Dataset Information

Higher Quality and Lower Cost from Improving Hospital Discharge Decision Making.

ABSTRACT: This paper reports research on improving decisions about hospital discharges - decisions that are now made by physicians based on mainly subjective evaluations of patients' discharge status. We report an experiment on uptake of our clinical decision support software (CDSS) which presents physicians with evidence-based discharge criteria that can be effectively utilized at the point of care where the discharge decision is made. One experimental treatment we report prompts physician attentiveness to the CDSS by replacing the default option of universal "opt in" to patient discharge with the alternative default option of "opt out" from the CDSS recommendations to discharge or not to discharge the patient on each day of hospital stay. We also report results from experimental treatments that implement the CDSS under varying conditions of time pressure on the subjects. The experiment was conducted using resident physicians and fourth-year medical students at a university medical school as subjects.

SUBMITTER: Cox JC

PROVIDER: S-EPMC5319446 | biostudies-literature | 2016 Nov

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Higher Quality and Lower Cost from Improving Hospital Discharge Decision Making.

Cox James C JC Sadiraj Vjollca V Schnier Kurt E KE Sweeney John F JF

Journal of economic behavior & organization 20150403 B

This paper reports research on improving decisions about hospital discharges - decisions that are now made by physicians based on mainly subjective evaluations of patients' discharge status. We report an experiment on uptake of our clinical decision support software (CDSS) which presents physicians with evidence-based discharge criteria that can be effectively utilized at the point of care where the discharge decision is made. One experimental treatment we report prompts physician attentiveness ...[more]

PMID: 28239219

Similar Datasets

Project description:Value-based decision-making involves trading off the cost associated with an action against its expected reward. Research has shown that both physical and mental effort constitute such subjective costs, biasing choices away from effortful actions, and discounting the value of obtained rewards. Facing conflicts between competing action alternatives is considered aversive, as recruiting cognitive control to overcome conflict is effortful. Moreover, engaging control to proactively suppress irrelevant information that could conflict with task-relevant information would presumably also be cognitively costly. Yet, it remains unclear whether the cognitive control demands involved in preventing and resolving conflict also constitute costs in value-based decisions. The present study investigated this question by embedding irrelevant distractors (flanker arrows) within a reversal-learning task, with intermixed free and instructed trials. Results showed that participants learned to adapt their free choices to maximize rewards, but were nevertheless biased to follow the suggestions of irrelevant distractors. Thus, the perceived cost of investing cognitive control to suppress an external suggestion could sometimes trump internal value representations. By adapting computational models of reinforcement learning, we assessed the influence of conflict at both the decision and learning stages. Modelling the decision showed that free choices were more biased when participants were less sure about which action was more rewarding. This supports the hypothesis that the costs linked to conflict management were traded off against expected rewards. During the learning phase, we found that learning rates were reduced in instructed, relative to free, choices. Learning rates were further reduced by conflict between an instruction and subjective action values, whereas learning was not robustly influenced by conflict between one's actions and external distractors. Our results show that the subjective cognitive control costs linked to conflict factor into value-based decision-making, and highlight that different types of conflict may have different effects on learning about action outcomes.

Project description:Quality of documentation is harder to quantify and incentivise, but it has a significant impact on patient care. Good discharge summaries facilitate continuity between secondary and primary care. The junior doctors' forum led this project to improve the quality of electronic discharge summaries (eDS). Baseline measurement revealed significant room for improvement. We measured the quality of 10 summaries per month (across all inpatient specialties), against 23 indicators from the revised Academy of Medical Royal Colleges (AoMRC) standards (2013) that were prioritised by GPs as a "minimum dataset". Junior doctors felt that the Trust's dual eDS systems were responsible for great variation in quality. This was confirmed by the results of a comparison audit of the systems in April 2014: one system greatly outperformed the other (57% mean compliance with iSoft clinical management (iCM) based system vs. 77% with InfoPath-based system). We recommended that the Trust move to a single eDS system, decommissioning the iCM-based system, and this proposal was approved by several Trust committees. We worked with information services, junior doctors, general practitioners and hospital physicians to develop and implement a generic template to further improve compliance with AoMRC standards. In August 2014, the iCM-based system was withdrawn, the new template went live, and training was delivered, coinciding with the changeover of junior doctors to minimise disruption. Median compliance increased from 66.7% to 77.8%. Quality of discharge summaries had improved across the specialties. There was a reduction in the number of complaints and positive qualitative feedback from general practitioners and junior doctors. Completion of discharge summaries within 24 hours was not affected by this change. There is still more to be done to improve quality; average compliance with the full AoMRC standards (39 indicators) is 59.5%. With the approval of the Trust executive committee further plan, do, study, act (PDSA) cycles are underway, working to improve the remaining specialty-specific templates.

Dataset Information

Higher Quality and Lower Cost from Improving Hospital Discharge Decision Making.

Publications

Higher Quality and Lower Cost from Improving Hospital Discharge Decision Making.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets