Jacob Imber, MD

Clinical question: Will a multifaceted quality improvement initiative targeted at hospitalists reduce inpatient laboratory costs?

Background: Routine inpatient laboratory testing is a well-recognized area of healthcare waste and was highlighted by the American Board of Internal Medicine Choosing Wisely campaign as a practice that should be questioned. Multifaceted quality improvement interventions, especially those that incorporate interventions beyond education, are more successful at achieving sustainable change.

Study design: Retrospective, controlled, interrupted time series study.

Setting: University of Utah, academic general internal medicine hospitalist service.

Synopsis: The intervention group, a teaching hospitalist service, received targeted education, cost feedback comparing individual provider performance, and divisional financial incentives. Additionally, a standardized rounding checklist was implemented and completed by rotating medical students. The control group included all non-hospitalist services. Approximately 20% of the 31,896 encounters measured in pre-intervention and post-intervention periods took place in the intervention group. Lab cost per day was reduced from $138 to $123 in the intervention group (P<0.001), while cost per day was non-significantly increased in the control group from $130 to $132 (P=0.37). Limitations of this study include the fact that the University of Utah already prioritizes high-value care and utilizes a local tool to provide individual cost and ordering feedback to providers as well as the financial incentives. Additionally, the use of medical students to implement the rounding checklist may not be feasible in many practice settings.

Bottom line: An approach of targeted education, direct provider feedback, consistent use of a rounding checklist, and financial incentives may decrease lab utilization.

Citation: Yarbrough PM, Kukhareva PV, Horton D, Edholm K, Kawamoto K. Multifaceted intervention including education, rounding checklist implementation, cost feedback, and financial incentives reduces inpatient laboratory costs [published online ahead of print February 4, 2016]. J Hosp Med. doi:10.1002/jhm.2552.

Short Take

aVL ST-Depression Differentiates Inferior Stemi from Pericarditis

This retrospective analysis showed that any aVL ST-depression helps to distinguish inferior myocardial infarctions from pericarditis.

Citation: Bischof JE, Worrall C, Thompson P, Marti D, Smith SW. ST depression in lead aVL differentiates inferior ST-elevation myocardial infarction from pericarditis. Am J Emerg Med. 2016;34(2):149-154.

Clinical question: Will a multifaceted quality improvement initiative targeted at hospitalists reduce inpatient laboratory costs?

Background: Routine inpatient laboratory testing is a well-recognized area of healthcare waste and was highlighted by the American Board of Internal Medicine Choosing Wisely campaign as a practice that should be questioned. Multifaceted quality improvement interventions, especially those that incorporate interventions beyond education, are more successful at achieving sustainable change.

Study design: Retrospective, controlled, interrupted time series study.

Setting: University of Utah, academic general internal medicine hospitalist service.

Synopsis: The intervention group, a teaching hospitalist service, received targeted education, cost feedback comparing individual provider performance, and divisional financial incentives. Additionally, a standardized rounding checklist was implemented and completed by rotating medical students. The control group included all non-hospitalist services. Approximately 20% of the 31,896 encounters measured in pre-intervention and post-intervention periods took place in the intervention group. Lab cost per day was reduced from $138 to $123 in the intervention group (P<0.001), while cost per day was non-significantly increased in the control group from $130 to $132 (P=0.37). Limitations of this study include the fact that the University of Utah already prioritizes high-value care and utilizes a local tool to provide individual cost and ordering feedback to providers as well as the financial incentives. Additionally, the use of medical students to implement the rounding checklist may not be feasible in many practice settings.

Bottom line: An approach of targeted education, direct provider feedback, consistent use of a rounding checklist, and financial incentives may decrease lab utilization.

Citation: Yarbrough PM, Kukhareva PV, Horton D, Edholm K, Kawamoto K. Multifaceted intervention including education, rounding checklist implementation, cost feedback, and financial incentives reduces inpatient laboratory costs [published online ahead of print February 4, 2016]. J Hosp Med. doi:10.1002/jhm.2552.

