Association of Hospitalist Years of Experience With Mortality in the Hospitalized Medicare Population.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Goodwin JS
PROVIDER: S-EPMC5801052 | biostudies-literature |
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:ImportanceInpatients treated by hospitalist physicians, who often work contiguous days, experience handoffs at the end of a scheduled shift block. Evidence suggests that transitions of patient care, or handoffs, among physician trainees are associated with adverse patient outcomes. However, little is known about the association between handoffs and patient outcomes among attending physicians, even though similar concerns apply.ObjectiveTo examine the association between inpatient handoffs of hospitalist physicians and patient mortality among hospitalized Medicare beneficiaries.Design, setting, and participantsThis cross-sectional study analyzed a random sample of Medicare beneficiaries who were hospitalized with a general medical condition between January 1, 2011, and December 31, 2016, and treated by a hospitalist. The study compared outcomes of patients with low vs high probability of physician handoff based on date of patient admission relative to the admitting hospitalist's last working day in a scheduled block, hypothesizing that otherwise similar patients admitted toward the end of a physician's shift block would be more likely to be handed off to another physician compared with patients admitted earlier in the shift block. Data analysis was performed from July 1, 2018, to January 12, 2021.ExposureHigh vs low probability of physician handoff.Main outcomes and measuresThe main outcome was patient 30-day mortality rate.ResultsA total of 1 074 000 patients (mean [SD] age, 75.9 [13.7] years; 57.4% female; 82.1% White) were studied. Multivariable regression models adjusted for beneficiary clinical and demographic characteristics and hospital fixed effects (a within-hospital analysis, effectively comparing patients treated at the same hospital). Among 597 288 hospitalizations, no overall difference in 30-day mortality was observed between patients admitted in the 2 days prior (days -1 and -2) to the treating hospitalist's last working day (a high handoff probability) compared with days -6 and -7 (a low handoff probability) (adjusted rate, 10.6%; 95% CI, 10.5%-10.7% vs 10.6%; 95% CI, 10.5%-10.7%; adjusted difference, 0.0%; 95% CI, -0.2% to 0.1%). However, in an exploratory analysis, among patients with high illness severity, defined as those in the top quartile of estimated mortality, 30-day mortality was higher for those with high vs low likelihood of physician handoff (adjusted mortality, 27.8%; 95% CI, 27.6%-27.9% vs 26.8%; 95% CI, 26.6%-27.1%; absolute adjusted difference, 1.0%; 95% CI, 0.5%-1.4%).Conclusions and relevanceIn this national analysis of Medicare beneficiaries hospitalized with a general medical condition and treated by a hospitalist physician, physician handoff was not associated with increased mortality overall.
| S-EPMC7991971 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Payers are increasingly holding hospitals accountable for patients' experiences with their care. This may conflict with another trend among US hospitals-greater hospitalist care-as hospitalists may have less familiarity with the history and preferences of their patients compared with primary-care physicians.Our objective was to better understand the relationship between hospitalist care and patients' experiences with their care.This was a retrospective cohort study.The setting was 2843 US acute-care hospitals (bottom tertile or "non-hospitalist" hospitals: median of 0% of general-medicine patients cared for by hospitalists; middle tertile or "mixed" hospitals: median of 39.5%; top tertile or "hospitalist" hospitals: median of 76.5%).The patients were 132,814 hospitalized Medicare beneficiaries cared for by a general medicine physician in 2009.The measurements were hospitalist use, based on Medicare claims data, and patient satisfaction, as measured by the Hospital Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems survey."Hospitalist" hospitals had better performance on global measures of patient satisfaction than "mixed" or "non-hospitalist" hospitals (overall satisfaction: 65.6% vs 63.9% vs 63.9%, respectively, P value for difference < 0.001). Hospitalist hospitals performed better in 6 specific domains of care, with the largest difference in satisfaction with discharge compared with mixed or non-hospitalist hospitals (80.3% vs 79.1% vs 78.1%, P < 0.001). Hospitalist care was not associated with patient satisfaction in 2 domains of care: cleanliness of room and communication with physician.For most measures of patient satisfaction, greater hospitalist care was associated with modestly better patient-centered care.
