Mullings Lauren, Sankaranarayanan Jayashri
Department of Pharmacy Practice, School of Pharmacy, University of Connecticut, Storrs, CT, USA.
Department of Pharmacy Practice, School of Pharmacy, University of Connecticut, Storrs, CT, USA; Department of Pharmacy Services, Hartford Hospital, Harford, CT, USA.
Res Social Adm Pharm. 2017 Jul-Aug;13(4):849-856. doi: 10.1016/j.sapharm.2016.09.005. Epub 2016 Oct 26.
Despite the benefits of improving transitions across care, literature is very limited on inpatient "Communication about Medicines" (ComMed) by staff across United States (U.S.) hospitals.
To evaluate ComMed quality variations by hospital characteristics.
In a cross-sectional, retrospective study of publicly available U.S. Medicare's Hospital Consumer Assessment of Health Care Plans Survey (HCAHPS) data (January 2013-September 2014), ComMed quality (high = above average/excellent vs. low = average/below average/poor star ratings) of 3125 hospitals were compared across region, rural-urban location, and health information technology (HIT) infrastructure giving providers access to patients' electronic medical records. Multivariate logistic regression analysis was conducted with adjusting for confounders (hospital - bed size, ownership, type, ED services, the number of completed HCAHPS surveys).
After adjusting for other characteristics, Midwest versus Western region hospitals (OR = 1.55, 95% CI: 1.21-1.98, p=<0.0001), hospitals with HIT infrastructure (OR = 1.29, 95% CI: 1.05-1.59, p = 0.02) were more likely while Northeast vs. Western region hospitals (OR = 0.67, 95% CI: 0.50-0.89, p=<0.0001) and hospitals in metropolitan areas with 1 million or more population vs. Nonmetro area with less than 2500 population were less likely (OR = 0.68, 95% CI: 0.48-0.95, p=<0.0001), to be associated with high ComMed quality. Hospitals' small bed-size, physician/non-profit ownership, critical-access type, absent ED services, and 100-299 HCAHPS completed surveys were more likely to be associated with high ComMed quality.
One of the first national studies found significant variations in ComMed quality across U.S. hospitals by location (high in Midwest and low in Northeast regions and urban areas) and by access to HIT infrastructure (high) after controlling for other hospital characteristics. With this baseline data, hospital providers and policymakers can design, implement, and evaluate service programs with pharmacists and HIT to enhance ComMed quality in the future delivery of patient-centered care.
尽管改善医疗服务过渡有诸多益处,但关于美国医院工作人员进行的住院患者“药物沟通”(ComMed)的文献非常有限。
根据医院特征评估ComMed质量差异。
在一项对公开的美国医疗保险医院消费者医疗保健计划调查(HCAHPS)数据(2013年1月 - 2014年9月)的横断面回顾性研究中,比较了3125家医院的ComMed质量(高 = 高于平均水平/优秀,低 = 平均水平/低于平均水平/差星级评分),涉及地区、城乡位置以及使医疗服务提供者能够访问患者电子病历的健康信息技术(HIT)基础设施。进行多因素逻辑回归分析,并对混杂因素(医院床位规模、所有权、类型、急诊服务、完成的HCAHPS调查数量)进行调整。
在调整其他特征后,中西部地区与西部地区医院(比值比[OR] = 1.55,95%置信区间[CI]:1.21 - 1.98,p < 0.0001)、拥有HIT基础设施的医院(OR = 1.29,95% CI:1.05 - 1.59,p = 0.02)更有可能具有高ComMed质量,而东北部地区与西部地区医院(OR = 0.67,95% CI:0.50 - 0.89,p < 0.0001)以及人口超过100万的大都市地区医院与人口少于2500的非大都市地区医院相比(OR = 0.68,95% CI:0.48 - 0.95,p < 0.0001)则不太可能具有高ComMed质量。医院床位规模小、医生/非营利性所有权、急救类型、无急诊服务以及完成100 - 299份HCAHPS调查的医院更有可能具有高ComMed质量。
第一项全国性研究之一发现,在美国医院中,ComMed质量在地理位置(中西部地区高,东北部地区和城市地区低)以及获得HIT基础设施(高)方面存在显著差异,在控制其他医院特征后依然如此。有了这些基线数据,医院医疗服务提供者和政策制定者可以设计、实施和评估与药剂师及HIT相关的服务项目,以在未来以患者为中心的医疗服务中提高ComMed质量。