Short Take

aVL ST-Depression Differentiates Inferior Stemi from Pericarditis

This retrospective analysis showed that any aVL ST-depression helps to distinguish inferior myocardial infarctions from pericarditis.

Citation: Bischof JE, Worrall C, Thompson P, Marti D, Smith SW. ST depression in lead aVL differentiates inferior ST-elevation myocardial infarction from pericarditis. Am J Emerg Med. 2016;34(2):149-154.

Clinical question: Will a multifaceted quality improvement initiative targeted at hospitalists reduce inpatient laboratory costs?

Background: Routine inpatient laboratory testing is a well-recognized area of healthcare waste and was highlighted by the American Board of Internal Medicine Choosing Wisely campaign as a practice that should be questioned. Multifaceted quality improvement interventions, especially those that incorporate interventions beyond education, are more successful at achieving sustainable change.

Study design: Retrospective, controlled, interrupted time series study.

Setting: University of Utah, academic general internal medicine hospitalist service.

Synopsis: The intervention group, a teaching hospitalist service, received targeted education, cost feedback comparing individual provider performance, and divisional financial incentives. Additionally, a standardized rounding checklist was implemented and completed by rotating medical students. The control group included all non-hospitalist services. Approximately 20% of the 31,896 encounters measured in pre-intervention and post-intervention periods took place in the intervention group. Lab cost per day was reduced from $138 to $123 in the intervention group (P<0.001), while cost per day was non-significantly increased in the control group from $130 to $132 (P=0.37). Limitations of this study include the fact that the University of Utah already prioritizes high-value care and utilizes a local tool to provide individual cost and ordering feedback to providers as well as the financial incentives. Additionally, the use of medical students to implement the rounding checklist may not be feasible in many practice settings.

Bottom line: An approach of targeted education, direct provider feedback, consistent use of a rounding checklist, and financial incentives may decrease lab utilization.

Citation: Yarbrough PM, Kukhareva PV, Horton D, Edholm K, Kawamoto K. Multifaceted intervention including education, rounding checklist implementation, cost feedback, and financial incentives reduces inpatient laboratory costs [published online ahead of print February 4, 2016]. J Hosp Med. doi:10.1002/jhm.2552.

Short Take

aVL ST-Depression Differentiates Inferior Stemi from Pericarditis

This retrospective analysis showed that any aVL ST-depression helps to distinguish inferior myocardial infarctions from pericarditis.

Citation: Bischof JE, Worrall C, Thompson P, Marti D, Smith SW. ST depression in lead aVL differentiates inferior ST-elevation myocardial infarction from pericarditis. Am J Emerg Med. 2016;34(2):149-154.

Clinical question: Does discharge planning improve length of stay and reduce readmission rates compared to usual care?

Background: Discharge planning is accomplished to varying degrees for patients admitted to an acute-care hospital. Goals include improving the quality of care transitions as well as cost containment.

Study design: Meta-analysis.

Setting: Thirty studies that examined the effects of discharge planning.

Synopsis: In 12 studies focusing on older patients, discharge planning resulted in a reduction in hospital length of stay by 0.73 days (95% CI, -1.33 to -0.12). Readmission rates for this population were reduced, with approximately three fewer readmissions per 100 patients (relative risk, 0.87; 95% CI, 0.79–0.97). These results were not consistent for other populations, including surgical patients and patients admitted following a fall. No conclusions could be drawn on other outcomes, including patient and provider satisfaction, location of eventual discharge, and mortality. The effect of discharge planning on cost of care was uncertain based on the five trials reporting varied outcomes. Limitations include the varied descriptions of what constituted discharge planning and the lack of reporting on the role of communication in the process. Given the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services’ requirements for discharge planning, it is difficult to estimate the effect this study has on clinical practice.

Further study is needed to determine which aspects of discharge planning lead to desired clinical outcomes and the effects on overall cost of care.

Bottom line: Discharge planning in older patients with medical admissions appears to marginally reduce length of stay and readmission rates without a clear effect on cost of care.