| S-EPMC3663143 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Use of locum tenens physicians has increased in the United States, but information about their quality and costs of care is lacking.To evaluate quality and costs of care among hospitalized Medicare beneficiaries treated by locum tenens vs non-locum tenens physicians.A random sample of Medicare fee-for-service beneficiaries hospitalized during 2009-2014 was used to compare quality and costs of hospital care delivered by locum tenens and non-locum tenens internal medicine physicians.Treatment by locum tenens general internal medicine physicians.The primary outcome was 30-day mortality. Secondary outcomes included inpatient Medicare Part B spending, length of stay, and 30-day readmissions. Differences between locum tenens and non-locum tenens physicians were estimated using multivariable logistic regression models adjusted for beneficiary clinical and demographic characteristics and hospital fixed effects, which enabled comparisons of clinical outcomes between physicians practicing within the same hospital. In prespecified subgroup analyses, outcomes were reevaluated among hospitals with different levels of intensity of locum tenens physician use.Of 1?818?873 Medicare admissions treated by general internists, 38?475 (2.1%) received care from a locum tenens physician; 9.3% (4123/44?520) of general internists were temporarily covered by a locum tenens physician at some point. Differences in patient characteristics, demographics, comorbidities, and reason for admission between locum tenens and non-locum tenens physicians were not clinically relevant. Treatment by locum tenens physicians, compared with treatment by non-locum tenens physicians (n?=?44?520 physicians), was not associated with a significant difference in 30-day mortality (8.83% vs 8.70%; adjusted difference, 0.14%; 95% CI, -0.18% to 0.45%). Patients treated by locum tenens physicians had significantly higher Part B spending ($1836 vs $1712; adjusted difference, $124; 95% CI, $93 to $154), significantly longer mean length of stay (5.64 days vs 5.21 days; adjusted difference, 0.43 days; 95% CI, 0.34 to 0.52), and significantly lower 30-day readmissions (22.80% vs 23.83%; adjusted difference, -1.00%; 95% CI -1.57% to -0.54%).Among hospitalized Medicare beneficiaries treated by a general internist, there were no significant differences in overall 30-day mortality rates among patients treated by locum tenens compared with non-locum tenens physicians. Additional research may help determine hospital-level factors associated with the quality and costs of care related to locum tenens physicians.
| S-EPMC5820716 | biostudies-other
Project description:Importance:Evidence is lacking on the consequences of high rates of inpatient consultation. Objective:To examine outcomes and resource use of patients cared for by hospitalists who use more inpatient consultation than their colleagues. Design, Setting, and Participants:A retrospective cohort study of medical admissions to hospitalists among fee-for-service Medicare beneficiaries was conducted. Hospitalist consultation tendency was identified from January 1, 2013, to December 31, 2014; admissions were calculated in 2013; and outcomes were measured in 2014. Data were analyzed from January 31, 2017, to May 9, 2019. A total of 711?654 admissions with patients receiving care from 14?584 hospitalists at 737 hospitals were included. Exposure:Admission to high-consulting hospitalists, considered to be those who were in the top 25% of the distribution of consulting frequency at their own hospital (adjusted for patient case mix). Main Outcomes and Measures:Outcomes included length of stay, Medicare Part B inpatient charges, discharge destination, all-cause 7- and 30-day readmissions, 90-day outpatient specialist visits, and 30-day mortality. Results:The 711?654 hospital admissions included 408 489 women (57.4%); mean (SD) age of the population was 80 (8.5) years. Length of stay of patients cared for by high-consulting hospitalists was longer compared with other hospitalists (adjusted incidence rate ratio, 1.04; 95% CI, 1.03-1.05). The admissions resulted in a mean of $137.91 (95% CI, $118.89-$156.93) more in Medicare Part B charges and were less likely to end with the patient going home (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 0.96; 95% CI, 0.94-0.98) compared with patients cared for by other hospitalists in the cohort. Patients cared for by high-consulting hospitalists also were 7% more likely than patients cared for by other hospitalists to see an outpatient specialist at 90 days (aOR 1.07; 95% CI, 1.05-1.09), with no significant differences in 30-day mortality (aOR 1.01, 95% CI, 0.98-1.03) or readmissions (7-day readmissions: aOR 1.01; 95% CI, 0.98-1.03; 30-day readmissions: aOR, 1.01; 95% CI, 0.99-1.03). Conclusions and Relevance:Hospitalists who obtain consultations more than their colleagues at the same institution were associated with greater use of health care resources without apparent mortality benefit. Further investigation should identify whether reducing high rates of consultation can reduce resource use without harming patients.
