User login
Collaborative Approaches Improve Pediatric Discharges
Clinical Question: Can a collaborative quality improvement project improve the quality and efficiency of pediatric hospital discharges?
Background: Transitions of care, including at the time of hospital discharge, are a potential source of risk and can be associated with adverse events including medication errors and preventable readmissions. Some studies have shown that 10–20% of patients had an adverse event after discharge, and half of those were preventable; one adult study found nearly half of the discharged patients had at least one medication error.1,2 Although multiple projects to improve the discharge process have been published in adult literature, few have focused on the pediatric population. In this study, the Children’s Hospital Association (CHA) formed a pediatric quality improvement collaborative across multiple facilities to examine whether shared improvement strategies would affect failures of discharge-related care, parent-reported readiness for discharge, and readmission rates.
Study Design: Multicenter quality improvement collaborative.
Setting: 11 freestanding tertiary-care children’s hospitals in the United States.
Synopsis: Each of the 11 participating sites chose a specific target population, such as patients with sickle cell disease, asthma, or all discharged pediatric patients. Populations were selected at the discretion of the sites. A multidisciplinary expert advisory panel reviewed literature and developed a change package that included being proactive about discharge planning during hospitalization; improving throughput; arranging post-discharge treatment and support; and communicating post-discharge plan with patients, families, and providers. Each site selected elements of the change package to implement based on individual needs and preferences and incorporated via plan-do-study-act cycles during three action periods. Elements that were implemented by most or all sites included family education on diagnosis and discharge plans, use of discharge checklists, improvement of written discharge instructions, post-discharge follow-up phone calls to reinforce discharge instructions, and identifying and obtaining medications. Virtual learning conferences and monthly Web conferences were held for participants in the collaborative, and experienced improvement coaches guided teams through implementation.
The primary aim of the study was to reduce discharge-related care failures by 50% in 12 months. Failures were measured by phone calls to families two to seven days following discharge, and if any problem related to discharge occurred, the discharge was considered a failure (all-or-none measure). Components of this measure included understanding the diagnosis, receiving discharge instructions and education, complying with instructions, receiving necessary equipment, planning for follow-up pending tests, receiving help with appointments, and not requiring a related unplanned medical visit. Other measures evaluated in this study included patient/family readiness for discharge and unplanned readmission rates (72 hours and 30 days).
Overall, the rate of failures of discharge care was 34% at baseline, which decreased to 21% at the end of the collaborative, for a reduction of 40%. Some individual hospitals exceeded this mark as well. Among the hospitals reporting data on family readiness for discharge, there was a statistically significant improvement, with 85% of families at baseline rating readiness in the highest category and 91% in the last quarter of the study. There was no improvement in rates of unplanned readmission, with 72-hour readmission rates steady across the project (0.7% at onset, 1.1% at end of study; P = 0.29) and slight worsening of the 30-day rate (4.5% to 6.3%; P = 0.05).
Potential explanations for the findings related to readmission rates include seasonal variability in readmissions as well as high variability in patients included in the study. For example, one site focused on patients with sickle cell disease, another on patients with asthma, and others included all diagnoses. Overall, unplanned readmission rates were low (around 1% for 72-hour, 5% for 30-day), which is consistent with other pediatric studies.
Bottom Line: In this study, institutions using a collaborative approach improved the quality of inpatient discharges by using an intervention bundle in pediatric hospital settings. There was no improvement noted in readmission rates, although these rates were low.
Citation: Wu S, Tyler A, Logsdon T, et al. A quality improvement collaborative to improve the discharge process for hospitalized children. Pediatrics. 2016;138(2). pii:e20143604.
References:
- Moore C, Wisnivesky J, Williams S, McGinn T. Medical errors related to discontinuity of care from an inpatient to an outpatient setting. J Gen Intern Med. 2003;18(8):646-651.
- Forster AJ, Clark HD, Menard A, et al. Adverse events among medical patients after discharge from hospital. CMAJ. 2004;170(3):345-349.
Clinical Question: Can a collaborative quality improvement project improve the quality and efficiency of pediatric hospital discharges?
Background: Transitions of care, including at the time of hospital discharge, are a potential source of risk and can be associated with adverse events including medication errors and preventable readmissions. Some studies have shown that 10–20% of patients had an adverse event after discharge, and half of those were preventable; one adult study found nearly half of the discharged patients had at least one medication error.1,2 Although multiple projects to improve the discharge process have been published in adult literature, few have focused on the pediatric population. In this study, the Children’s Hospital Association (CHA) formed a pediatric quality improvement collaborative across multiple facilities to examine whether shared improvement strategies would affect failures of discharge-related care, parent-reported readiness for discharge, and readmission rates.
Study Design: Multicenter quality improvement collaborative.
Setting: 11 freestanding tertiary-care children’s hospitals in the United States.
Synopsis: Each of the 11 participating sites chose a specific target population, such as patients with sickle cell disease, asthma, or all discharged pediatric patients. Populations were selected at the discretion of the sites. A multidisciplinary expert advisory panel reviewed literature and developed a change package that included being proactive about discharge planning during hospitalization; improving throughput; arranging post-discharge treatment and support; and communicating post-discharge plan with patients, families, and providers. Each site selected elements of the change package to implement based on individual needs and preferences and incorporated via plan-do-study-act cycles during three action periods. Elements that were implemented by most or all sites included family education on diagnosis and discharge plans, use of discharge checklists, improvement of written discharge instructions, post-discharge follow-up phone calls to reinforce discharge instructions, and identifying and obtaining medications. Virtual learning conferences and monthly Web conferences were held for participants in the collaborative, and experienced improvement coaches guided teams through implementation.
The primary aim of the study was to reduce discharge-related care failures by 50% in 12 months. Failures were measured by phone calls to families two to seven days following discharge, and if any problem related to discharge occurred, the discharge was considered a failure (all-or-none measure). Components of this measure included understanding the diagnosis, receiving discharge instructions and education, complying with instructions, receiving necessary equipment, planning for follow-up pending tests, receiving help with appointments, and not requiring a related unplanned medical visit. Other measures evaluated in this study included patient/family readiness for discharge and unplanned readmission rates (72 hours and 30 days).
Overall, the rate of failures of discharge care was 34% at baseline, which decreased to 21% at the end of the collaborative, for a reduction of 40%. Some individual hospitals exceeded this mark as well. Among the hospitals reporting data on family readiness for discharge, there was a statistically significant improvement, with 85% of families at baseline rating readiness in the highest category and 91% in the last quarter of the study. There was no improvement in rates of unplanned readmission, with 72-hour readmission rates steady across the project (0.7% at onset, 1.1% at end of study; P = 0.29) and slight worsening of the 30-day rate (4.5% to 6.3%; P = 0.05).
Potential explanations for the findings related to readmission rates include seasonal variability in readmissions as well as high variability in patients included in the study. For example, one site focused on patients with sickle cell disease, another on patients with asthma, and others included all diagnoses. Overall, unplanned readmission rates were low (around 1% for 72-hour, 5% for 30-day), which is consistent with other pediatric studies.
Bottom Line: In this study, institutions using a collaborative approach improved the quality of inpatient discharges by using an intervention bundle in pediatric hospital settings. There was no improvement noted in readmission rates, although these rates were low.
Citation: Wu S, Tyler A, Logsdon T, et al. A quality improvement collaborative to improve the discharge process for hospitalized children. Pediatrics. 2016;138(2). pii:e20143604.
References:
- Moore C, Wisnivesky J, Williams S, McGinn T. Medical errors related to discontinuity of care from an inpatient to an outpatient setting. J Gen Intern Med. 2003;18(8):646-651.
- Forster AJ, Clark HD, Menard A, et al. Adverse events among medical patients after discharge from hospital. CMAJ. 2004;170(3):345-349.
Clinical Question: Can a collaborative quality improvement project improve the quality and efficiency of pediatric hospital discharges?
Background: Transitions of care, including at the time of hospital discharge, are a potential source of risk and can be associated with adverse events including medication errors and preventable readmissions. Some studies have shown that 10–20% of patients had an adverse event after discharge, and half of those were preventable; one adult study found nearly half of the discharged patients had at least one medication error.1,2 Although multiple projects to improve the discharge process have been published in adult literature, few have focused on the pediatric population. In this study, the Children’s Hospital Association (CHA) formed a pediatric quality improvement collaborative across multiple facilities to examine whether shared improvement strategies would affect failures of discharge-related care, parent-reported readiness for discharge, and readmission rates.
Study Design: Multicenter quality improvement collaborative.
Setting: 11 freestanding tertiary-care children’s hospitals in the United States.
Synopsis: Each of the 11 participating sites chose a specific target population, such as patients with sickle cell disease, asthma, or all discharged pediatric patients. Populations were selected at the discretion of the sites. A multidisciplinary expert advisory panel reviewed literature and developed a change package that included being proactive about discharge planning during hospitalization; improving throughput; arranging post-discharge treatment and support; and communicating post-discharge plan with patients, families, and providers. Each site selected elements of the change package to implement based on individual needs and preferences and incorporated via plan-do-study-act cycles during three action periods. Elements that were implemented by most or all sites included family education on diagnosis and discharge plans, use of discharge checklists, improvement of written discharge instructions, post-discharge follow-up phone calls to reinforce discharge instructions, and identifying and obtaining medications. Virtual learning conferences and monthly Web conferences were held for participants in the collaborative, and experienced improvement coaches guided teams through implementation.
The primary aim of the study was to reduce discharge-related care failures by 50% in 12 months. Failures were measured by phone calls to families two to seven days following discharge, and if any problem related to discharge occurred, the discharge was considered a failure (all-or-none measure). Components of this measure included understanding the diagnosis, receiving discharge instructions and education, complying with instructions, receiving necessary equipment, planning for follow-up pending tests, receiving help with appointments, and not requiring a related unplanned medical visit. Other measures evaluated in this study included patient/family readiness for discharge and unplanned readmission rates (72 hours and 30 days).
Overall, the rate of failures of discharge care was 34% at baseline, which decreased to 21% at the end of the collaborative, for a reduction of 40%. Some individual hospitals exceeded this mark as well. Among the hospitals reporting data on family readiness for discharge, there was a statistically significant improvement, with 85% of families at baseline rating readiness in the highest category and 91% in the last quarter of the study. There was no improvement in rates of unplanned readmission, with 72-hour readmission rates steady across the project (0.7% at onset, 1.1% at end of study; P = 0.29) and slight worsening of the 30-day rate (4.5% to 6.3%; P = 0.05).
Potential explanations for the findings related to readmission rates include seasonal variability in readmissions as well as high variability in patients included in the study. For example, one site focused on patients with sickle cell disease, another on patients with asthma, and others included all diagnoses. Overall, unplanned readmission rates were low (around 1% for 72-hour, 5% for 30-day), which is consistent with other pediatric studies.
Bottom Line: In this study, institutions using a collaborative approach improved the quality of inpatient discharges by using an intervention bundle in pediatric hospital settings. There was no improvement noted in readmission rates, although these rates were low.
Citation: Wu S, Tyler A, Logsdon T, et al. A quality improvement collaborative to improve the discharge process for hospitalized children. Pediatrics. 2016;138(2). pii:e20143604.
References:
- Moore C, Wisnivesky J, Williams S, McGinn T. Medical errors related to discontinuity of care from an inpatient to an outpatient setting. J Gen Intern Med. 2003;18(8):646-651.
- Forster AJ, Clark HD, Menard A, et al. Adverse events among medical patients after discharge from hospital. CMAJ. 2004;170(3):345-349.
Evaluating Febrile Infants with Step-by-Step Approach
Clinical Question: What is the performance of the Step-by-Step approach to evaluate febrile infants, and how does it compare to other existing criteria?
Background: Multiple studies have been performed to find the best set of criteria to identify febrile infants at low risk for bacterial infection in order to manage them in a less invasive manner. Common criteria used in the United States include Rochester, Philadelphia, and Boston criteria, initially published in the early 1990s. Since that time, management has evolved with the introduction of newer biomarkers such as C-reactive protein (CRP) and procalcitonin (PCT), and epidemiology has changed with immunizations and improvement in intrapartum antibiotic prophylaxis.
A new algorithm, Step-by-Step, has been developed by a group of European pediatric emergency physicians and has been shown retrospectively to accurately identify groups of patients according to risk of noninvasive or invasive bacterial infection (IBI). This algorithm uses a sequential approach, evaluating the general appearance, age of the patient, urinalysis, and then other lab findings including CRP, PCT, and absolute neutrophil count (ANC). In this study, the authors sought to validate this algorithm prospectively in a larger multicenter population.
Study Design: Multicenter prospective study.
Setting: 11 European pediatric emergency departments in Spain, Italy, and Switzerland.
Synopsis: This study included infants ≤90 days of age presenting to the pediatric emergency department (PED) between September 2012 and August 2014 with fever without source (defined as temperature ≥38°C measured by thermometer at home or in the PED, with normal physical examination and no respiratory signs or symptoms or diarrheal process). Labs obtained for each patient included urinalysis, urine culture (obtained by bladder catheterization or suprapubic aspiration), white blood cell count, PCT, CRP, and blood culture. Further testing and management were determined by the treating physician and management protocols of each center.
Exclusion criteria included:
- Clear source of fever by history or physical examination.
- No fever in the PED and fever assessed only subjectively by parents prior to presentation without the use of a thermometer.
- Absence of one or more of the above lab tests.
- Refusal of parents to participate.
The study included 2,185 infants. Of these, 504 were diagnosed with bacterial infection, including 87 (3.9%) with IBI (defined as positive blood or cerebrospinal fluid culture) and 417 (19.1%) with non-IBI (409 of which were urinary tract infections). Following the first part of the Step-by-Step approach, which uses general appearance (well-appearing versus ill-appearing), age (older or younger than 21 days), and leukocyturia, identified 79.3% of patients with IBI and 98.5% of non-IBI. Adding the next steps in the approach, with PCT, CRP, and ANC, identified 991 low-risk patients (45.3% of the studied population). In this low-risk group, seven patients were subsequently identified as having IBI (0.7% of this group). Using the Step-by-Step approach led to a negative predictive value (NPV) of 99.3 for identifying IBI, with a negative likelihood ratio (LR) of 0.17.
In evaluation of the seven low-risk patients with IBI, three of these were noted to present to the PED within one hour of onset of fever, and three more patients had fever first detected on arrival in the PED. This short duration of fever, and the lack of time for a rise in biomarkers, is likely why these patients were missed in the initial assessment.
When the Rochester criteria were used for this group of 2,185 patients, 949 patients were identified as low risk, with 1.6% of the low-risk patients found to have IBI, leading to an NPV of 98.3 and negative LR of 0.41. The authors chose to compare their approach to the Rochester criteria because the other commonly used approaches (Boston, Philadelphia) recommend lumbar puncture in all febrile infants while Rochester does not, and more recent literature suggests an individualized approach rather than recommending the test systematically.
Limitations included:
- Prevalence of bacterial infection was similar to other European publications but higher than in many studies in the United States, primarily due to an increased rate of UTI. (In this study, the authors used a definition of leukocyturia and culture with ≥10,000 cfu/mL.)
- Band count, although part of the Rochester criteria, was not available in some of the centers and not included in analysis. Inclusion of this lab study could have changed the performance of the Rochester criteria.
- The Step-by-Step approach was not compared to other existing criteria.
Bottom Line: In this study, the Step-by-Step approach was very accurate in identifying febrile infants at low risk for invasive bacterial infection, performing better than the Rochester criteria, and may be helpful in evaluation of infants with fever in the emergency department. A cautious approach is warranted for patients with very short fever duration, as they may be missed by ancillary test results.
Citation: Gomez B, Mintegi S, Bressan S, et al. Validation of the “step-by-step” approach in the management of young febrile infants. Pediatrics. 2016;138(2). pic:e20154381.
Carl Galloway, MD, is a hospitalist at Sanford Children’s Hospital in Sioux Falls, S.D.
Clinical Question: What is the performance of the Step-by-Step approach to evaluate febrile infants, and how does it compare to other existing criteria?
