Board of Medical Specialties and 10 of its constituent specialty boards, with the lion’s share of them certified by the American Board of Internal Medicine. That more than doubled the number of physicians earning the HPM credential since its inception in 2008.

Even with the surge in palliative care training, workforce studies suggest the U.S. is woefully short of credentialed palliative care physicians. And many think hospitalists can help fill that void.

The Center to Advance Palliative Care (CAPC, www.capc.org) counts 1,400 hospital-based palliative care programs in the U.S., while the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) recognizes about 3,500 Medicare-certified hospice programs. A 2010 estimate by Dale Lupu and the American Academy of Hospice and Palliative Medicine (AAHPM), however, suggested a need for between 4,487 and 10,810 palliative care physician FTEs just to staff existing programs at appropriate levels—without considering growth for the field or its spread into outpatient settings.¹

In the past, mid-career physicians had an experiential pathway to the HPM board exam, based on hours worked with a hospice or palliative care team, but physicians now must complete an HPM fellowship of at least one year in order to sit for the boards. And, according to AAHPM, only 234 HPM fellowship positions are offered nationwide by 85 approved fellowship programs.

Dr. Bekanich

A one-year fellowship is a big commitment for an established hospitalist, according to Stephen Bekanich, MD, co-director of Seton Palliative Care at Seton Healthcare, an 11-hospital system in Austin, Texas. A former hospitalist, Dr. Bekanich says that in his region a fellow stipend is about $70,000, whereas typical hospitalist compensation is in the mid- to upper-$200,000s.

AAHPM is exploring other approaches to expanding the workforce with mid-career physicians. One approach, authored by Timothy Quill, MD, and Amy Abernethy, MD, the past and current AAHPM board presidents, is to develop a two-tiered system in which palliative medicine specialists teach basic palliative care techniques and approaches to primary care physicians, hospitalists, and such specialists as oncologists.² The article also suggested equipping clinicians with the tools to recognize when more specialized help is needed.

“As in any medical discipline, some core elements of palliative care, such as aligning treatment with a patient’s goals and basic symptom management, should be routine aspects of care delivered by any practitioner,” Drs. Quill and Abernethy wrote. “Other skills are more complex and take years of training to learn and apply, such as negotiating a difficult family meeting, addressing veiled existential distress, and managing refractory symptoms.”

Dr. Bekanich is trying the two-tiered approach at Seton Healthcare. At facilities with no palliative care service, he is transplanting palliative-trained nurse practitioners in hospital medicine groups.

“This model is locked into our budget for fiscal year 2014,” Dr. Bekanich says. “We’ll train folks, starting with hospitalists and primary care physicians.”

The training will start with a pair of three-hour sessions on palliative care techniques for hospitalists and PCPs, followed by homework assignments. “Then we’ll meet again in three months to do some role plays,” he says.

Two final rounds of training will focus on skills, philosophy, values, and practice.

Palliative care is incredibly intense but richly rewarding work. The patients you see are never simple. It allows us to practice the type of medicine we originally set out to do, with people at the most vulnerable times in their lives.

—Marianne Novelli, MD, FHM, FACP, former chief of the division of hospital medicine, Kaiser Permanente, Denver, Colo.

On-the-Job Training

David Weissman, MD, FACP, a palliative care specialist in Milwaukee, Wis., and consultant to the CAPC, recommends hospitalists do what they can to improve their knowledge and skills. “There are a lot of opportunities for palliative care training out there,” he says.

HM conferences often include palliative care content. AAHPM and CAPC offer annual conferences that immerse participants in content, with opportunities to mingle with palliative care colleagues. AAHPM also offers specific content through its “Unipac” series of nine self-study training modules (www.aahpm.org/resources/default/unipac-4th-edition.html.)

Dr. Weissman

On the job, Dr. Weissman says hospitalists should ask for consults for patients with complex needs. Also pay attention to how the service works and what it recommends. Taking a couple of days to round with the palliative care service could be very educational. It may be possible to take a part-time position with the team, providing weekend or vacation coverage. Hospitalists can participate on planning or advisory committees for palliative care in their hospitals or on quality improvement projects.

“If there isn’t a palliative care service, advocate for developing one,” he says.

Local hospice programs, especially those with inpatient hospice facilities that need daily physician coverage, might have part-time staff positions, which could be a great moonlighting opportunity for hospitalists and a way to learn a lot very quickly.

“I can tell the difference between physicians who have spent time working in a hospice, where you can learn about caring for people at the end of life because most of the patients are so sick, and those who have not,” says Porter Storey, MD, FACP, AAHPM’s executive vice president and a practicing palliative care physician in Colorado. “You can learn how to use the medications to get someone comfortable quickly and how to talk to families in crisis. It can be some of the most rewarding work you can possibly do—especially when you have the time and training to do it well for some of the most challenging of patients and families.”

Dr. Storey recommends that hospitalists join AAHPM, use its professional materials, attend its annual meetings, and, if they feel a calling, consider fellowship training as the next big step.