| S-EPMC7043199 | biostudies-literature
Project description:In a period of dynamic change in health care technology, delivery, and behaviors, tracking trends in health and health care can provide a perspective on what is being achieved.To comprehensively describe national trends in mortality, hospitalizations, and expenditures in the Medicare fee-for-service population between 1999 and 2013.Serial cross-sectional analysis of Medicare beneficiaries aged 65 years or older between 1999 and 2013 using Medicare denominator and inpatient files.For all Medicare beneficiaries, trends in all-cause mortality; for fee-for-service beneficiaries, trends in all-cause hospitalization and hospitalization-associated outcomes and expenditures. Geographic variation, stratified by key demographic groups, and changes in the intensity of care for fee-for-service beneficiaries in the last 1, 3, and 6 months of life were also assessed.The sample consisted of 68,374,904 unique Medicare beneficiaries (fee-for-service and Medicare Advantage). All-cause mortality for all Medicare beneficiaries declined from 5.30% in 1999 to 4.45% in 2013 (difference, 0.85 percentage points; 95% CI, 0.83-0.87). Among fee-for-service beneficiaries (n?=?60,056,069), the total number of hospitalizations per 100,000 person-years decreased from 35,274 to 26,930 (difference, 8344; 95% CI, 8315-8374). Mean inflation-adjusted inpatient expenditures per Medicare fee-for-service beneficiary declined from $3290 to $2801 (difference, $489; 95% CI, $487-$490). Among fee-for-service beneficiaries in the last 6 months of life, the number of hospitalizations decreased from 131.1 to 102.9 per 100 deaths (difference, 28.2; 95% CI, 27.9-28.4). The percentage of beneficiaries with 1 or more hospitalizations decreased from 70.5 to 56.8 per 100 deaths (difference, 13.7; 95% CI, 13.5-13.8), while the inflation-adjusted inpatient expenditure per death increased from $15,312 in 1999 to $17,423 in 2009 and then decreased to $13,388 in 2013. Findings were consistent across geographic and demographic groups.Among Medicare fee-for-service beneficiaries aged 65 years or older, all-cause mortality rates, hospitalization rates, and expenditures per beneficiary decreased from 1999 to 2013. In the last 6 months of life, total hospitalizations and inpatient expenditures decreased in recent years.
| S-EPMC5459402 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Patient outcomes associated with the 2011 Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) duty hour reforms have not been evaluated at a national level.To evaluate the association of the 2011 ACGME duty hour reforms with mortality and readmissions.Observational study of Medicare patient admissions (6,384,273 admissions from 2,790,356 patients) to short-term, acute care, nonfederal hospitals (n?=?3104) with principal medical diagnoses of acute myocardial infarction, stroke, gastrointestinal bleeding, or congestive heart failure or a Diagnosis Related Group classification of general, orthopedic, or vascular surgery. Of the hospitals, 96 (3.1%) were very major teaching, 138 (4.4%) major teaching, 442 (14.2%) minor teaching, 443 (14.3%) very minor teaching, and 1985 (64.0%) nonteaching.Resident-to-bed ratio as a continuous measure of hospital teaching intensity.Change in 30-day all-location mortality and 30-day all-cause readmission, comparing patients in more intensive relative to less intensive teaching hospitals before (July 1, 2009-June 30, 2011) and after (July 1, 2011-June 30, 2012) duty hour reforms, adjusting for patient comorbidities, time trends, and hospital site.In the 2 years before duty hour reforms, there were 4,325,854 admissions with 288,422 deaths and 602,380 readmissions. In the first year after the reforms, accounting for teaching hospital intensity, there were 2,058,419 admissions with 133,547 deaths and 272,938 readmissions. There were no significant postreform differences in mortality accounting for teaching hospital intensity for combined medical conditions (odds ratio [OR], 1.00; 95% CI, 0.96-1.03), combined surgical categories (OR, 0.99; 95% CI, 0.94-1.04), or any of the individual medical conditions or surgical categories. There were no significant postreform differences in readmissions for combined medical conditions (OR, 1.00; 95% CI, 0.97-1.02) or combined surgical categories (OR, 1.00; 95% CI, 0.98-1.03). For the medical condition of stroke, there were higher odds of readmissions in the postreform period (OR, 1.06; 95% CI, 1.001-1.13). However, this finding was not supported by sensitivity analyses and there were no significant postreform differences for readmissions for any other individual medical condition or surgical category.Among Medicare beneficiaries, there were no significant differences in the change in 30-day mortality rates or 30-day all-cause readmission rates for those hospitalized in more intensive relative to less intensive teaching hospitals in the year after implementation of the 2011 ACGME duty hour reforms compared with those hospitalized in the 2 years before implementation.