Background: Multiple studies have been performed to find the best set of criteria to identify febrile infants at low risk for bacterial infection in order to manage them in a less invasive manner. Common criteria used in the United States include Rochester, Philadelphia, and Boston criteria, initially published in the early 1990s. Since that time, management has evolved with the introduction of newer biomarkers such as C-reactive protein (CRP) and procalcitonin (PCT), and epidemiology has changed with immunizations and improvement in intrapartum antibiotic prophylaxis.
A new algorithm, Step-by-Step, has been developed by a group of European pediatric emergency physicians and has been shown retrospectively to accurately identify groups of patients according to risk of noninvasive or invasive bacterial infection (IBI). This algorithm uses a sequential approach, evaluating the general appearance, age of the patient, urinalysis, and then other lab findings including CRP, PCT, and absolute neutrophil count (ANC). In this study, the authors sought to validate this algorithm prospectively in a larger multicenter population.
Study Design: Multicenter prospective study.
Setting: 11 European pediatric emergency departments in Spain, Italy, and Switzerland.
Synopsis: This study included infants ≤90 days of age presenting to the pediatric emergency department (PED) between September 2012 and August 2014 with fever without source (defined as temperature ≥38°C measured by thermometer at home or in the PED, with normal physical examination and no respiratory signs or symptoms or diarrheal process). Labs obtained for each patient included urinalysis, urine culture (obtained by bladder catheterization or suprapubic aspiration), white blood cell count, PCT, CRP, and blood culture. Further testing and management were determined by the treating physician and management protocols of each center.
Exclusion criteria included:
- Clear source of fever by history or physical examination.
- No fever in the PED and fever assessed only subjectively by parents prior to presentation without the use of a thermometer.
- Absence of one or more of the above lab tests.
- Refusal of parents to participate.
The study included 2,185 infants. Of these, 504 were diagnosed with bacterial infection, including 87 (3.9%) with IBI (defined as positive blood or cerebrospinal fluid culture) and 417 (19.1%) with non-IBI (409 of which were urinary tract infections). Following the first part of the Step-by-Step approach, which uses general appearance (well-appearing versus ill-appearing), age (older or younger than 21 days), and leukocyturia, identified 79.3% of patients with IBI and 98.5% of non-IBI. Adding the next steps in the approach, with PCT, CRP, and ANC, identified 991 low-risk patients (45.3% of the studied population). In this low-risk group, seven patients were subsequently identified as having IBI (0.7% of this group). Using the Step-by-Step approach led to a negative predictive value (NPV) of 99.3 for identifying IBI, with a negative likelihood ratio (LR) of 0.17.
In evaluation of the seven low-risk patients with IBI, three of these were noted to present to the PED within one hour of onset of fever, and three more patients had fever first detected on arrival in the PED. This short duration of fever, and the lack of time for a rise in biomarkers, is likely why these patients were missed in the initial assessment.
When the Rochester criteria were used for this group of 2,185 patients, 949 patients were identified as low risk, with 1.6% of the low-risk patients found to have IBI, leading to an NPV of 98.3 and negative LR of 0.41. The authors chose to compare their approach to the Rochester criteria because the other commonly used approaches (Boston, Philadelphia) recommend lumbar puncture in all febrile infants while Rochester does not, and more recent literature suggests an individualized approach rather than recommending the test systematically.
Limitations included:
- Prevalence of bacterial infection was similar to other European publications but higher than in many studies in the United States, primarily due to an increased rate of UTI. (In this study, the authors used a definition of leukocyturia and culture with ≥10,000 cfu/mL.)
- Band count, although part of the Rochester criteria, was not available in some of the centers and not included in analysis. Inclusion of this lab study could have changed the performance of the Rochester criteria.
- The Step-by-Step approach was not compared to other existing criteria.
Bottom Line: In this study, the Step-by-Step approach was very accurate in identifying febrile infants at low risk for invasive bacterial infection, performing better than the Rochester criteria, and may be helpful in evaluation of infants with fever in the emergency department. A cautious approach is warranted for patients with very short fever duration, as they may be missed by ancillary test results.
Citation: Gomez B, Mintegi S, Bressan S, et al. Validation of the “step-by-step” approach in the management of young febrile infants. Pediatrics. 2016;138(2). pic:e20154381.
Carl Galloway, MD, is a hospitalist at Sanford Children’s Hospital in Sioux Falls, S.D.
Clinical Question: What is the performance of the Step-by-Step approach to evaluate febrile infants, and how does it compare to other existing criteria?
Background: Multiple studies have been performed to find the best set of criteria to identify febrile infants at low risk for bacterial infection in order to manage them in a less invasive manner. Common criteria used in the United States include Rochester, Philadelphia, and Boston criteria, initially published in the early 1990s. Since that time, management has evolved with the introduction of newer biomarkers such as C-reactive protein (CRP) and procalcitonin (PCT), and epidemiology has changed with immunizations and improvement in intrapartum antibiotic prophylaxis.
A new algorithm, Step-by-Step, has been developed by a group of European pediatric emergency physicians and has been shown retrospectively to accurately identify groups of patients according to risk of noninvasive or invasive bacterial infection (IBI). This algorithm uses a sequential approach, evaluating the general appearance, age of the patient, urinalysis, and then other lab findings including CRP, PCT, and absolute neutrophil count (ANC). In this study, the authors sought to validate this algorithm prospectively in a larger multicenter population.
Study Design: Multicenter prospective study.
Setting: 11 European pediatric emergency departments in Spain, Italy, and Switzerland.
Synopsis: This study included infants ≤90 days of age presenting to the pediatric emergency department (PED) between September 2012 and August 2014 with fever without source (defined as temperature ≥38°C measured by thermometer at home or in the PED, with normal physical examination and no respiratory signs or symptoms or diarrheal process). Labs obtained for each patient included urinalysis, urine culture (obtained by bladder catheterization or suprapubic aspiration), white blood cell count, PCT, CRP, and blood culture. Further testing and management were determined by the treating physician and management protocols of each center.
Exclusion criteria included:
- Clear source of fever by history or physical examination.
- No fever in the PED and fever assessed only subjectively by parents prior to presentation without the use of a thermometer.
- Absence of one or more of the above lab tests.
- Refusal of parents to participate.
The study included 2,185 infants. Of these, 504 were diagnosed with bacterial infection, including 87 (3.9%) with IBI (defined as positive blood or cerebrospinal fluid culture) and 417 (19.1%) with non-IBI (409 of which were urinary tract infections). Following the first part of the Step-by-Step approach, which uses general appearance (well-appearing versus ill-appearing), age (older or younger than 21 days), and leukocyturia, identified 79.3% of patients with IBI and 98.5% of non-IBI. Adding the next steps in the approach, with PCT, CRP, and ANC, identified 991 low-risk patients (45.3% of the studied population). In this low-risk group, seven patients were subsequently identified as having IBI (0.7% of this group). Using the Step-by-Step approach led to a negative predictive value (NPV) of 99.3 for identifying IBI, with a negative likelihood ratio (LR) of 0.17.
In evaluation of the seven low-risk patients with IBI, three of these were noted to present to the PED within one hour of onset of fever, and three more patients had fever first detected on arrival in the PED. This short duration of fever, and the lack of time for a rise in biomarkers, is likely why these patients were missed in the initial assessment.
When the Rochester criteria were used for this group of 2,185 patients, 949 patients were identified as low risk, with 1.6% of the low-risk patients found to have IBI, leading to an NPV of 98.3 and negative LR of 0.41. The authors chose to compare their approach to the Rochester criteria because the other commonly used approaches (Boston, Philadelphia) recommend lumbar puncture in all febrile infants while Rochester does not, and more recent literature suggests an individualized approach rather than recommending the test systematically.
Limitations included:
- Prevalence of bacterial infection was similar to other European publications but higher than in many studies in the United States, primarily due to an increased rate of UTI. (In this study, the authors used a definition of leukocyturia and culture with ≥10,000 cfu/mL.)
- Band count, although part of the Rochester criteria, was not available in some of the centers and not included in analysis. Inclusion of this lab study could have changed the performance of the Rochester criteria.
- The Step-by-Step approach was not compared to other existing criteria.
