Dataset Information

Clinical and Economic Outcomes of Enhanced Recovery Dissemination in Michigan Hospitals.

ABSTRACT:

Objective

To evaluate real-world effects of enhanced recovery protocol (ERP) dissemination on clinical and economic outcomes after colectomy.

Summary background data

Hospitals aiming to accelerate discharge and reduce spending after surgery are increasingly adopting perioperative ERPs. Despite their efficacy in specialty institutions, most studies have lacked adequate control groups and diverse hospital settings and have considered only in-hospital costs. There remain concerns that accelerated discharge might incur unintended consequences.

Methods

Retrospective, population-based cohort including patients in 72 hospitals in the Michigan Surgical Quality Collaborative clinical registry (N = 13,611) and/or Michigan Value Collaborative claims registry (N = 14,800) who underwent elective colectomy, 2012 to 2018. Marginal effects of ERP on clinical outcomes and risk-adjusted, price-standardized 90-day episode payments were evaluated using mixed-effects models to account for secular trends and hospital performance unrelated to ERP.

Results

In 24 ERP hospitals, patients Post-ERP had significantly shorter length of stay than those Pre-ERP (5.1 vs 6.5 days, P < 0.001), lower incidence of complications (14.6% vs 16.9%, P < 0.001) and readmissions (10.4% vs 11.3%, P = 0.02), and lower episode payments ($28,550 vs $31,192, P < 0.001) and postacute care ($3,384 vs $3,909, P < 0.001). In mixed-effects adjusted analyses, these effects were significantly attenuated-ERP was associated with a marginal length of stay reduction of 0.4 days (95% confidence interval 0.2-0.6 days, P = 0.001), and no significant difference in complications, readmissions, or overall spending.

Conclusions

ERPs are associated with small reduction in postoperative length of hospitalization after colectomy, without unwanted increases in readmission or postacute care spending. The real-world effects across a variety of hospitals may be smaller than observed in early-adopting specialty centers.

SUBMITTER: Regenbogen SE

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8211908 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:ObjectiveTo describe patient characteristics, symptoms, patterns of care and outcomes for patients hospitalised with COVID-19 in Michigan.DesignMulticentre retrospective cohort study.Setting32 acute care hospitals in the state of Michigan.ParticipantsPatients discharged (16 March-11 May 2020) with suspected or confirmed COVID-19 were identified. Trained abstractors collected demographic information on all patients and detailed clinical data on a subset of COVID-19-positive patients.Primary outcome measurementsPatient characteristics, treatment and outcomes including cardiopulmonary resuscitation, mortality and venous thromboembolism within and across hospitals.ResultsDemographic-only data from 1593 COVID-19-positive and 1259 persons under investigation discharges were collected. Among 1024 cases with detailed data, the median age was 63 years; median body mass index was 30.6; and 51.4% were black. Cough, fever and shortness of breath were the top symptoms. 37.2% reported a known COVID-19 contact; 7.0% were healthcare workers; and 16.1% presented from congregated living facilities.During hospitalisation, 232 (22.7%) patients were treated in an intensive care unit (ICU); 558 (54.9%) in a 'cohorted' unit; 161 (15.7%) received mechanical ventilation; and 90 (8.8%) received high-flow nasal cannula. ICU patients more often received hydroxychloroquine (66% vs 46%), corticosteroids (34% vs 18%) and antibiotic therapy (92% vs 71%) than general ward patients (p<0.05 for all). Overall, 219 (21.4%) patients died, with in-hospital mortality ranging from 7.9% to 45.7% across hospitals. 73% received at least one COVID-19-specific treatment, ranging from 32% to 96% across sites.Across 14 hospitals, the proportion of patients admitted directly to an ICU ranged from 0% to 43.8%; mechanical ventilation on admission from 0% to 12.8%; mortality from 7.9% to 45.7%. Use of at least one COVID-19-specific therapy varied from 32% to 96.3% across sites.ConclusionsDuring the early days of the Michigan outbreak of COVID-19, patient characteristics, treatment and outcomes varied widely within and across hospitals.