| S-EPMC5546100 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ImportanceThe measured severity of illness of hospitalized Medicare beneficiaries has increased. Whether this change is associated with payment reforms, concentrated among hospitalizations with principal diagnoses targeted by payment reform, and reflective of true increases in severity of illness is unknown.ObjectivesTo assess whether the expansion of secondary diagnosis codes in January 2011 and the incentive payments for health information technology under the US Health Information Technology for Economic and Clinical Health Act were associated with changes in measured severity of illness and whether those changes are reflective of true increases in underlying patient severity.Design, setting, and participantsThis cohort study of Medicare fee-for-service beneficiary discharges (N = 47 951 443) between January 1, 2008, and August 31, 2015, used a regression-discontinuity design to evaluate changes in measured severity of illness after the expansion of secondary diagnoses. Discharge-level linear regression model with hospital fixed effects was used to evaluate changes in measured severity of illness after hospitals' receipt of incentives for health information technology. The change in predictive accuracy of measured severity of illness on 30-day readmissions after the implementation of both policies was evaluated. Data analysis was performed from November 1, 2018, to March 5, 2019.Main outcomes and measuresThe primary outcome was patients' measured severity of illness determined by the number of condition categories from secondary discharge diagnosis codes. Measured severity of illness for diagnoses commonly targeted by Medicare policies and untargeted diagnoses was assessed.ResultsIn total, 47 951 443 discharges at 2850 hospitals were included. In 2008, these beneficiaries included 3 882 672 women (58.5%) with a mean (SD) age of 78.5 (8.4) years. In 2014, the discharges included 3 377 137 women (57.8%) with the mean (SD) age of 78.4 (8.7) years. The Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services expansion of secondary diagnoses was associated with a 0.348 (95% CI, 0.328-0.367; P < .001) change in condition categories for all diagnoses, 0.445 (95% CI, 0.419-0.470; P < .001) for targeted diagnoses, and 0.321 (95% CI, 0.302-0.341; P < .001) for untargeted diagnoses. Health information technology incentives were associated with a 0.013 (95% CI, 0.004-0.022; P = .005) change in condition categories for all diagnoses, 0.195 (95% CI, 0.184-0.207; P < .001) for targeted diagnoses, and -0.016 (95% CI, -0.025 to -0.007; P < .001) for untargeted diagnoses. Minimal improvements in predictive accuracy were observed.Conclusions and relevanceChanges in Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services policies appear to be associated with increases in measured severity of illness; these increases do not appear to reflect substantive changes in true patient severity.
| S-EPMC6503517 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundHospitals are increasingly at risk for post-acute care outcomes and spending, such as those in skilled nursing facilities (SNFs). While hospitalists are thought to improve patient outcomes of acute care, whether these effects extend to the post-acute setting in SNFs is unknown.ObjectiveTo compare longer term outcomes of patients discharged to SNFs who were treated by hospitalists vs. non-hospitalists during their hospitalization.DesignThis was a retrospective cohort study.ParticipantsParticipants are Medicare fee-for-service beneficiaries over 66 years of age who were hospitalized and discharged to a SNF in 2012-2014 (N?=?2,839,779).Main measuresWe estimated the effect of being treated by a hospitalist on 30-day rehospitalization and mortality, 60-day episode Medicare payments (Parts A and B), and successful discharge to community. Patients discharged to the community within 100 days of SNF admission who remained alive and not readmitted to a hospital or SNF for at least 30 days were considered successfully discharged. All outcomes were adjusted for demographics and clinical characteristics. To account for heterogeneity across facilities, we included hospital fixed effects.Key resultsThe 30-day rehospitalization rate was 17.59% for hospitalists' vs. 17.31% for non-hospitalists' patients (adjusted difference, 0.28%; 95% CI, 0.13 to 0.44). Sixty-day payments were $26,301 for hospitalists' vs. $25,996 for non-hospitalists' patients (adjusted difference, $305; 95% CI, $243 to $367). There was a non-significant trend toward lower successful discharge to the community rate (adjusted difference, -?0.26%; 95% CI, -?0.48 to -?0.04) and lower mortality for patients of hospitalists (adjusted difference, -?0.12%; 95% CI, -?0.22 to -?0.02).ConclusionsAmong hospitalized Medicare beneficiaries who were discharged to SNFs, readmissions and Medicare costs were slightly higher for stays under the care of hospitalists compared with those of non-hospitalist generalist physicians, but there was a non-significant trend toward lower mortality.