Bottom Line: In this study, the Step-by-Step approach was very accurate in identifying febrile infants at low risk for invasive bacterial infection, performing better than the Rochester criteria, and may be helpful in evaluation of infants with fever in the emergency department. A cautious approach is warranted for patients with very short fever duration, as they may be missed by ancillary test results.
Citation: Gomez B, Mintegi S, Bressan S, et al. Validation of the “step-by-step” approach in the management of young febrile infants. Pediatrics. 2016;138(2). pic:e20154381.
Carl Galloway, MD, is a hospitalist at Sanford Children’s Hospital in Sioux Falls, S.D.
Diluted Apple Juice Versus Electrolyte Solution in Gastroenteritis
Clinical Question: Is diluted apple juice inferior to apple-flavored electrolyte oral rehydration solution in children with mild dehydration due to acute gastroenteritis?
Background: In the setting of acute gastroenteritis, teaching has classically been that the simple sugars in juice and sports drinks can worsen diarrhea and that they could cause hyponatremia since they are not isotonic. Due to this, the American Academy of Pediatrics recommends an electrolyte oral rehydration solution for children with dehydration and acute gastroenteritis. These solutions are more expensive and less palatable than juices. The authors sought to determine if diluted apple juice versus electrolyte oral rehydration fluid decreased the need for IV fluids, hospitalization, return visits, prolonged symptoms, or ongoing dehydration in mildly dehydrated children with acute gastroenteritis.
Study Design: Randomized single-blind non-inferiority prospective trial.
Setting: Single large tertiary-care pediatric emergency room.
Synopsis: Over five years, 3,668 patients were identified. Inclusion criteria were age >6 months or 8 kg of weight; Clinical Dehydration Scale score
Patients were challenged with small aliquots of these solutions and given ondansetron if they vomited. Upon discharge, they were sent home with 2 L of their solution. In the control arm, families were instructed to use this solution to make up for any ongoing losses. In the experimental arm, families were instructed to provide whatever fluids they would prefer. Follow-up was via phone, mail, and in-person reassessments. Patients were considered to have failed treatment if they required hospitalization, IV fluids, or a repeat unscheduled visit to a physician or experienced diarrhea lasting more than seven days or worsening dehydration on follow-up.
In the experimental arm, 16.7% of patients failed treatment (95% CI, 12.8%–21.2%) compared to 25% in the control arm (95% CI, 20.4%–30.1%; P < 0.001 for non-inferiority, P = .006 for superiority). The experimental arm also required IV fluids (2.5% versus 9%) significantly less often, though without a significantly decreased rate of hospitalization. These differences were present primarily in children >24 months old. No difference in the frequency of diarrheal stools was found, and no episodes of significant hyponatremia occurred.
Bottom Line: Giving children with mild dehydration due to acute gastroenteritis diluted apple juice and preferred fluids rather than the currently recommended electrolyte oral rehydration solution leads to decreased treatment failures and decreased need for IV fluids. There was no evidence of worsened diarrhea or significant hyponatremia.
Citation: Freedman SB, Willan AR, Boutis K, Schuh S. Effect of dilute apple juice and preferred fluids vs electrolyte maintenance solution on treatment failure among children with mild gastroenteritis: a randomized clinical trial. JAMA. 2016;315(18):1966-1974. doi:10.1001/jama.2016.5352.
Dr. Stubblefield is a pediatric hospitalist at Nemours/Alfred I. Dupont Hospital for Children in Wilmington, Del., and assistant professor of pediatrics at Thomas Jefferson Medical College in Philadelphia.
Clinical Question: Is diluted apple juice inferior to apple-flavored electrolyte oral rehydration solution in children with mild dehydration due to acute gastroenteritis?
Background: In the setting of acute gastroenteritis, teaching has classically been that the simple sugars in juice and sports drinks can worsen diarrhea and that they could cause hyponatremia since they are not isotonic. Due to this, the American Academy of Pediatrics recommends an electrolyte oral rehydration solution for children with dehydration and acute gastroenteritis. These solutions are more expensive and less palatable than juices. The authors sought to determine if diluted apple juice versus electrolyte oral rehydration fluid decreased the need for IV fluids, hospitalization, return visits, prolonged symptoms, or ongoing dehydration in mildly dehydrated children with acute gastroenteritis.
Study Design: Randomized single-blind non-inferiority prospective trial.
Setting: Single large tertiary-care pediatric emergency room.
Synopsis: Over five years, 3,668 patients were identified. Inclusion criteria were age >6 months or 8 kg of weight; Clinical Dehydration Scale score
Patients were challenged with small aliquots of these solutions and given ondansetron if they vomited. Upon discharge, they were sent home with 2 L of their solution. In the control arm, families were instructed to use this solution to make up for any ongoing losses. In the experimental arm, families were instructed to provide whatever fluids they would prefer. Follow-up was via phone, mail, and in-person reassessments. Patients were considered to have failed treatment if they required hospitalization, IV fluids, or a repeat unscheduled visit to a physician or experienced diarrhea lasting more than seven days or worsening dehydration on follow-up.
In the experimental arm, 16.7% of patients failed treatment (95% CI, 12.8%–21.2%) compared to 25% in the control arm (95% CI, 20.4%–30.1%; P < 0.001 for non-inferiority, P = .006 for superiority). The experimental arm also required IV fluids (2.5% versus 9%) significantly less often, though without a significantly decreased rate of hospitalization. These differences were present primarily in children >24 months old. No difference in the frequency of diarrheal stools was found, and no episodes of significant hyponatremia occurred.
Bottom Line: Giving children with mild dehydration due to acute gastroenteritis diluted apple juice and preferred fluids rather than the currently recommended electrolyte oral rehydration solution leads to decreased treatment failures and decreased need for IV fluids. There was no evidence of worsened diarrhea or significant hyponatremia.
Citation: Freedman SB, Willan AR, Boutis K, Schuh S. Effect of dilute apple juice and preferred fluids vs electrolyte maintenance solution on treatment failure among children with mild gastroenteritis: a randomized clinical trial. JAMA. 2016;315(18):1966-1974. doi:10.1001/jama.2016.5352.
Dr. Stubblefield is a pediatric hospitalist at Nemours/Alfred I. Dupont Hospital for Children in Wilmington, Del., and assistant professor of pediatrics at Thomas Jefferson Medical College in Philadelphia.
Clinical Question: Is diluted apple juice inferior to apple-flavored electrolyte oral rehydration solution in children with mild dehydration due to acute gastroenteritis?
Background: In the setting of acute gastroenteritis, teaching has classically been that the simple sugars in juice and sports drinks can worsen diarrhea and that they could cause hyponatremia since they are not isotonic. Due to this, the American Academy of Pediatrics recommends an electrolyte oral rehydration solution for children with dehydration and acute gastroenteritis. These solutions are more expensive and less palatable than juices. The authors sought to determine if diluted apple juice versus electrolyte oral rehydration fluid decreased the need for IV fluids, hospitalization, return visits, prolonged symptoms, or ongoing dehydration in mildly dehydrated children with acute gastroenteritis.
Study Design: Randomized single-blind non-inferiority prospective trial.
Setting: Single large tertiary-care pediatric emergency room.
Synopsis: Over five years, 3,668 patients were identified. Inclusion criteria were age >6 months or 8 kg of weight; Clinical Dehydration Scale score
Patients were challenged with small aliquots of these solutions and given ondansetron if they vomited. Upon discharge, they were sent home with 2 L of their solution. In the control arm, families were instructed to use this solution to make up for any ongoing losses. In the experimental arm, families were instructed to provide whatever fluids they would prefer. Follow-up was via phone, mail, and in-person reassessments. Patients were considered to have failed treatment if they required hospitalization, IV fluids, or a repeat unscheduled visit to a physician or experienced diarrhea lasting more than seven days or worsening dehydration on follow-up.
In the experimental arm, 16.7% of patients failed treatment (95% CI, 12.8%–21.2%) compared to 25% in the control arm (95% CI, 20.4%–30.1%; P < 0.001 for non-inferiority, P = .006 for superiority). The experimental arm also required IV fluids (2.5% versus 9%) significantly less often, though without a significantly decreased rate of hospitalization. These differences were present primarily in children >24 months old. No difference in the frequency of diarrheal stools was found, and no episodes of significant hyponatremia occurred.
Bottom Line: Giving children with mild dehydration due to acute gastroenteritis diluted apple juice and preferred fluids rather than the currently recommended electrolyte oral rehydration solution leads to decreased treatment failures and decreased need for IV fluids. There was no evidence of worsened diarrhea or significant hyponatremia.
Citation: Freedman SB, Willan AR, Boutis K, Schuh S. Effect of dilute apple juice and preferred fluids vs electrolyte maintenance solution on treatment failure among children with mild gastroenteritis: a randomized clinical trial. JAMA. 2016;315(18):1966-1974. doi:10.1001/jama.2016.5352.
Dr. Stubblefield is a pediatric hospitalist at Nemours/Alfred I. Dupont Hospital for Children in Wilmington, Del., and assistant professor of pediatrics at Thomas Jefferson Medical College in Philadelphia.
Real-World Safety and Effectiveness of Oral Anticoagulants for Afib
Clinical Question: Which oral anticoagulants are safest and most effective in nonvalvular atrial fibrillation?
Background: Use of direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) has been increasing since their introduction and widespread marketing. While dosing is a challenge for warfarin, certain medical conditions limit the use of DOACs. Choosing the optimal oral anticoagulant is challenging with the increasing complexity of patients.
Study Design: Nationwide observational cohort study.
Setting: Three national Danish databases, from August 2011 to October 2015.
Synopsis: Authors reviewed data from 61,678 patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation who were new to oral anticoagulants. The study compared the efficacy, safety, and patient characteristics of DOACs and warfarin. Ischemic stroke, systemic embolism, and death were evaluated separately and as a composite measure of efficacy. Any bleeding, intracranial bleeding, and major bleeding were measured as safety outcomes. DOACs patients were younger and had lower CHA2DS2-VASc and HAS-BLED scores. No significant difference in risk of ischemic stroke was identified between DOACs and warfarin. Rivaroxaban was associated with lower rates of ischemic stroke and systemic embolism but had bleeding rates that were similar to warfarin. Any bleeding and major bleeding rates were lowest for dabigatran and apixaban. All-cause mortality was lowest in the dabigatran group and highest in the warfarin group.
Limitations were the retrospective, observational study design, with an average follow-up of only 1.9 years.
Bottom Line: All DOACs appear to be safer and more effective alternatives to warfarin. Oral anticoagulant selection needs to be based on individual patient clinical profile.
Citation: Larsen TB, Skjoth F, Nielsen PB, Kjaeldgaard JN, Lip GY. Comparative effectiveness and safety of non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants and warfarin in patients with atrial fibrillation: propensity weighted nationwide cohort study. BMJ. 2016;353:i3189.
Short Take
Mortality and Long-Acting Opiates
This retrospective cohort study raises questions about the safety of long-acting opioids for chronic noncancer pain. When compared with anticonvulsants or antidepressants, the adjusted hazard ratio was 1.64 for total mortality.
Citation: Ray W, Chung CP, Murray KT, Hall K, Stein CM. Prescription of long-acting opioids and mortality in patients with chronic noncancer pain. JAMA. 2016;315(22):2415-2423.
Clinical Question: Which oral anticoagulants are safest and most effective in nonvalvular atrial fibrillation?
Background: Use of direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) has been increasing since their introduction and widespread marketing. While dosing is a challenge for warfarin, certain medical conditions limit the use of DOACs. Choosing the optimal oral anticoagulant is challenging with the increasing complexity of patients.
Study Design: Nationwide observational cohort study.
Setting: Three national Danish databases, from August 2011 to October 2015.
Synopsis: Authors reviewed data from 61,678 patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation who were new to oral anticoagulants. The study compared the efficacy, safety, and patient characteristics of DOACs and warfarin. Ischemic stroke, systemic embolism, and death were evaluated separately and as a composite measure of efficacy. Any bleeding, intracranial bleeding, and major bleeding were measured as safety outcomes. DOACs patients were younger and had lower CHA2DS2-VASc and HAS-BLED scores. No significant difference in risk of ischemic stroke was identified between DOACs and warfarin. Rivaroxaban was associated with lower rates of ischemic stroke and systemic embolism but had bleeding rates that were similar to warfarin. Any bleeding and major bleeding rates were lowest for dabigatran and apixaban. All-cause mortality was lowest in the dabigatran group and highest in the warfarin group.
Limitations were the retrospective, observational study design, with an average follow-up of only 1.9 years.
Bottom Line: All DOACs appear to be safer and more effective alternatives to warfarin. Oral anticoagulant selection needs to be based on individual patient clinical profile.
Citation: Larsen TB, Skjoth F, Nielsen PB, Kjaeldgaard JN, Lip GY. Comparative effectiveness and safety of non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants and warfarin in patients with atrial fibrillation: propensity weighted nationwide cohort study. BMJ. 2016;353:i3189.
Short Take
Mortality and Long-Acting Opiates
This retrospective cohort study raises questions about the safety of long-acting opioids for chronic noncancer pain. When compared with anticonvulsants or antidepressants, the adjusted hazard ratio was 1.64 for total mortality.
Citation: Ray W, Chung CP, Murray KT, Hall K, Stein CM. Prescription of long-acting opioids and mortality in patients with chronic noncancer pain. JAMA. 2016;315(22):2415-2423.
Clinical Question: Which oral anticoagulants are safest and most effective in nonvalvular atrial fibrillation?
Background: Use of direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) has been increasing since their introduction and widespread marketing. While dosing is a challenge for warfarin, certain medical conditions limit the use of DOACs. Choosing the optimal oral anticoagulant is challenging with the increasing complexity of patients.
Study Design: Nationwide observational cohort study.
Setting: Three national Danish databases, from August 2011 to October 2015.
Synopsis: Authors reviewed data from 61,678 patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation who were new to oral anticoagulants. The study compared the efficacy, safety, and patient characteristics of DOACs and warfarin. Ischemic stroke, systemic embolism, and death were evaluated separately and as a composite measure of efficacy. Any bleeding, intracranial bleeding, and major bleeding were measured as safety outcomes. DOACs patients were younger and had lower CHA2DS2-VASc and HAS-BLED scores. No significant difference in risk of ischemic stroke was identified between DOACs and warfarin. Rivaroxaban was associated with lower rates of ischemic stroke and systemic embolism but had bleeding rates that were similar to warfarin. Any bleeding and major bleeding rates were lowest for dabigatran and apixaban. All-cause mortality was lowest in the dabigatran group and highest in the warfarin group.
Limitations were the retrospective, observational study design, with an average follow-up of only 1.9 years.
Bottom Line: All DOACs appear to be safer and more effective alternatives to warfarin. Oral anticoagulant selection needs to be based on individual patient clinical profile.
Citation: Larsen TB, Skjoth F, Nielsen PB, Kjaeldgaard JN, Lip GY. Comparative effectiveness and safety of non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants and warfarin in patients with atrial fibrillation: propensity weighted nationwide cohort study. BMJ. 2016;353:i3189.
Short Take
Mortality and Long-Acting Opiates
This retrospective cohort study raises questions about the safety of long-acting opioids for chronic noncancer pain. When compared with anticonvulsants or antidepressants, the adjusted hazard ratio was 1.64 for total mortality.
Citation: Ray W, Chung CP, Murray KT, Hall K, Stein CM. Prescription of long-acting opioids and mortality in patients with chronic noncancer pain. JAMA. 2016;315(22):2415-2423.
Prescribing Naloxone for Patients on Long-Term Opioid Therapy
Background: Unintentional opioid overdose is a major public health issue. Studies have shown that provision of naloxone to at-risk patients reduces mortality and improves survival. The CDC recommends considering naloxone prescription in high-risk patients. This study focused on patient education and prescription habits of providers rather than just making naloxone available.
Study Design: Non-randomized interventional study.
Setting: Six safety-net primary-care clinics in San Francisco.
Synopsis: The authors identified 1,985 adults on long-term opioid treatment, of which 759 were prescribed naloxone. Providers were encouraged to prescribe naloxone along with opioids. Patients were educated about use of the intranasal naloxone device. Outcomes included opioid-related emergency department visits and prescribed dosage. They noted that patients on a higher dose of opioids and with opioid-related ED visits in the prior 12 months were more likely to be prescribed naloxone. When compared to patients who were not prescribed naloxone, patients who received naloxone had 47% fewer ED visits per month in the first six months and 63% fewer ED visits over 12 months. Limitations include lack of randomization and being a single-center study.
Hospitalists can prioritize patients and consider providing naloxone prescription to reduce ED visits and perhaps readmissions. Further studies are needed focusing on patients who get discharged from the hospital.
Bottom Line: Naloxone prescription in patients on long-term opioid treatment may prevent opioid-related ED visits.
Citation: Coffin PO, Behar E, Rowe C, et al. Nonrandomized intervention study of naloxone coprescription for primary care patients receiving long-term opioid therapy for pain. Ann Intern Med. 2016;165(4):245-252.
Short Take
Mortality and Long-Acting Opiates
This retrospective cohort study raises questions about the safety of long-acting opioids for chronic noncancer pain. When compared with anticonvulsants or antidepressants, the adjusted hazard ratio was 1.64 for total mortality.
Citation: Ray W, Chung CP, Murray KT, Hall K, Stein CM. Prescription of long-acting opioids and mortality in patients with chronic noncancer pain. JAMA. 2016;315(22):2415-2423.
Background: Unintentional opioid overdose is a major public health issue. Studies have shown that provision of naloxone to at-risk patients reduces mortality and improves survival. The CDC recommends considering naloxone prescription in high-risk patients. This study focused on patient education and prescription habits of providers rather than just making naloxone available.
Study Design: Non-randomized interventional study.
Setting: Six safety-net primary-care clinics in San Francisco.
Synopsis: The authors identified 1,985 adults on long-term opioid treatment, of which 759 were prescribed naloxone. Providers were encouraged to prescribe naloxone along with opioids. Patients were educated about use of the intranasal naloxone device. Outcomes included opioid-related emergency department visits and prescribed dosage. They noted that patients on a higher dose of opioids and with opioid-related ED visits in the prior 12 months were more likely to be prescribed naloxone. When compared to patients who were not prescribed naloxone, patients who received naloxone had 47% fewer ED visits per month in the first six months and 63% fewer ED visits over 12 months. Limitations include lack of randomization and being a single-center study.
Hospitalists can prioritize patients and consider providing naloxone prescription to reduce ED visits and perhaps readmissions. Further studies are needed focusing on patients who get discharged from the hospital.
Bottom Line: Naloxone prescription in patients on long-term opioid treatment may prevent opioid-related ED visits.
Citation: Coffin PO, Behar E, Rowe C, et al. Nonrandomized intervention study of naloxone coprescription for primary care patients receiving long-term opioid therapy for pain. Ann Intern Med. 2016;165(4):245-252.
Short Take
Mortality and Long-Acting Opiates
This retrospective cohort study raises questions about the safety of long-acting opioids for chronic noncancer pain. When compared with anticonvulsants or antidepressants, the adjusted hazard ratio was 1.64 for total mortality.
Citation: Ray W, Chung CP, Murray KT, Hall K, Stein CM. Prescription of long-acting opioids and mortality in patients with chronic noncancer pain. JAMA. 2016;315(22):2415-2423.
Background: Unintentional opioid overdose is a major public health issue. Studies have shown that provision of naloxone to at-risk patients reduces mortality and improves survival. The CDC recommends considering naloxone prescription in high-risk patients. This study focused on patient education and prescription habits of providers rather than just making naloxone available.
Study Design: Non-randomized interventional study.
Setting: Six safety-net primary-care clinics in San Francisco.
Synopsis: The authors identified 1,985 adults on long-term opioid treatment, of which 759 were prescribed naloxone. Providers were encouraged to prescribe naloxone along with opioids. Patients were educated about use of the intranasal naloxone device. Outcomes included opioid-related emergency department visits and prescribed dosage. They noted that patients on a higher dose of opioids and with opioid-related ED visits in the prior 12 months were more likely to be prescribed naloxone. When compared to patients who were not prescribed naloxone, patients who received naloxone had 47% fewer ED visits per month in the first six months and 63% fewer ED visits over 12 months. Limitations include lack of randomization and being a single-center study.
Hospitalists can prioritize patients and consider providing naloxone prescription to reduce ED visits and perhaps readmissions. Further studies are needed focusing on patients who get discharged from the hospital.
Bottom Line: Naloxone prescription in patients on long-term opioid treatment may prevent opioid-related ED visits.
Citation: Coffin PO, Behar E, Rowe C, et al. Nonrandomized intervention study of naloxone coprescription for primary care patients receiving long-term opioid therapy for pain. Ann Intern Med. 2016;165(4):245-252.
Short Take
Mortality and Long-Acting Opiates
This retrospective cohort study raises questions about the safety of long-acting opioids for chronic noncancer pain. When compared with anticonvulsants or antidepressants, the adjusted hazard ratio was 1.64 for total mortality.
Citation: Ray W, Chung CP, Murray KT, Hall K, Stein CM. Prescription of long-acting opioids and mortality in patients with chronic noncancer pain. JAMA. 2016;315(22):2415-2423.
Palliative Care May Improve End-of-Life Care for Patients with ESRD, Cardiopulmonary Failure, Frailty
Clinical Question: Is there a difference in family-rated quality of care for patients dying with different serious illnesses?
Background: End-of-life care has focused largely on cancer patients. However, other conditions lead to more deaths than cancer in the United States.
Study Design: A retrospective cross-sectional study.
Setting: 146 inpatient Veterans Affairs (VA) facilities.
Synopsis: This study included 57,753 patients who died in inpatient facilities with a diagnosis of cancer, dementia, end-stage renal disease (ESRD), cardiopulmonary failure (heart failure or chronic obstructive pulmonary disease), or frailty. Measures included palliative care consultations, do-not-resuscitate (DNR) orders, death in inpatient hospice, death in the intensive care unit (ICU), and family-reported quality of end-of-life care. Palliative care consultations were given to 73.5% of patients with cancer and 61.4% of patients with dementia, which was significantly more than patients with other diagnoses (P < .001).
Approximately one-third of patients with diagnoses other than cancer or dementia died in the ICU, which was more than double the rate among patients with cancer or dementia (P < .001). Rates of excellent quality of end-of-life care were similar for patients with cancer and dementia (59.2% and 59.3%) but lower for other conditions (P = 0.02 when compared with cancer patient). This was mediated by palliative care consultation, setting of death, and DNR status. Difficulty defining frailty and restriction to only the VA system are limitations of this study.
Bottom Line: Increasing access to palliative care, goals-of-care discussions, and preferred setting of death may improve overall quality of end-of-life care.
Citation: Wachterman MW, Pilver C, Smith D, Ersek M, Lipsitz SR, Keating NL. Quality of end-of-life care provided to patients with different serious illnesses. JAMA Intern Med. 2016;176(8):1095-1102. doi:10.1001/jamainternmed.2016.1200.
Clinical Question: Is there a difference in family-rated quality of care for patients dying with different serious illnesses?
Background: End-of-life care has focused largely on cancer patients. However, other conditions lead to more deaths than cancer in the United States.
Study Design: A retrospective cross-sectional study.
Setting: 146 inpatient Veterans Affairs (VA) facilities.
Synopsis: This study included 57,753 patients who died in inpatient facilities with a diagnosis of cancer, dementia, end-stage renal disease (ESRD), cardiopulmonary failure (heart failure or chronic obstructive pulmonary disease), or frailty. Measures included palliative care consultations, do-not-resuscitate (DNR) orders, death in inpatient hospice, death in the intensive care unit (ICU), and family-reported quality of end-of-life care. Palliative care consultations were given to 73.5% of patients with cancer and 61.4% of patients with dementia, which was significantly more than patients with other diagnoses (P < .001).