Citation: Gonçalves-Bradley DC, Lannin NA, Clemson LM, Cameron ID, Shepperd S. Discharge planning from hospital. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2016;1:CD000313. doi:10.1002/14651858.CD000313.pub5.

Clinical question: Does discharge planning improve length of stay and reduce readmission rates compared to usual care?

Background: Discharge planning is accomplished to varying degrees for patients admitted to an acute-care hospital. Goals include improving the quality of care transitions as well as cost containment.

Study design: Meta-analysis.

Setting: Thirty studies that examined the effects of discharge planning.

Synopsis: In 12 studies focusing on older patients, discharge planning resulted in a reduction in hospital length of stay by 0.73 days (95% CI, -1.33 to -0.12). Readmission rates for this population were reduced, with approximately three fewer readmissions per 100 patients (relative risk, 0.87; 95% CI, 0.79–0.97). These results were not consistent for other populations, including surgical patients and patients admitted following a fall. No conclusions could be drawn on other outcomes, including patient and provider satisfaction, location of eventual discharge, and mortality. The effect of discharge planning on cost of care was uncertain based on the five trials reporting varied outcomes. Limitations include the varied descriptions of what constituted discharge planning and the lack of reporting on the role of communication in the process. Given the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services’ requirements for discharge planning, it is difficult to estimate the effect this study has on clinical practice.

Further study is needed to determine which aspects of discharge planning lead to desired clinical outcomes and the effects on overall cost of care.

Bottom line: Discharge planning in older patients with medical admissions appears to marginally reduce length of stay and readmission rates without a clear effect on cost of care.

Citation: Gonçalves-Bradley DC, Lannin NA, Clemson LM, Cameron ID, Shepperd S. Discharge planning from hospital. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2016;1:CD000313. doi:10.1002/14651858.CD000313.pub5.

Clinical question: Does discharge planning improve length of stay and reduce readmission rates compared to usual care?

Background: Discharge planning is accomplished to varying degrees for patients admitted to an acute-care hospital. Goals include improving the quality of care transitions as well as cost containment.

Study design: Meta-analysis.

Setting: Thirty studies that examined the effects of discharge planning.

Synopsis: In 12 studies focusing on older patients, discharge planning resulted in a reduction in hospital length of stay by 0.73 days (95% CI, -1.33 to -0.12). Readmission rates for this population were reduced, with approximately three fewer readmissions per 100 patients (relative risk, 0.87; 95% CI, 0.79–0.97). These results were not consistent for other populations, including surgical patients and patients admitted following a fall. No conclusions could be drawn on other outcomes, including patient and provider satisfaction, location of eventual discharge, and mortality. The effect of discharge planning on cost of care was uncertain based on the five trials reporting varied outcomes. Limitations include the varied descriptions of what constituted discharge planning and the lack of reporting on the role of communication in the process. Given the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services’ requirements for discharge planning, it is difficult to estimate the effect this study has on clinical practice.

Further study is needed to determine which aspects of discharge planning lead to desired clinical outcomes and the effects on overall cost of care.

Bottom line: Discharge planning in older patients with medical admissions appears to marginally reduce length of stay and readmission rates without a clear effect on cost of care.

Citation: Gonçalves-Bradley DC, Lannin NA, Clemson LM, Cameron ID, Shepperd S. Discharge planning from hospital. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2016;1:CD000313. doi:10.1002/14651858.CD000313.pub5.

Clinical question: Can a nurse-driven early ambulation program aimed at all hospitalized adults increase patient mobility and decrease length of stay?

Background: Many adults experience decline of functional abilities during their hospitalization. Interventions to increase early mobilization of patients in the ICU have been associated with decreased length of stay, decreased costs, and improved patient satisfaction. Previous studies of interventions in non-ICU patients have used specialized staff or have targeted select patient populations.

Study design: Before-after cohort study.

Setting: Patients admitted to two general medical units at a single large academic hospital.