“Palliative care programs are growing in number and size but are chronically understaffed,” says Steven Pantilat, MD, SFHM, hospitalist and director of the Palliative Care Program at the University of California at San Francisco. “This creates a great opportunity for hospitalists. I have heard of places that were having trouble recruiting palliative care physicians but were willing to sponsor a hospitalist to go and do a fellowship, supplementing their salary as an incentive—and a reasonable one—for a hospitalist interested in making a career move.”

He says that palliative care, like hospital medicine, has been a significant value-add in many hospitals and health systems. More importantly, it correlates to positive patient outcomes (see “Research Highlights Palliative Care Contributions,”).

Dr. Pantilat

“What’s new is how it connects to current issues like improved care transitions and readmissions reduction,” Dr. Pantilat says.

Advocates say palliative care helps to match medical services to patient preferences, thereby improving patient satisfaction scores, especially for those who aren’t likely to achieve good outcomes. Dr. Pantilat says it puts plans in place for patients to get the right services for the post-discharge period and for responding to anticipated problems like chest pain.

“It’s not just how to get patients out of the hospital as quickly as possible,” he says, “but to do that with a plan that sets them up to succeed at home.”

Larry Beresford is a freelance writer in San Francisco.

References

1. Lupu D. American Academy of Hospice and Palliative Medicine Workforce Task Force. Estimate of current hospice and palliative medicine physician workforce shortage. J Pain Symptom Manage. 2010;40(6):899-911.
2. Quill TE, Abernethy AP. Generalist plus specialist palliative care—creating a more sustainable model. N Engl J Med. 2013;368(13):1173-1175.
3. Morrison RS, Penrod JD, Cassel JB, et al. Palliative Care Leadership Centers' Outcomes Group. Cost savings associated with US hospital palliative care consultation programs. Arch Intern Med. 2008;168(16):1783-1790.
4. Penrod JD, Deb P, Dellenbaugh C, et al. Hospital-based palliative care consultation: effects on hospital cost. J Palliat Med. 2010;13(8):973-979.
5. Gelfman LP, Meier DE, Morrison RS. Does palliative care improve quality? A survey of bereaved family members. J Pain Symptom Manage. 2008;36(1):22-28.
6. Temel JS, Greer JA, Muzikansky A, et al. Early palliative care for patients with metastatic non-small-cell lung cancer. N Engl J Med. 2010;363(8):733-742.
7. Irwin KE, Greer JA, Khatib J, Temel JS, Pirl WF. Early palliative care and metastatic non-small cell lung cancer: potential mechanisms of prolonged survival. Chron Respir Dis. 2013;10(1):35-47.
8. Von Roenn JN, Temel J. The integration of palliative care and oncology: the evidence. Oncology. 2011;25(13):1258-1260,1262,1264-1265.
9. Yoong J, Park ER, Greer JA, etc. Early palliative care in advanced lung cancer: a qualitative study. JAMA Intern Med. 2013;173(4):283-290.
10. Enguidanos S, Vesper E, Lorenz K. 30-day readmissions among seriously ill older adults. J Palliat Med. 2012;15(12):1356-1361.
11. Eti S, O’Mahony S, McHugh M, Guilbe R, Blank A, Selwyn P. Outcomes of the acute palliative care unit in an academic medical center [published online ahead of print May 10, 2013]. Am J Hosp Palliat Care. PMID: 23666616.
12. Smith AK, Thai JN, Bakitas MA, et al. The diverse landscape of palliative care clinics. J Palliat Med. 2013;16(6):661-668.

Clinical question: What steps can hospitals take to reduce readmission rates in patients with heart failure?

Background: Evidence about various hospital strategies to decrease readmissions in patients with heart failure is limited.

Study Design: Cross-sectional study using a web-based survey.

Setting: Survey of 599 hospitals participating in quality initiatives to reduce readmissions.

Synopsis: Readmission of patients with heart failure is common and costly. Hospitals with high readmissions can lose up to 3% of their Medicare reimbursements by 2015.

This study found six strategies associated with lower risk-standardized 30-day readmission rates.

1. Partnering with community physicians and physician groups (0.33%; P=0.017);
2. Partnering with local hospitals (0.34%; P=0.020);
3. Having nurses responsible for medication reconciliation (0.18%; P=0.002);
4. Arranging follow-up visit before discharge (0.19%; P=0.037);
5. Having a process in place to send all discharge summaries directly to the patient’s primary care physician (0.21%; P=0.004); and
6. Assigning staff to follow up on test results after the patient is discharged (0.26%; P=0.049).

Individually, the magnitude of the effects was modest, but implementing multiple strategies was more beneficial (0.34% additional benefit for each additional strategy). Only 7% of the hospitals surveyed implemented all six strategies, highlighting substantial opportunities for improvement.

Bottom line: Implementing multiple strategies may help reduce readmission in patients with heart failure.

Citation: Bradley EH, Curry L, Horwitz LI, et al. Hospital strategies associated with 30-day readmission rates for patients with heart failure. Circ Cardiovasc Qual Outcomes. 2013;6:444-450.

Clinical question: What steps can hospitals take to reduce readmission rates in patients with heart failure?

Background: Evidence about various hospital strategies to decrease readmissions in patients with heart failure is limited.

Study Design: Cross-sectional study using a web-based survey.