Approximately one-third of patients with diagnoses other than cancer or dementia died in the ICU, which was more than double the rate among patients with cancer or dementia (P < .001). Rates of excellent quality of end-of-life care were similar for patients with cancer and dementia (59.2% and 59.3%) but lower for other conditions (P = 0.02 when compared with cancer patient). This was mediated by palliative care consultation, setting of death, and DNR status. Difficulty defining frailty and restriction to only the VA system are limitations of this study.
Bottom Line: Increasing access to palliative care, goals-of-care discussions, and preferred setting of death may improve overall quality of end-of-life care.
Citation: Wachterman MW, Pilver C, Smith D, Ersek M, Lipsitz SR, Keating NL. Quality of end-of-life care provided to patients with different serious illnesses. JAMA Intern Med. 2016;176(8):1095-1102. doi:10.1001/jamainternmed.2016.1200.
Clinical Question: Is there a difference in family-rated quality of care for patients dying with different serious illnesses?
Background: End-of-life care has focused largely on cancer patients. However, other conditions lead to more deaths than cancer in the United States.
Study Design: A retrospective cross-sectional study.
Setting: 146 inpatient Veterans Affairs (VA) facilities.
Synopsis: This study included 57,753 patients who died in inpatient facilities with a diagnosis of cancer, dementia, end-stage renal disease (ESRD), cardiopulmonary failure (heart failure or chronic obstructive pulmonary disease), or frailty. Measures included palliative care consultations, do-not-resuscitate (DNR) orders, death in inpatient hospice, death in the intensive care unit (ICU), and family-reported quality of end-of-life care. Palliative care consultations were given to 73.5% of patients with cancer and 61.4% of patients with dementia, which was significantly more than patients with other diagnoses (P < .001).
Approximately one-third of patients with diagnoses other than cancer or dementia died in the ICU, which was more than double the rate among patients with cancer or dementia (P < .001). Rates of excellent quality of end-of-life care were similar for patients with cancer and dementia (59.2% and 59.3%) but lower for other conditions (P = 0.02 when compared with cancer patient). This was mediated by palliative care consultation, setting of death, and DNR status. Difficulty defining frailty and restriction to only the VA system are limitations of this study.
Bottom Line: Increasing access to palliative care, goals-of-care discussions, and preferred setting of death may improve overall quality of end-of-life care.
Citation: Wachterman MW, Pilver C, Smith D, Ersek M, Lipsitz SR, Keating NL. Quality of end-of-life care provided to patients with different serious illnesses. JAMA Intern Med. 2016;176(8):1095-1102. doi:10.1001/jamainternmed.2016.1200.
Patients’ Out-of-Pocket Spending Increasing
Clinical Question: How much are insured nonelderly adult patients paying out of pocket for inpatient care, and does that amount vary over time or by patient characteristics, region, or type of insurance?
Background: Prior estimates have been based on patient-reported survey data. This is the first study to find nationwide out-of-pocket expenditure for inpatient hospitalizations.
Study Design: Retrospective analysis.
Setting: Medical claims data from Aetna, UnitedHealthcare, and Humana including 7.3 million hospitalizations from 2009 to 2013.
Synopsis: Authors used the Health Care Cost Institute (HCCI) database and studied inpatient hospitalization for ages 18–64. The adjusted total cost sharing per inpatient hospitalization increased by 37% (from $738 in 2009 to $1,013 in 2013). Both the mean amount of coinsurance and deductibles increased during this period by 33% (from $518 to $688) and 86% (from $145 to $270), respectively. The mean copayment decreased by 27% (from $75 to $55).
Increase in cost sharing was lowest in individual-market and consumer-directed health plans, although both had highest cost sharing.
Total cost sharing increased in every state. The largest increases were seen in Georgia, Louisiana, and Colorado. In 2013, the states with the highest cost sharing were Utah, Alaska, and Oregon.
Acute myocardial infarction and acute appendicitis saw maximum rise in out-of-pocket spending; both surpassed $1,500 in 2013. Cost sharing associated with procedures was lower.
Bottom Line: Even after adjusting for inflation and case-mix differences, the total cost sharing per inpatient hospitalization increased between 2009 and 2013. Policymakers and patients need to pay attention to these trends.
Citation: Adrion ER, Ryan AM, Seltzer AC, Chen LM, Ayanian JZ, Nallamothu BK. Out-of-pocket spending for hospitalizations among nonelderly adults. JAMA Intern Med. 2016;176(9)1325-1332.
Short Take
Aspirin Is Being Used Instead of Anticoagulation in Afib
Despite recommendations to anticoagulate patients with CHADS2 /CHA2DS2-VASc scores of ≥2, more than one-third of the patients in a large population of cardiology outpatients were treated with aspirin alone.
Citation: Hsu JC, Maddox TM, Kennedy K, et al. Aspirin instead of oral anticoagulant prescription in atrial fibrillation patients at risk for stroke. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2016;67(25):2913-2923.
Clinical Question: How much are insured nonelderly adult patients paying out of pocket for inpatient care, and does that amount vary over time or by patient characteristics, region, or type of insurance?
Background: Prior estimates have been based on patient-reported survey data. This is the first study to find nationwide out-of-pocket expenditure for inpatient hospitalizations.
Study Design: Retrospective analysis.
Setting: Medical claims data from Aetna, UnitedHealthcare, and Humana including 7.3 million hospitalizations from 2009 to 2013.
Synopsis: Authors used the Health Care Cost Institute (HCCI) database and studied inpatient hospitalization for ages 18–64. The adjusted total cost sharing per inpatient hospitalization increased by 37% (from $738 in 2009 to $1,013 in 2013). Both the mean amount of coinsurance and deductibles increased during this period by 33% (from $518 to $688) and 86% (from $145 to $270), respectively. The mean copayment decreased by 27% (from $75 to $55).
Increase in cost sharing was lowest in individual-market and consumer-directed health plans, although both had highest cost sharing.
Total cost sharing increased in every state. The largest increases were seen in Georgia, Louisiana, and Colorado. In 2013, the states with the highest cost sharing were Utah, Alaska, and Oregon.
Acute myocardial infarction and acute appendicitis saw maximum rise in out-of-pocket spending; both surpassed $1,500 in 2013. Cost sharing associated with procedures was lower.
Bottom Line: Even after adjusting for inflation and case-mix differences, the total cost sharing per inpatient hospitalization increased between 2009 and 2013. Policymakers and patients need to pay attention to these trends.
Citation: Adrion ER, Ryan AM, Seltzer AC, Chen LM, Ayanian JZ, Nallamothu BK. Out-of-pocket spending for hospitalizations among nonelderly adults. JAMA Intern Med. 2016;176(9)1325-1332.
Short Take
Aspirin Is Being Used Instead of Anticoagulation in Afib
Despite recommendations to anticoagulate patients with CHADS2 /CHA2DS2-VASc scores of ≥2, more than one-third of the patients in a large population of cardiology outpatients were treated with aspirin alone.
Citation: Hsu JC, Maddox TM, Kennedy K, et al. Aspirin instead of oral anticoagulant prescription in atrial fibrillation patients at risk for stroke. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2016;67(25):2913-2923.
Clinical Question: How much are insured nonelderly adult patients paying out of pocket for inpatient care, and does that amount vary over time or by patient characteristics, region, or type of insurance?
Background: Prior estimates have been based on patient-reported survey data. This is the first study to find nationwide out-of-pocket expenditure for inpatient hospitalizations.
Study Design: Retrospective analysis.
Setting: Medical claims data from Aetna, UnitedHealthcare, and Humana including 7.3 million hospitalizations from 2009 to 2013.
Synopsis: Authors used the Health Care Cost Institute (HCCI) database and studied inpatient hospitalization for ages 18–64. The adjusted total cost sharing per inpatient hospitalization increased by 37% (from $738 in 2009 to $1,013 in 2013). Both the mean amount of coinsurance and deductibles increased during this period by 33% (from $518 to $688) and 86% (from $145 to $270), respectively. The mean copayment decreased by 27% (from $75 to $55).
Increase in cost sharing was lowest in individual-market and consumer-directed health plans, although both had highest cost sharing.
Total cost sharing increased in every state. The largest increases were seen in Georgia, Louisiana, and Colorado. In 2013, the states with the highest cost sharing were Utah, Alaska, and Oregon.