Synopsis: The authors implemented a 12-month multidisciplinary quality improvement project in 3,352 patients, with the goal of mobilizing patients three times per day. Additional goals included consistently documenting daily mobility, setting daily goals to increase activity, and standardizing the description of mobility across disciplines. Ambulation, documentation, and goal setting were assigned to regular nursing staff and targeted at each of the patients admitted to these units during the study period. Highest level of mobility was documented using a locally derived simple eight-point ordinal scale. Daily documentation rate of mobility averaged 85% over the 12 months of the project. Comparing the four-month study period at the beginning of the project implementation to the four-month period after implementation, more patients ambulated (70% versus 43%), patients with improved mobility scores increased from 32% to 45%, and length of stay declined by 0.40 days. All of these differences were statistically significant. There was no increase in falls with injury.

Bottom line: A nurse-driven early mobility program aimed at all patients admitted to general medical services may improve mobility and decrease length of stay.

Citation: Hoyer EH, Friedman M, Lavezza A, et al. Promoting mobility and reducing length of stay in hospitalized general medicine patients: a quality-improvement project [published online ahead of print February 5, 2016]. J Hosp Med. doi:10.1002/jhm.2546.

Short Take

Prednisolone is Equivalent to NSAIDs in the Treatment of Acute Gout

In a multicenter, double-blind, randomized equivalence trial of 416 patients presenting to the emergency department with symptoms of acute gout, treatment with prednisolone was equivalent to indomethacin for pain treatment without any difference in adverse events.

Citation: Rainer TH, Cheng CH, Janssens HJEM, et al. Oral prednisolone in the treatment of acute gout: a pragmatic, multicenter, double-blind, randomized trial. Ann Intern Med. 2016;164(7):464-471. doi:10.7326/M14-2070.

Clinical question: Can a nurse-driven early ambulation program aimed at all hospitalized adults increase patient mobility and decrease length of stay?

Background: Many adults experience decline of functional abilities during their hospitalization. Interventions to increase early mobilization of patients in the ICU have been associated with decreased length of stay, decreased costs, and improved patient satisfaction. Previous studies of interventions in non-ICU patients have used specialized staff or have targeted select patient populations.

Study design: Before-after cohort study.

Setting: Patients admitted to two general medical units at a single large academic hospital.

Synopsis: The authors implemented a 12-month multidisciplinary quality improvement project in 3,352 patients, with the goal of mobilizing patients three times per day. Additional goals included consistently documenting daily mobility, setting daily goals to increase activity, and standardizing the description of mobility across disciplines. Ambulation, documentation, and goal setting were assigned to regular nursing staff and targeted at each of the patients admitted to these units during the study period. Highest level of mobility was documented using a locally derived simple eight-point ordinal scale. Daily documentation rate of mobility averaged 85% over the 12 months of the project. Comparing the four-month study period at the beginning of the project implementation to the four-month period after implementation, more patients ambulated (70% versus 43%), patients with improved mobility scores increased from 32% to 45%, and length of stay declined by 0.40 days. All of these differences were statistically significant. There was no increase in falls with injury.

Bottom line: A nurse-driven early mobility program aimed at all patients admitted to general medical services may improve mobility and decrease length of stay.

Citation: Hoyer EH, Friedman M, Lavezza A, et al. Promoting mobility and reducing length of stay in hospitalized general medicine patients: a quality-improvement project [published online ahead of print February 5, 2016]. J Hosp Med. doi:10.1002/jhm.2546.

Short Take

Prednisolone is Equivalent to NSAIDs in the Treatment of Acute Gout

In a multicenter, double-blind, randomized equivalence trial of 416 patients presenting to the emergency department with symptoms of acute gout, treatment with prednisolone was equivalent to indomethacin for pain treatment without any difference in adverse events.

Citation: Rainer TH, Cheng CH, Janssens HJEM, et al. Oral prednisolone in the treatment of acute gout: a pragmatic, multicenter, double-blind, randomized trial. Ann Intern Med. 2016;164(7):464-471. doi:10.7326/M14-2070.