Setting: Survey of 599 hospitals participating in quality initiatives to reduce readmissions.

Synopsis: Readmission of patients with heart failure is common and costly. Hospitals with high readmissions can lose up to 3% of their Medicare reimbursements by 2015.

This study found six strategies associated with lower risk-standardized 30-day readmission rates.

1. Partnering with community physicians and physician groups (0.33%; P=0.017);
2. Partnering with local hospitals (0.34%; P=0.020);
3. Having nurses responsible for medication reconciliation (0.18%; P=0.002);
4. Arranging follow-up visit before discharge (0.19%; P=0.037);
5. Having a process in place to send all discharge summaries directly to the patient’s primary care physician (0.21%; P=0.004); and
6. Assigning staff to follow up on test results after the patient is discharged (0.26%; P=0.049).

Individually, the magnitude of the effects was modest, but implementing multiple strategies was more beneficial (0.34% additional benefit for each additional strategy). Only 7% of the hospitals surveyed implemented all six strategies, highlighting substantial opportunities for improvement.

Bottom line: Implementing multiple strategies may help reduce readmission in patients with heart failure.

Citation: Bradley EH, Curry L, Horwitz LI, et al. Hospital strategies associated with 30-day readmission rates for patients with heart failure. Circ Cardiovasc Qual Outcomes. 2013;6:444-450.

Clinical question: What steps can hospitals take to reduce readmission rates in patients with heart failure?

Background: Evidence about various hospital strategies to decrease readmissions in patients with heart failure is limited.

Study Design: Cross-sectional study using a web-based survey.

Setting: Survey of 599 hospitals participating in quality initiatives to reduce readmissions.

Synopsis: Readmission of patients with heart failure is common and costly. Hospitals with high readmissions can lose up to 3% of their Medicare reimbursements by 2015.

This study found six strategies associated with lower risk-standardized 30-day readmission rates.

1. Partnering with community physicians and physician groups (0.33%; P=0.017);
2. Partnering with local hospitals (0.34%; P=0.020);
3. Having nurses responsible for medication reconciliation (0.18%; P=0.002);
4. Arranging follow-up visit before discharge (0.19%; P=0.037);
5. Having a process in place to send all discharge summaries directly to the patient’s primary care physician (0.21%; P=0.004); and
6. Assigning staff to follow up on test results after the patient is discharged (0.26%; P=0.049).

Individually, the magnitude of the effects was modest, but implementing multiple strategies was more beneficial (0.34% additional benefit for each additional strategy). Only 7% of the hospitals surveyed implemented all six strategies, highlighting substantial opportunities for improvement.

Bottom line: Implementing multiple strategies may help reduce readmission in patients with heart failure.

Citation: Bradley EH, Curry L, Horwitz LI, et al. Hospital strategies associated with 30-day readmission rates for patients with heart failure. Circ Cardiovasc Qual Outcomes. 2013;6:444-450.

As we enter a new era of health-care and payment reform, we are all keenly aware of the need to limit unnecessary readmissions. We have been given tools and tips on how to most efficiently and effectively transition patients from the hospital setting to the outpatient world in order to limit the chances that they will “bounce back” to us, resulting in penalties to our hospital or health-care system. Tools such as Project BOOST and others help us to educate patients, transfer information effectively, follow up on patients post-discharge, and reconcile medications safely across the continuum of care. But without a competent and committed provider of care to “catch” the patient on the other side, we might just be dropping the ball yet again.

It is imperative as we look to safely transition patients into the next level of care that we, as hospitalists, get outside the box and begin to engage the community of care providers outside our walls, and yes, even outside of our control. We have been down this road before with other quality initiatives, which at first glance appeared to be outside our sphere of influence—such projects as post-operative antibiotic use and hospitalwide DVT prophylaxis. Given the right hospitalist leader, with the right set of leadership tools, these quality-improvement (QI) projects have been widely successful in many environments.

I would suggest that the issue of safe transitions for our patients is no different, and maybe more important, to the health and safety of our patients.

Solving the readmission problem on a local level requires an analytical approach, much like a “root-cause analysis.” We need to begin to examine the sources of our readmitted patients, as well as the routes of our discharged patients, and we need to ask ourselves if we are continuing to feed patients into the vicious circle that results in readmissions. Are there post-acute-care facilities in your area that are responsible for more than their fair share of patients returning to your service? If so, why do we continue to discharge patients to their care? Is it because we are pressured to lower length of stay, and any bed at the next level of care is better than another day in the acute-care hospital? At some point, this reasoning fails, and given the penalties coming soon, it may be better to begin to more discriminately discharge patients to facilities that provide higher-quality care and assist us in our goals to reduce unnecessary readmissions. Leading the charge in this endeavor also necessitates that we begin to engage those providers on the other side, making them aware of the quality data related to their facility and providing education and resources to assist them in improving their performance.

Realities of the Care Continuum

Several options pertaining to hospitalist groups are available. The first, already a large movement in our current marketplace, is to extend the current hospitalist group across the chasm and begin to deliver care in those post-acute facilities. Long-term acute care (LTAC) and skilled nursing facilities (SNF) are prime examples of this movement; the obvious advantage lies in the effective control of quality and efficient transfer of information that a single group can achieve when it extends to these facilities. Obviously, manpower issues and financial support are drawbacks in a model such as this.

