Concurrent utilization review and inappropriate hospital stay: evaluation of a program.

Using a crossover design, we tested the hypothesis that concurrent utilization review by a utilization officer would reduce length of stay and inappropriate bed days in a tertiary care hospital. The intervention groups included 396 consecutive patients admitted to specified services during two 1-month study periods and followed for at least 1 month or until discharge. Controls were 410 patients admitted to the same services during a preceding or subsequent month, separated by a 1-month washout period. Intervention cases had daily review of their care plan and medical condition by the utilization officer to identify existing or likely inappropriate hospital stay. The officer used interdisciplinary and interdepartmental consultation in attempting to resolve identified problems. A separate research nurse identified the controls and gathered data on the medical condition and care plan for a random 50% sample of both intervention and control cases. These data were used by a multidisciplinary panel to count and classify the reasons for inappropriate hospital days. Overall, there were no significant differences between the corresponding intervention and control groups for length of stay or proportion of inappropriate days. There was evidence of a time-related reduction in both length of stay and inappropriate days only in the subgroup of patients with a length of stay of < 15 d. As further evidence of this period effect unrelated to the intervention, length of stay had been declining for 1 of the groups of services before this study began. We concluded that concurrent utilization review, as practiced in this study, was ineffective in the short term. However, utilization review and modification of hospital processes can reduce inefficiency, as evidenced by the time-related reduction in inefficiency illustrated in our study.