Clinical question: Can a nurse-driven early ambulation program aimed at all hospitalized adults increase patient mobility and decrease length of stay?

Background: Many adults experience decline of functional abilities during their hospitalization. Interventions to increase early mobilization of patients in the ICU have been associated with decreased length of stay, decreased costs, and improved patient satisfaction. Previous studies of interventions in non-ICU patients have used specialized staff or have targeted select patient populations.

Study design: Before-after cohort study.

Setting: Patients admitted to two general medical units at a single large academic hospital.

Synopsis: The authors implemented a 12-month multidisciplinary quality improvement project in 3,352 patients, with the goal of mobilizing patients three times per day. Additional goals included consistently documenting daily mobility, setting daily goals to increase activity, and standardizing the description of mobility across disciplines. Ambulation, documentation, and goal setting were assigned to regular nursing staff and targeted at each of the patients admitted to these units during the study period. Highest level of mobility was documented using a locally derived simple eight-point ordinal scale. Daily documentation rate of mobility averaged 85% over the 12 months of the project. Comparing the four-month study period at the beginning of the project implementation to the four-month period after implementation, more patients ambulated (70% versus 43%), patients with improved mobility scores increased from 32% to 45%, and length of stay declined by 0.40 days. All of these differences were statistically significant. There was no increase in falls with injury.

Bottom line: A nurse-driven early mobility program aimed at all patients admitted to general medical services may improve mobility and decrease length of stay.

Citation: Hoyer EH, Friedman M, Lavezza A, et al. Promoting mobility and reducing length of stay in hospitalized general medicine patients: a quality-improvement project [published online ahead of print February 5, 2016]. J Hosp Med. doi:10.1002/jhm.2546.

Short Take

Prednisolone is Equivalent to NSAIDs in the Treatment of Acute Gout

In a multicenter, double-blind, randomized equivalence trial of 416 patients presenting to the emergency department with symptoms of acute gout, treatment with prednisolone was equivalent to indomethacin for pain treatment without any difference in adverse events.

Citation: Rainer TH, Cheng CH, Janssens HJEM, et al. Oral prednisolone in the treatment of acute gout: a pragmatic, multicenter, double-blind, randomized trial. Ann Intern Med. 2016;164(7):464-471. doi:10.7326/M14-2070.

Clinical question: Given advances in the understanding and treatment of sepsis, can sepsis be better defined?

Background: Definitions of sepsis and septic shock were last revised in 2001. The current definitions are based on a constellation of clinical signs and symptoms in a patient with suspected infection. Recent studies suggest that the definitions have low sensitivity and specificity, and they do not correlate well with patient outcomes.

Study design: Consensus guidelines.

Setting: Task force of 19 critical care, infectious disease, surgical, and pulmonary specialists convened in 2014 by the European Society of Intensive Care Medicine and the Society of Critical Care Medicine.

Synopsis: The task force recommended that sepsis be defined as life-threatening organ dysfunction caused by a dysregulated host response to infection and that it be identified by a change of more than one point in the Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) score. This score incorporates the Glasgow Coma Scale, mean arterial blood pressure (MAP), PaO2/FiO2, platelet count, creatinine, and bilirubin. Septic shock is defined as a subset of sepsis with profound circulatory, cellular, and metabolic abnormalities, and it’s identified by serum lactate level >2 mmol/L and vasopressor requirement to maintain a MAP of ≥65 mm Hg in the absence of hypovolemia. These new definitions have higher sensitivity and specificity and can predict mortality more accurately. Patients with these definitions of sepsis and septic shock have in-hospital mortality >10% and >40%, respectively. The presence of two or more quick SOFA (qSOFA) elements (altered mentation, systolic blood pressure ≤100 mm Hg, and respiratory rate ≥22/min) identifies adult patients with suspected infection who need more extensive laboratory testing to exclude sepsis.

Bottom line: Defining sepsis now requires more laboratory testing but provides more diagnostic consistency and more accurately predicts outcomes.