More realistically, a group might consider taking a less aggressive approach to this problem. Educating care providers and assisting these facilities with QI projects would require fewer resources and might provide a higher return on investment (ROI) for your group and hospital. Engaging these physicians, nonphysician providers, and facility administrators is key to our ability to impact this problem. Demanding quality care for our discharged patients in terms of timeliness of follow-up, adherence to care paths, and responsiveness to changes in condition should be non-negotiable and factored into our development of referral patterns.

As our population of patients continues to be more acutely ill, and the level of care provided at post-acute care facilities continues to rise, our current reality is that a majority of these patients, at any given time, meet hospital admissions criteria. Preventing readmissions requires that post-acute care providers have mechanisms in place to stop the “knee-jerk” transfer to the emergency department, rather than attempt to evaluate and treat the patient in the facility. Interact II (http://interact2.net/index.aspx) is a resource that provides tools for post-acute-care facilities to use in monitoring their own internal data around acute-care transfers. It also provides tracking tools, communication strategies, advanced-care-planning tools, and clinical pathways for limiting the number of acute-care transfers. The reality is, once these patients end up in the emergency department, they are likely to be referred to us for consideration of readmission. The best way to stop this is to stop the transfer before it happens.

Demand Better

We, as hospitalists, need to begin to leverage our own “buying power” as it relates to the care of our patients post-discharge. We can start by educating and assisting care providers on a local level to improve compliance with well-known standards of care that prevent unnecessary readmissions. We need to be prepared to wield our collective weight as a specialty to demand from our post-acute care colleagues what has been demanded of us over the last several years: quality and value. Make no mistake—hospitalists have to get outside the box.

Dr. Harrington is an SHM board member and chief medical officer of Locum Leaders in Alpharetta, Ga.

As we enter a new era of health-care and payment reform, we are all keenly aware of the need to limit unnecessary readmissions. We have been given tools and tips on how to most efficiently and effectively transition patients from the hospital setting to the outpatient world in order to limit the chances that they will “bounce back” to us, resulting in penalties to our hospital or health-care system. Tools such as Project BOOST and others help us to educate patients, transfer information effectively, follow up on patients post-discharge, and reconcile medications safely across the continuum of care. But without a competent and committed provider of care to “catch” the patient on the other side, we might just be dropping the ball yet again.

It is imperative as we look to safely transition patients into the next level of care that we, as hospitalists, get outside the box and begin to engage the community of care providers outside our walls, and yes, even outside of our control. We have been down this road before with other quality initiatives, which at first glance appeared to be outside our sphere of influence—such projects as post-operative antibiotic use and hospitalwide DVT prophylaxis. Given the right hospitalist leader, with the right set of leadership tools, these quality-improvement (QI) projects have been widely successful in many environments.

I would suggest that the issue of safe transitions for our patients is no different, and maybe more important, to the health and safety of our patients.

Solving the readmission problem on a local level requires an analytical approach, much like a “root-cause analysis.” We need to begin to examine the sources of our readmitted patients, as well as the routes of our discharged patients, and we need to ask ourselves if we are continuing to feed patients into the vicious circle that results in readmissions. Are there post-acute-care facilities in your area that are responsible for more than their fair share of patients returning to your service? If so, why do we continue to discharge patients to their care? Is it because we are pressured to lower length of stay, and any bed at the next level of care is better than another day in the acute-care hospital? At some point, this reasoning fails, and given the penalties coming soon, it may be better to begin to more discriminately discharge patients to facilities that provide higher-quality care and assist us in our goals to reduce unnecessary readmissions. Leading the charge in this endeavor also necessitates that we begin to engage those providers on the other side, making them aware of the quality data related to their facility and providing education and resources to assist them in improving their performance.

Realities of the Care Continuum

Several options pertaining to hospitalist groups are available. The first, already a large movement in our current marketplace, is to extend the current hospitalist group across the chasm and begin to deliver care in those post-acute facilities. Long-term acute care (LTAC) and skilled nursing facilities (SNF) are prime examples of this movement; the obvious advantage lies in the effective control of quality and efficient transfer of information that a single group can achieve when it extends to these facilities. Obviously, manpower issues and financial support are drawbacks in a model such as this.

More realistically, a group might consider taking a less aggressive approach to this problem. Educating care providers and assisting these facilities with QI projects would require fewer resources and might provide a higher return on investment (ROI) for your group and hospital. Engaging these physicians, nonphysician providers, and facility administrators is key to our ability to impact this problem. Demanding quality care for our discharged patients in terms of timeliness of follow-up, adherence to care paths, and responsiveness to changes in condition should be non-negotiable and factored into our development of referral patterns.

As our population of patients continues to be more acutely ill, and the level of care provided at post-acute care facilities continues to rise, our current reality is that a majority of these patients, at any given time, meet hospital admissions criteria. Preventing readmissions requires that post-acute care providers have mechanisms in place to stop the “knee-jerk” transfer to the emergency department, rather than attempt to evaluate and treat the patient in the facility. Interact II (http://interact2.net/index.aspx) is a resource that provides tools for post-acute-care facilities to use in monitoring their own internal data around acute-care transfers. It also provides tracking tools, communication strategies, advanced-care-planning tools, and clinical pathways for limiting the number of acute-care transfers. The reality is, once these patients end up in the emergency department, they are likely to be referred to us for consideration of readmission. The best way to stop this is to stop the transfer before it happens.

