Figueroa Jose F, Joynt Karen E, Zhou Xiner, Orav Endel J, Jha Ashish K
*Department of Health Policy and Management, Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health †Department of Medicine, Division of General Internal Medicine, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Cambridge ‡Department of Health Policy and Management, Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health §Department of Medicine, Division of Cardiovascular Medicine, Brigham and Women's Hospital ∥Department of Biostatistics, Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health ¶Department of Medicine, Division of General Internal Medicine, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston #Division of Medicine, Veterans Affairs Boston Healthcare System, Cambridge, MA.
Med Care. 2017 Mar;55(3):229-235. doi: 10.1097/MLR.0000000000000687.
US hospitals that care for vulnerable populations, "safety-net hospitals" (SNHs), are more likely to incur penalties under the Hospital Readmissions Reduction Program, which penalizes hospitals with higher-than-expected readmissions. Understanding whether SNHs face unique barriers to reducing readmissions or whether they underuse readmission-prevention strategies is important.
We surveyed leadership at 1600 US acute care hospitals, of whom 980 participated, between June 2013 and January 2014. Responses on 28 questions on readmission-related barriers and strategies were compared between SNHs and non-SNHs, adjusting for nonresponse and sampling strategy. We further compared responses between high-performing SNHs and low-performing SNHs.
We achieved a 62% response rate. SNHs were more likely to report patient-related barriers, including lack of transportation, homelessness, and language barriers compared with non-SNHs (P-values<0.001). Despite reporting more barriers, SNHs were less likely to use e-tools to share discharge summaries (70.1% vs. 73.7%, P<0.04) or verbally communicate (31.5% vs. 39.8%, P<0.001) with outpatient providers, track readmissions by race/ethnicity (23.9% vs. 28.6%, P<0.001), or enroll patients in postdischarge programs (13.3% vs. 17.2%, P<0.001). SNHs were also less likely to use discharge coordinators, pharmacists, and postdischarge programs. When we examined the use of strategies within SNHs, we found trends to suggest that high-performing SNHs were more likely to use several readmission strategies.
Despite reporting more barriers to reducing readmissions, SNHs were less likely to use readmission-reduction strategies. This combination of higher barriers and lower use of strategies may explain why SNHs have higher rates of readmissions and penalties under the Hospital Readmissions Reduction Program.
美国那些照顾弱势群体的医院,即“安全网医院”(SNHs),在“医院再入院率降低计划”下更有可能受到处罚,该计划会对再入院率高于预期的医院进行处罚。了解安全网医院在降低再入院率方面是否面临独特障碍,或者它们是否未充分利用预防再入院的策略非常重要。
2013年6月至2014年1月期间,我们对1600家美国急症护理医院的领导层进行了调查,其中980家参与了调查。对安全网医院和非安全网医院在28个与再入院相关的障碍和策略问题上的回答进行了比较,并对无回应情况和抽样策略进行了调整。我们还比较了高绩效安全网医院和低绩效安全网医院的回答。
我们的回应率为62%。与非安全网医院相比,安全网医院更有可能报告与患者相关的障碍,包括交通不便、无家可归和语言障碍(P值<0.001)。尽管报告了更多障碍,但安全网医院使用电子工具共享出院小结的可能性较小(70.1%对73.7%,P<0.04),与门诊提供者进行口头沟通的可能性较小(31.5%对39.8%,P<0.001),按种族/民族跟踪再入院情况的可能性较小(23.9%对28.6%,P<0.001),或让患者参加出院后项目的可能性较小(13.3%对17.2%,P<0.001)。安全网医院使用出院协调员、药剂师和出院后项目的可能性也较小。当我们研究安全网医院内部策略的使用情况时,我们发现有趋势表明高绩效安全网医院更有可能使用多种再入院策略。
尽管安全网医院报告在降低再入院率方面存在更多障碍,但它们使用降低再入院率策略的可能性较小。这种更高的障碍和更低的策略使用率的结合,可能解释了为什么安全网医院在“医院再入院率降低计划”下有更高的再入院率和处罚率。