Citation: Singer M, Deutschman CS, Seymour CW, et al. The Third International Consensus definitions for sepsis and septic shock (sepsis-3). JAMA. 2016;315(8):801-810. doi:10.1001/jama.2016.0287.

Clinical question: Given advances in the understanding and treatment of sepsis, can sepsis be better defined?

Background: Definitions of sepsis and septic shock were last revised in 2001. The current definitions are based on a constellation of clinical signs and symptoms in a patient with suspected infection. Recent studies suggest that the definitions have low sensitivity and specificity, and they do not correlate well with patient outcomes.

Study design: Consensus guidelines.

Setting: Task force of 19 critical care, infectious disease, surgical, and pulmonary specialists convened in 2014 by the European Society of Intensive Care Medicine and the Society of Critical Care Medicine.

Synopsis: The task force recommended that sepsis be defined as life-threatening organ dysfunction caused by a dysregulated host response to infection and that it be identified by a change of more than one point in the Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) score. This score incorporates the Glasgow Coma Scale, mean arterial blood pressure (MAP), PaO2/FiO2, platelet count, creatinine, and bilirubin. Septic shock is defined as a subset of sepsis with profound circulatory, cellular, and metabolic abnormalities, and it’s identified by serum lactate level >2 mmol/L and vasopressor requirement to maintain a MAP of ≥65 mm Hg in the absence of hypovolemia. These new definitions have higher sensitivity and specificity and can predict mortality more accurately. Patients with these definitions of sepsis and septic shock have in-hospital mortality >10% and >40%, respectively. The presence of two or more quick SOFA (qSOFA) elements (altered mentation, systolic blood pressure ≤100 mm Hg, and respiratory rate ≥22/min) identifies adult patients with suspected infection who need more extensive laboratory testing to exclude sepsis.

Bottom line: Defining sepsis now requires more laboratory testing but provides more diagnostic consistency and more accurately predicts outcomes.

Citation: Singer M, Deutschman CS, Seymour CW, et al. The Third International Consensus definitions for sepsis and septic shock (sepsis-3). JAMA. 2016;315(8):801-810. doi:10.1001/jama.2016.0287.

Clinical question: Given advances in the understanding and treatment of sepsis, can sepsis be better defined?

Background: Definitions of sepsis and septic shock were last revised in 2001. The current definitions are based on a constellation of clinical signs and symptoms in a patient with suspected infection. Recent studies suggest that the definitions have low sensitivity and specificity, and they do not correlate well with patient outcomes.

Study design: Consensus guidelines.

Setting: Task force of 19 critical care, infectious disease, surgical, and pulmonary specialists convened in 2014 by the European Society of Intensive Care Medicine and the Society of Critical Care Medicine.

Synopsis: The task force recommended that sepsis be defined as life-threatening organ dysfunction caused by a dysregulated host response to infection and that it be identified by a change of more than one point in the Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) score. This score incorporates the Glasgow Coma Scale, mean arterial blood pressure (MAP), PaO2/FiO2, platelet count, creatinine, and bilirubin. Septic shock is defined as a subset of sepsis with profound circulatory, cellular, and metabolic abnormalities, and it’s identified by serum lactate level >2 mmol/L and vasopressor requirement to maintain a MAP of ≥65 mm Hg in the absence of hypovolemia. These new definitions have higher sensitivity and specificity and can predict mortality more accurately. Patients with these definitions of sepsis and septic shock have in-hospital mortality >10% and >40%, respectively. The presence of two or more quick SOFA (qSOFA) elements (altered mentation, systolic blood pressure ≤100 mm Hg, and respiratory rate ≥22/min) identifies adult patients with suspected infection who need more extensive laboratory testing to exclude sepsis.

Bottom line: Defining sepsis now requires more laboratory testing but provides more diagnostic consistency and more accurately predicts outcomes.

Citation: Singer M, Deutschman CS, Seymour CW, et al. The Third International Consensus definitions for sepsis and septic shock (sepsis-3). JAMA. 2016;315(8):801-810. doi:10.1001/jama.2016.0287.