Demand Better

We, as hospitalists, need to begin to leverage our own “buying power” as it relates to the care of our patients post-discharge. We can start by educating and assisting care providers on a local level to improve compliance with well-known standards of care that prevent unnecessary readmissions. We need to be prepared to wield our collective weight as a specialty to demand from our post-acute care colleagues what has been demanded of us over the last several years: quality and value. Make no mistake—hospitalists have to get outside the box.

Dr. Harrington is an SHM board member and chief medical officer of Locum Leaders in Alpharetta, Ga.

As we enter a new era of health-care and payment reform, we are all keenly aware of the need to limit unnecessary readmissions. We have been given tools and tips on how to most efficiently and effectively transition patients from the hospital setting to the outpatient world in order to limit the chances that they will “bounce back” to us, resulting in penalties to our hospital or health-care system. Tools such as Project BOOST and others help us to educate patients, transfer information effectively, follow up on patients post-discharge, and reconcile medications safely across the continuum of care. But without a competent and committed provider of care to “catch” the patient on the other side, we might just be dropping the ball yet again.

It is imperative as we look to safely transition patients into the next level of care that we, as hospitalists, get outside the box and begin to engage the community of care providers outside our walls, and yes, even outside of our control. We have been down this road before with other quality initiatives, which at first glance appeared to be outside our sphere of influence—such projects as post-operative antibiotic use and hospitalwide DVT prophylaxis. Given the right hospitalist leader, with the right set of leadership tools, these quality-improvement (QI) projects have been widely successful in many environments.

I would suggest that the issue of safe transitions for our patients is no different, and maybe more important, to the health and safety of our patients.

Solving the readmission problem on a local level requires an analytical approach, much like a “root-cause analysis.” We need to begin to examine the sources of our readmitted patients, as well as the routes of our discharged patients, and we need to ask ourselves if we are continuing to feed patients into the vicious circle that results in readmissions. Are there post-acute-care facilities in your area that are responsible for more than their fair share of patients returning to your service? If so, why do we continue to discharge patients to their care? Is it because we are pressured to lower length of stay, and any bed at the next level of care is better than another day in the acute-care hospital? At some point, this reasoning fails, and given the penalties coming soon, it may be better to begin to more discriminately discharge patients to facilities that provide higher-quality care and assist us in our goals to reduce unnecessary readmissions. Leading the charge in this endeavor also necessitates that we begin to engage those providers on the other side, making them aware of the quality data related to their facility and providing education and resources to assist them in improving their performance.

Realities of the Care Continuum

Several options pertaining to hospitalist groups are available. The first, already a large movement in our current marketplace, is to extend the current hospitalist group across the chasm and begin to deliver care in those post-acute facilities. Long-term acute care (LTAC) and skilled nursing facilities (SNF) are prime examples of this movement; the obvious advantage lies in the effective control of quality and efficient transfer of information that a single group can achieve when it extends to these facilities. Obviously, manpower issues and financial support are drawbacks in a model such as this.

More realistically, a group might consider taking a less aggressive approach to this problem. Educating care providers and assisting these facilities with QI projects would require fewer resources and might provide a higher return on investment (ROI) for your group and hospital. Engaging these physicians, nonphysician providers, and facility administrators is key to our ability to impact this problem. Demanding quality care for our discharged patients in terms of timeliness of follow-up, adherence to care paths, and responsiveness to changes in condition should be non-negotiable and factored into our development of referral patterns.

As our population of patients continues to be more acutely ill, and the level of care provided at post-acute care facilities continues to rise, our current reality is that a majority of these patients, at any given time, meet hospital admissions criteria. Preventing readmissions requires that post-acute care providers have mechanisms in place to stop the “knee-jerk” transfer to the emergency department, rather than attempt to evaluate and treat the patient in the facility. Interact II (http://interact2.net/index.aspx) is a resource that provides tools for post-acute-care facilities to use in monitoring their own internal data around acute-care transfers. It also provides tracking tools, communication strategies, advanced-care-planning tools, and clinical pathways for limiting the number of acute-care transfers. The reality is, once these patients end up in the emergency department, they are likely to be referred to us for consideration of readmission. The best way to stop this is to stop the transfer before it happens.

Demand Better

We, as hospitalists, need to begin to leverage our own “buying power” as it relates to the care of our patients post-discharge. We can start by educating and assisting care providers on a local level to improve compliance with well-known standards of care that prevent unnecessary readmissions. We need to be prepared to wield our collective weight as a specialty to demand from our post-acute care colleagues what has been demanded of us over the last several years: quality and value. Make no mistake—hospitalists have to get outside the box.

Dr. Harrington is an SHM board member and chief medical officer of Locum Leaders in Alpharetta, Ga.