Project description:Background: Seizures are common among hospitalized patients. Levetiracetam (LEV), a synaptic vesicle protein 2A (SV2A) ligand, is a common intravenous (IV) anti-seizure medication option in hospitals. Brivaracetam (BRV), a selective SV2A ligand for treatment of focal seizures in patients ≥16 years, has greater binding affinity, higher lipophilicity, and faster brain entry than IV LEV. Differences in clinical outcomes and associated costs between IV BRV and IV LEV in treating hospitalized patients with seizure remain unknown. Objectives: To compare the clinical outcomes, costs, and healthcare resource utilization between patients with seizure treated with IV BRV and those with IV LEV within hospital setting. Design/Methods: A retrospective cohort analysis was performed using chargemaster data from 210 United States hospitals in Premier Healthcare Database. Adult patients (age ≥18 years) treated intravenously with LEV or BRV (with or without BZD) and a seizure discharge diagnosis between July 1, 2016 and December 31, 2019 were included. The cohorts were propensity score-matched 4:1 on baseline characteristics. Outcomes included intubation rates, intensive care unit (ICU) admission, length of stay (LOS), all-cause and seizure-related readmission, total hospitalization cost, and in-hospital mortality. A multivariable regression analysis was performed to determine the association between treatment and main outcomes adjusting for unbalanced confounders. Results: A total of 450 patients were analyzed (IV LEV, n = 360 vs. IV BRV, n = 90). Patients treated with IV BRV had lower crude prevalence of ICU admission (14.4 vs. 24.2%, P < 0.05), 30-day all-cause readmission (1.1 vs. 6.4%, P = 0.06), seizure-related 30-day readmission (0 vs. 4.2%, P < 0.05), similar mean total hospitalization costs ($13,715 vs. $13,419, P = 0.91), intubation (0 vs. 1.1%, P = 0.59), and in-hospital mortality (4.4 vs. 3.9%, P = 0.77). The adjusted odds for ICU admission (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] = 0.6; 95% confidence interval [CI]:0.31, 1.16; P = 0.13), 30-day all-cause readmission (aOR = 0.17; 95% CI:0.02, 1.24; P = 0.08), and in-hospital mortality (aOR = 1.15; 95% CI:0.37, 3.58, P = 0.81) were statistically similar between comparison groups. Conclusion: The use of IV BRV may provide an alternative to IV LEV for management of seizures in hospital setting due to lower or comparable prevalence of ICU admission, intubation, and 30-day seizure-related readmission. Additional studies with greater statistical power are needed to confirm these findings.

Project description:BackgroundOsteoporotic fractures frequently require inpatient care, and are associated with elevated risks of morbidity, mortality, and re-hospitalization. A comprehensive evaluation of healthcare costs, resource utilization, and outcomes associated with osteoporosis (OP)-related fractures treated in US hospitals was undertaken.MethodsA retrospective analysis using the Premier Perspective Database (2010 - 2013) was conducted. Study population comprised patients aged ≥ 50 years hospitalized with a principal diagnosis of a closed or pathologic fracture commonly associated with OP; the first qualifying hospitalization was designated the "index admission". Patients with evidence of major trauma, malignancy, or other non-OP conditions that may lead to pathologic fracture during the index admission were excluded. Study measures included healthcare costs (in 2013 USD), length of stay (LOS), intensive care unit (ICU) use, and mortality during the index admission, as well as 60-day fracture-related readmission.ResultsA total of 268,477 patients were admitted to hospital (n = 548 hospitals) with a principal diagnosis of an OP-related fracture; mean (SD) age was 78 (11) years, 75% were female, 69% had ≥ 2 comorbidities, and 82% of patients had a diagnostic code for accidental fall. Among all OP-related fracture admissions, mean (95% CI) hospital cost was $12,839 (12,784-12,893) and LOS was 5.1 (5.1-5.1) days; during the admission, ICU use was 7.4% (7.3-7.5) and mortality was 1.5% (1.5-1.6), and during the 60-day post-discharge period, fracture-related readmission was 2.3% (2.2-2.4).ConclusionsHospital costs associated with the acute treatment of OP-related fractures are substantial, especially among patients with fractures of the hip, femur, and spine. Among patients with vertebral fractures-the second most common reason for admission-mortality and ICU use were notably high, and costs and LOS were higher than among those with non-vertebral fractures (excluding hip). Interventions that are effective in reducing fracture risk have the potential to yield substantial cost savings.