| S-EPMC6957621 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BACKGROUND:Studies have shown that long-term exposure to air pollution increases mortality. However, evidence is limited for air-pollution levels below the most recent National Ambient Air Quality Standards. Previous studies involved predominantly urban populations and did not have the statistical power to estimate the health effects in underrepresented groups. METHODS:We constructed an open cohort of all Medicare beneficiaries (60,925,443 persons) in the continental United States from the years 2000 through 2012, with 460,310,521 person-years of follow-up. Annual averages of fine particulate matter (particles with a mass median aerodynamic diameter of less than 2.5 ?m [PM2.5]) and ozone were estimated according to the ZIP Code of residence for each enrollee with the use of previously validated prediction models. We estimated the risk of death associated with exposure to increases of 10 ?g per cubic meter for PM2.5 and 10 parts per billion (ppb) for ozone using a two-pollutant Cox proportional-hazards model that controlled for demographic characteristics, Medicaid eligibility, and area-level covariates. RESULTS:Increases of 10 ?g per cubic meter in PM2.5 and of 10 ppb in ozone were associated with increases in all-cause mortality of 7.3% (95% confidence interval [CI], 7.1 to 7.5) and 1.1% (95% CI, 1.0 to 1.2), respectively. When the analysis was restricted to person-years with exposure to PM2.5 of less than 12 ?g per cubic meter and ozone of less than 50 ppb, the same increases in PM2.5 and ozone were associated with increases in the risk of death of 13.6% (95% CI, 13.1 to 14.1) and 1.0% (95% CI, 0.9 to 1.1), respectively. For PM2.5, the risk of death among men, blacks, and people with Medicaid eligibility was higher than that in the rest of the population. CONCLUSIONS:In the entire Medicare population, there was significant evidence of adverse effects related to exposure to PM2.5 and ozone at concentrations below current national standards. This effect was most pronounced among self-identified racial minorities and people with low income. (Supported by the Health Effects Institute and others.).
| S-EPMC5766848 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ImportanceHigh use of subspecialty care is an important source of health care spending. Medical subspecialty care in particular may duplicate the scope of practice of the primary attending physicians for patients hospitalized for medical conditions. Under value-based payments, which aim to control overall spending during an episode of hospitalization (including Part B physician fees), subspecialty consultations may be a target for hospitals working to reduce costs.ObjectivesTo measure the use of subspecialty consultation for Medicare beneficiaries hospitalized for nonsurgical conditions; to compare payments for consultative and nonconsultative care, adjusted for case mix and demographics; and to measure variation in payments across hospital referral regions (HRRs).Design, setting, and participantsThis retrospective cross-sectional study included a 15% random sample of Medicare fee-for-service beneficiaries enrolled in Parts A and B and identified all discharges after acute care hospital stays for nonsurgical conditions from January 1 through December 31, 2014. A total of 735 627 discharges were included. The analyses were conducted from December 1, 2017, through February 12, 2019. Total Part B payments were extrapolated to the population of Medicare fee-for-service beneficiaries.Main outcomes and measuresProbability of any consultation during a hospitalization was estimated using logistic regression. The number of consultations per stay and the number of consultative visits per hospital day were estimated using Poisson regression. Part B payments for consultative and nonconsultative care were estimated using generalized linear regression with gamma-log link. All models were adjusted for patient demographics and case mix. Payment models also included HRR fixed effects.ResultsA total of 735 627 discharges from 4534 hospitals in 2014 were included in the analysis (41.2% men and 58.8% women; mean [SD] age, 79.6 [8.9] years; 84.7% white, 10.1% black, and 5.2% other race). After adjusting for patient case mix and demographics, a 6-fold variation between the top and bottom quintiles of hospitals (relative difference, $401 [95% CI, $368-$434]) and HRRs (relative difference, $363 [95% CI, $337-$389]) was found in payments per stay for consultative care. Part B payments for consultative care by medical subspecialists accounted for 41.3% of payments for physician visits during hospitalization and totaled $1.3 billion in 2014.Conclusions and relevanceThe substantial variation in the use of subspecialty consultative care suggests potential opportunities for cost savings.
| S-EPMC6450334 | biostudies-literature