Initial research on outcomes following Project BOOST (Better Outcomes for Older Adults through Safe Transitions) implementation shows modest improvement in rehospitalization rates. Moreover, some experts suggest the real problem might lie in using 30-day hospital readmissions, now a target for Medicare reimbursement penalties, as the quality metric for care transitions out of the hospital.

Study data showed a 2% absolute reduction in all-patient, 30-day readmission rates at 11 of the original 30 BOOST sites (to 12.7% from 14.7%), according to an article in the August issue of the Journal of Hospital Medicine.¹

“Everybody has talked about readmissions as the quality target, but really it should be about improving transitions of care for the patient going home,” says Ashish Jha, MD, MPH, of the Harvard School of Public Health, Health Policy and Management. “If we’re going to use readmissions as our quality measure, maybe we’re set up to fail. Can we do care transitions better? Yes, we can. Can we do better quality measures? Yes. My take-home message is that we should get clearer on what we are trying to achieve.”

Project BOOST (www.hospitalmedicine.org/boost) has been a major quality initiative for SHM since 2008 and one of several national programs aimed at helping hospitals improve care-transitions processes and patient outcomes. BOOST offers participating sites an online toolkit of strategies and interventions, along with the support of an expert mentor.

“Participation in Project BOOST appeared to be associated with a decrease in readmission rates,” the authors conclude. But two accompanying editorials in the journal expressed disappointment with a lack of “robustness” to these results and lack of participation by BOOST sites.^2,3 The editorials also acknowledge the challenges of multisite, voluntary research on a topic that, so far, has largely resisted validated, generalizable research outcomes demonstrating what really works in preventing readmissions.

“I think people want a silver bullet on this issue,” says lead author Luke Hansen, MD, MHS, of the division of hospital medicine at Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine in Chicago. “They want to be able to define an intervention to take care of all of the avoidable fraction of rehospitalizations. But I don’t think that’s possible. The disappointment may come from the fact that this is a more complicated issue than we thought.”

Dr. Hansen says data reporting was voluntary and uncompensated, and the BOOST research team is trying to facilitate better reporting from subsequent cohorts. He says one of BOOST’s unique aspects—tailoring interventions to local circumstances—could be a drawback to outcomes research. “We have to incorporate the diversity of experience into our research methods and our expectations,” he says.

Hospitalist Bradley Flansbaum, DO, MPH, FACP, SFHM, of Lenox Hill Hospital in New York City says BOOST reinforces many of things hospitalists should be doing to provide optimal discharges and transitions

.

“Like appropriate teaching and patient education, medication reconciliation, and setting up follow-up appointments,” says Dr. Flansbaum, a member of SHM’s Public Policy Committee and regular contributor to SHM’s Practice Management blog. “But if there was one thing I’d like hospitalists to take home from this research, it’s the cognitive dissonance—the challenge of matching the evidence with what the regulatory bodies expect from us and knowing that the evidence is falling short.

“As much as we might be held accountable for outcomes like readmissions, the reality is that we can’t control them. What we’re learning is that this is really hard to do.”

Amy Boutwell, MD, MPP, a hospitalist in Newton, Mass., and founder of Collaborative Healthcare Strategies, agrees transitions of care are difficult. However, she also thinks hospitals and hospitalists cannot wait for conclusive research that proves what works in preventing readmissions.

“The BOOST results reflect my own experience working with more than a hundred STAAR [State Action on Avoidable Readmissions] hospitals. We haven’t yet been able to sufficiently extract the data about readmissions from the field—and we need to figure out how to do that,” she says. “But when you look at the issue from a patient’s perspective and their desire for a safe transition, why would you not do the things recommended by Project BOOST and similar initiatives?”

Primary-care physicians (PCPs) need to know about major changes in a discharged patient’s plan of care in a timely manner, along with any results from pending lab tests, Dr. Boutwell explains. She emphasizes that patients and their caregivers need to be given clear discharge instructions when they leave the hospital.

“We have an obligation to do what we know to be best practices and standards of care. The BOOST toolkit of recommendations is very comprehensive and gives hospitals a lot of options to improve their internal processes,” Dr. Boutwell says. “It’s hard to argue against any of them, even if it’s hard to draw clear links between them and readmissions rates. These are the self-evident, basic tasks that I would want done for myself or my child or my parent, if we were in the hospital.”

Larry Beresford is a freelance writer in San Francisco.

References

1. Hansen L, Greenwald J, Budnitz T, et al. Project BOOST: Effectiveness of a multihospital effort to reduce rehospitalization. J Hosp Med. 2013;8(8):421-427. doi: 10.1002/jhm.2054. Epub 2013 Jul 22.
2. Auerbach A, Fang M, Glasheen J, Brotman D, O’Leary KJ, Horwitz LJ. BOOST: Evidence needing a lift. J Hosp Med. 2013;8(8):468-469. doi: 10.1002/jhm.2065. Epub 2013 Jul 22.
3. Jha A. BOOST and readmissions: Thinking beyond the walls of the hospital. J Hosp Med. 2013;8(8):470-471. doi: 10.1002/jhm.2069. Epub 2013 Jul 22.