Acute myocardial infarction and acute appendicitis saw maximum rise in out-of-pocket spending; both surpassed $1,500 in 2013. Cost sharing associated with procedures was lower.
Bottom Line: Even after adjusting for inflation and case-mix differences, the total cost sharing per inpatient hospitalization increased between 2009 and 2013. Policymakers and patients need to pay attention to these trends.
Citation: Adrion ER, Ryan AM, Seltzer AC, Chen LM, Ayanian JZ, Nallamothu BK. Out-of-pocket spending for hospitalizations among nonelderly adults. JAMA Intern Med. 2016;176(9)1325-1332.
Short Take
Aspirin Is Being Used Instead of Anticoagulation in Afib
Despite recommendations to anticoagulate patients with CHADS2 /CHA2DS2-VASc scores of ≥2, more than one-third of the patients in a large population of cardiology outpatients were treated with aspirin alone.
Citation: Hsu JC, Maddox TM, Kennedy K, et al. Aspirin instead of oral anticoagulant prescription in atrial fibrillation patients at risk for stroke. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2016;67(25):2913-2923.
Patients with Epilepsy May Lack Essential Social Cognition Skills
Patients with epilepsy seem to have difficulty recognizing certain emotional states, according to a recent study that used video simulations to evaluate patients’ social cognition skills. When researchers administered the Awareness of Social Inference Test to 43 patients with focal epilepsy and 22 controls, using a video format, they found that neither group had trouble identifying positive emotional states like happiness; but patients with epilepsy had difficulty recognizing negative emotions such as anger, fear, and disgust. The study suggests that standard psychometric tools used to measure cognitive abilities in patients with epilepsy may need to be supplemented with a vehicle that evaluates social cognition.
Bujarski KA, Flashman L, Li Z, et al. Investigating social cognition in epilepsy using a naturalistic task. Epilepsia. 2016;57(9):1515-1520.
Patients with epilepsy seem to have difficulty recognizing certain emotional states, according to a recent study that used video simulations to evaluate patients’ social cognition skills. When researchers administered the Awareness of Social Inference Test to 43 patients with focal epilepsy and 22 controls, using a video format, they found that neither group had trouble identifying positive emotional states like happiness; but patients with epilepsy had difficulty recognizing negative emotions such as anger, fear, and disgust. The study suggests that standard psychometric tools used to measure cognitive abilities in patients with epilepsy may need to be supplemented with a vehicle that evaluates social cognition.
Bujarski KA, Flashman L, Li Z, et al. Investigating social cognition in epilepsy using a naturalistic task. Epilepsia. 2016;57(9):1515-1520.
Patients with epilepsy seem to have difficulty recognizing certain emotional states, according to a recent study that used video simulations to evaluate patients’ social cognition skills. When researchers administered the Awareness of Social Inference Test to 43 patients with focal epilepsy and 22 controls, using a video format, they found that neither group had trouble identifying positive emotional states like happiness; but patients with epilepsy had difficulty recognizing negative emotions such as anger, fear, and disgust. The study suggests that standard psychometric tools used to measure cognitive abilities in patients with epilepsy may need to be supplemented with a vehicle that evaluates social cognition.
Bujarski KA, Flashman L, Li Z, et al. Investigating social cognition in epilepsy using a naturalistic task. Epilepsia. 2016;57(9):1515-1520.
The Default Mode Network Plays Important Role in Pathology of Epilepsy
The default mode network (DMN), which connects brain regions such as precuneus/posterior cingulate cortex, medial prefrontal cortex, and medial, lateral, and inferior parietal cortex, plays an important role in temporal lobe epilepsy (TLE), according to a recent literature review. Among patients with TLE, the amplitude of the blood oxygenation-level dependent (BOLD) signal decreases during the interval between seizures. Investigators have also found that TLE patients have less anterograde connectivity from the anterior to the posterior DMN. Changes in the activity of the DMN in people with epilepsy, as well as several other neurological disorders, suggest that assessment of the network may help improve early detection and treatment, according to the researchers.
Mohan A, Roberto AJ, Mohan A, et al. The significance of the default mode network (DMN) in neurological and neuropsychiatric disorders: A review. Yale J Biol Med. 2016;89(1):49-57.
The default mode network (DMN), which connects brain regions such as precuneus/posterior cingulate cortex, medial prefrontal cortex, and medial, lateral, and inferior parietal cortex, plays an important role in temporal lobe epilepsy (TLE), according to a recent literature review. Among patients with TLE, the amplitude of the blood oxygenation-level dependent (BOLD) signal decreases during the interval between seizures. Investigators have also found that TLE patients have less anterograde connectivity from the anterior to the posterior DMN. Changes in the activity of the DMN in people with epilepsy, as well as several other neurological disorders, suggest that assessment of the network may help improve early detection and treatment, according to the researchers.
Mohan A, Roberto AJ, Mohan A, et al. The significance of the default mode network (DMN) in neurological and neuropsychiatric disorders: A review. Yale J Biol Med. 2016;89(1):49-57.
The default mode network (DMN), which connects brain regions such as precuneus/posterior cingulate cortex, medial prefrontal cortex, and medial, lateral, and inferior parietal cortex, plays an important role in temporal lobe epilepsy (TLE), according to a recent literature review. Among patients with TLE, the amplitude of the blood oxygenation-level dependent (BOLD) signal decreases during the interval between seizures. Investigators have also found that TLE patients have less anterograde connectivity from the anterior to the posterior DMN. Changes in the activity of the DMN in people with epilepsy, as well as several other neurological disorders, suggest that assessment of the network may help improve early detection and treatment, according to the researchers.
Mohan A, Roberto AJ, Mohan A, et al. The significance of the default mode network (DMN) in neurological and neuropsychiatric disorders: A review. Yale J Biol Med. 2016;89(1):49-57.
Using MRIs to Separate Rasmussen Encephalitis from Epilepsy
To help distinguish patients with Rasmussen encephalitis from patients with epilepsy not suffering from the syndrome, researchers performed quantitative volumetric MR imaging on 42 patients with Rasmussen syndrome and compared the readings to MRIs performed on 42 controls and 42 unaffected patients with epilepsy. Their analysis found that interhemispheric and frontal lobe ratios were the most effective way to differentiate Rasmussen encephalitis from the other 2 groups. They also found that the insula of Rasmussen encephalitis patients was significantly more atrophic, when compared with other cortical regions of the brain.
Wang Z, Krishnan B, Shattuck DW, et al. Automated MRI volumetric analysis in patients with Rasmussen syndrome [published online ahead of print September 8, 2016]. AJNR Am. J. Neuroradiol. 2016.
To help distinguish patients with Rasmussen encephalitis from patients with epilepsy not suffering from the syndrome, researchers performed quantitative volumetric MR imaging on 42 patients with Rasmussen syndrome and compared the readings to MRIs performed on 42 controls and 42 unaffected patients with epilepsy. Their analysis found that interhemispheric and frontal lobe ratios were the most effective way to differentiate Rasmussen encephalitis from the other 2 groups. They also found that the insula of Rasmussen encephalitis patients was significantly more atrophic, when compared with other cortical regions of the brain.
Wang Z, Krishnan B, Shattuck DW, et al. Automated MRI volumetric analysis in patients with Rasmussen syndrome [published online ahead of print September 8, 2016]. AJNR Am. J. Neuroradiol. 2016.
To help distinguish patients with Rasmussen encephalitis from patients with epilepsy not suffering from the syndrome, researchers performed quantitative volumetric MR imaging on 42 patients with Rasmussen syndrome and compared the readings to MRIs performed on 42 controls and 42 unaffected patients with epilepsy. Their analysis found that interhemispheric and frontal lobe ratios were the most effective way to differentiate Rasmussen encephalitis from the other 2 groups. They also found that the insula of Rasmussen encephalitis patients was significantly more atrophic, when compared with other cortical regions of the brain.
Wang Z, Krishnan B, Shattuck DW, et al. Automated MRI volumetric analysis in patients with Rasmussen syndrome [published online ahead of print September 8, 2016]. AJNR Am. J. Neuroradiol. 2016.