Initial research on outcomes following Project BOOST (Better Outcomes for Older Adults through Safe Transitions) implementation shows modest improvement in rehospitalization rates. Moreover, some experts suggest the real problem might lie in using 30-day hospital readmissions, now a target for Medicare reimbursement penalties, as the quality metric for care transitions out of the hospital.

Study data showed a 2% absolute reduction in all-patient, 30-day readmission rates at 11 of the original 30 BOOST sites (to 12.7% from 14.7%), according to an article in the August issue of the Journal of Hospital Medicine.¹

“Everybody has talked about readmissions as the quality target, but really it should be about improving transitions of care for the patient going home,” says Ashish Jha, MD, MPH, of the Harvard School of Public Health, Health Policy and Management. “If we’re going to use readmissions as our quality measure, maybe we’re set up to fail. Can we do care transitions better? Yes, we can. Can we do better quality measures? Yes. My take-home message is that we should get clearer on what we are trying to achieve.”

Project BOOST (www.hospitalmedicine.org/boost) has been a major quality initiative for SHM since 2008 and one of several national programs aimed at helping hospitals improve care-transitions processes and patient outcomes. BOOST offers participating sites an online toolkit of strategies and interventions, along with the support of an expert mentor.

“Participation in Project BOOST appeared to be associated with a decrease in readmission rates,” the authors conclude. But two accompanying editorials in the journal expressed disappointment with a lack of “robustness” to these results and lack of participation by BOOST sites.^2,3 The editorials also acknowledge the challenges of multisite, voluntary research on a topic that, so far, has largely resisted validated, generalizable research outcomes demonstrating what really works in preventing readmissions.

“I think people want a silver bullet on this issue,” says lead author Luke Hansen, MD, MHS, of the division of hospital medicine at Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine in Chicago. “They want to be able to define an intervention to take care of all of the avoidable fraction of rehospitalizations. But I don’t think that’s possible. The disappointment may come from the fact that this is a more complicated issue than we thought.”

Dr. Hansen says data reporting was voluntary and uncompensated, and the BOOST research team is trying to facilitate better reporting from subsequent cohorts. He says one of BOOST’s unique aspects—tailoring interventions to local circumstances—could be a drawback to outcomes research. “We have to incorporate the diversity of experience into our research methods and our expectations,” he says.

Hospitalist Bradley Flansbaum, DO, MPH, FACP, SFHM, of Lenox Hill Hospital in New York City says BOOST reinforces many of things hospitalists should be doing to provide optimal discharges and transitions

.

“Like appropriate teaching and patient education, medication reconciliation, and setting up follow-up appointments,” says Dr. Flansbaum, a member of SHM’s Public Policy Committee and regular contributor to SHM’s Practice Management blog. “But if there was one thing I’d like hospitalists to take home from this research, it’s the cognitive dissonance—the challenge of matching the evidence with what the regulatory bodies expect from us and knowing that the evidence is falling short.

“As much as we might be held accountable for outcomes like readmissions, the reality is that we can’t control them. What we’re learning is that this is really hard to do.”

Amy Boutwell, MD, MPP, a hospitalist in Newton, Mass., and founder of Collaborative Healthcare Strategies, agrees transitions of care are difficult. However, she also thinks hospitals and hospitalists cannot wait for conclusive research that proves what works in preventing readmissions.

“The BOOST results reflect my own experience working with more than a hundred STAAR [State Action on Avoidable Readmissions] hospitals. We haven’t yet been able to sufficiently extract the data about readmissions from the field—and we need to figure out how to do that,” she says. “But when you look at the issue from a patient’s perspective and their desire for a safe transition, why would you not do the things recommended by Project BOOST and similar initiatives?”

Primary-care physicians (PCPs) need to know about major changes in a discharged patient’s plan of care in a timely manner, along with any results from pending lab tests, Dr. Boutwell explains. She emphasizes that patients and their caregivers need to be given clear discharge instructions when they leave the hospital.

“We have an obligation to do what we know to be best practices and standards of care. The BOOST toolkit of recommendations is very comprehensive and gives hospitals a lot of options to improve their internal processes,” Dr. Boutwell says. “It’s hard to argue against any of them, even if it’s hard to draw clear links between them and readmissions rates. These are the self-evident, basic tasks that I would want done for myself or my child or my parent, if we were in the hospital.”

Larry Beresford is a freelance writer in San Francisco.

References

1. Hansen L, Greenwald J, Budnitz T, et al. Project BOOST: Effectiveness of a multihospital effort to reduce rehospitalization. J Hosp Med. 2013;8(8):421-427. doi: 10.1002/jhm.2054. Epub 2013 Jul 22.
2. Auerbach A, Fang M, Glasheen J, Brotman D, O’Leary KJ, Horwitz LJ. BOOST: Evidence needing a lift. J Hosp Med. 2013;8(8):468-469. doi: 10.1002/jhm.2065. Epub 2013 Jul 22.
3. Jha A. BOOST and readmissions: Thinking beyond the walls of the hospital. J Hosp Med. 2013;8(8):470-471. doi: 10.1002/jhm.2069. Epub 2013 Jul 22.

Initial research on outcomes following Project BOOST (Better Outcomes for Older Adults through Safe Transitions) implementation shows modest improvement in rehospitalization rates. Moreover, some experts suggest the real problem might lie in using 30-day hospital readmissions, now a target for Medicare reimbursement penalties, as the quality metric for care transitions out of the hospital.

Study data showed a 2% absolute reduction in all-patient, 30-day readmission rates at 11 of the original 30 BOOST sites (to 12.7% from 14.7%), according to an article in the August issue of the Journal of Hospital Medicine.¹

“Everybody has talked about readmissions as the quality target, but really it should be about improving transitions of care for the patient going home,” says Ashish Jha, MD, MPH, of the Harvard School of Public Health, Health Policy and Management. “If we’re going to use readmissions as our quality measure, maybe we’re set up to fail. Can we do care transitions better? Yes, we can. Can we do better quality measures? Yes. My take-home message is that we should get clearer on what we are trying to achieve.”

Project BOOST (www.hospitalmedicine.org/boost) has been a major quality initiative for SHM since 2008 and one of several national programs aimed at helping hospitals improve care-transitions processes and patient outcomes. BOOST offers participating sites an online toolkit of strategies and interventions, along with the support of an expert mentor.

“Participation in Project BOOST appeared to be associated with a decrease in readmission rates,” the authors conclude. But two accompanying editorials in the journal expressed disappointment with a lack of “robustness” to these results and lack of participation by BOOST sites.^2,3 The editorials also acknowledge the challenges of multisite, voluntary research on a topic that, so far, has largely resisted validated, generalizable research outcomes demonstrating what really works in preventing readmissions.

“I think people want a silver bullet on this issue,” says lead author Luke Hansen, MD, MHS, of the division of hospital medicine at Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine in Chicago. “They want to be able to define an intervention to take care of all of the avoidable fraction of rehospitalizations. But I don’t think that’s possible. The disappointment may come from the fact that this is a more complicated issue than we thought.”

Dr. Hansen says data reporting was voluntary and uncompensated, and the BOOST research team is trying to facilitate better reporting from subsequent cohorts. He says one of BOOST’s unique aspects—tailoring interventions to local circumstances—could be a drawback to outcomes research. “We have to incorporate the diversity of experience into our research methods and our expectations,” he says.

Hospitalist Bradley Flansbaum, DO, MPH, FACP, SFHM, of Lenox Hill Hospital in New York City says BOOST reinforces many of things hospitalists should be doing to provide optimal discharges and transitions

.

“Like appropriate teaching and patient education, medication reconciliation, and setting up follow-up appointments,” says Dr. Flansbaum, a member of SHM’s Public Policy Committee and regular contributor to SHM’s Practice Management blog. “But if there was one thing I’d like hospitalists to take home from this research, it’s the cognitive dissonance—the challenge of matching the evidence with what the regulatory bodies expect from us and knowing that the evidence is falling short.

“As much as we might be held accountable for outcomes like readmissions, the reality is that we can’t control them. What we’re learning is that this is really hard to do.”

Amy Boutwell, MD, MPP, a hospitalist in Newton, Mass., and founder of Collaborative Healthcare Strategies, agrees transitions of care are difficult. However, she also thinks hospitals and hospitalists cannot wait for conclusive research that proves what works in preventing readmissions.

“The BOOST results reflect my own experience working with more than a hundred STAAR [State Action on Avoidable Readmissions] hospitals. We haven’t yet been able to sufficiently extract the data about readmissions from the field—and we need to figure out how to do that,” she says. “But when you look at the issue from a patient’s perspective and their desire for a safe transition, why would you not do the things recommended by Project BOOST and similar initiatives?”

Primary-care physicians (PCPs) need to know about major changes in a discharged patient’s plan of care in a timely manner, along with any results from pending lab tests, Dr. Boutwell explains. She emphasizes that patients and their caregivers need to be given clear discharge instructions when they leave the hospital.

“We have an obligation to do what we know to be best practices and standards of care. The BOOST toolkit of recommendations is very comprehensive and gives hospitals a lot of options to improve their internal processes,” Dr. Boutwell says. “It’s hard to argue against any of them, even if it’s hard to draw clear links between them and readmissions rates. These are the self-evident, basic tasks that I would want done for myself or my child or my parent, if we were in the hospital.”

Larry Beresford is a freelance writer in San Francisco.

References

1. Hansen L, Greenwald J, Budnitz T, et al. Project BOOST: Effectiveness of a multihospital effort to reduce rehospitalization. J Hosp Med. 2013;8(8):421-427. doi: 10.1002/jhm.2054. Epub 2013 Jul 22.
2. Auerbach A, Fang M, Glasheen J, Brotman D, O’Leary KJ, Horwitz LJ. BOOST: Evidence needing a lift. J Hosp Med. 2013;8(8):468-469. doi: 10.1002/jhm.2065. Epub 2013 Jul 22.
3. Jha A. BOOST and readmissions: Thinking beyond the walls of the hospital. J Hosp Med. 2013;8(8):470-471. doi: 10.1002/jhm.2069. Epub 2013 Jul 22.

Click here to listen to our interview with Dr. Hansen

Click here to listen to our interview with Dr. Hansen

Click here to listen to our interview with Dr. Hansen