Comparison of Factors Identified by Patients and Physicians Associated with Hospital Readmission (COMPARE2)

Prevalence of factors contributing to unplanned hospital readmission of older medical patients when assessed by patients, their significant others and healthcare professionals: a cross-sectional survey

OBJECTIVE

To describe the prevalence of factors contributing to readmission of older medical patients perceived by patients, significant others and healthcare professionals and to examine the agreement of factors contributing to readmission.

METHODS

This cross-sectional survey was conducted at Horsens Regional Hospital from September 2020 to June 2021. Patients aged ≥ 65 years and who were readmitted within 30 days were included. The questionnaire covered eight themes: disease; diagnosing, treatment and care; network; organisation; communication; skills and knowledge; resources; and practical arrangements. Response groups were patients, significant others, GPs, district nurses and hospital physicians. Outcomes were the prevalence of factors contributing to 30-day readmission and inter-rater agreement between respondents.

RESULTS

In total, 165 patients, 147 significant others, 115 GPs, 75 district nurses and 165 hospital physicians were included. The patients' median age was 79 years (IQR 74-85), and 44% were women. The following were the most prevalent contributing factors: (1) relapse of the condition that caused the index admission, (2) the patient could not manage the symptoms or illness, (3) worsening of other illnesses or conditions, (4) the patient was not fully treated at the time of discharge and (5) the patient's situation was too complex for the medical practice to handle. Kappas ranged from 0.0142 to 0.2421 for patient-significant other dyads and 0.0032 to 0.2459 for GP-hospital physician dyads.

CONCLUSION

From the perspectives of the included respondents, factors associated with the disease and its management were the most prevalent contributors to readmission for older medical patients. Agreement on the contributing factors was generally low.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Clinical trial number NCT05116644. Registration date October 27, 2021.

Perceived Life Expectancy Among Dialysis Recipients: A Scoping Review

Rationale & Objective

Greater prognostic understanding is associated with higher quality care at the end of life. We undertook a scoping review to explore how long dialysis recipients expect to live.

Study Design

Scoping Review.

Setting & Study Populations

People with kidney failure over 18 years old.

Search Strategy & Sources

Studies were identified by searching Medline, Embase, APA PsycINFO, HMIC, and ProQuest database for terms related to "life expectancy", "self-estimated", and "end stage kidney disease".

Data Extraction

Search strategies reported 349 unique, potentially eligible studies, with 8 studies meeting the inclusion criteria after screening.

Results

Significant mismatches between dialysis recipients and their health care provider's estimations of prognosis were reported, with patients predicting significantly higher life expectancies than health care professionals and almost no agreement between patient and nephrologist's estimates of 1-year survival. Documented cognitive impairment did not affect 1-year or 5-year prognosis estimates, nor did gender, age, time on dialysis, or discussing perceived life expectancy. Dialysis recipients who thought they were on the transplant list or who self-identified as African American reported higher perceived life expectancy, whereas people who were 75 years or older, or with fair or poor self-reported health status reported a lower perceived life expectancy. Those with a lower perceived life expectancy preferred care focusing on relieving pain and discomfort, whereas people who thought they had a higher chance of survival were significantly more likely to prefer life-extending care.

Limitations

There is a marked paucity of research in this area, with most studies conducted in North American cohorts.

Conclusions

Optimistic patient prognostic expectations persist in dialysis recipients. Given the effects of perceived life expectancy on treatment choices and subsequent quality of life, it is important that transparent discussions regarding prognosis are conducted with people receiving dialysis and their families.

Plain-Language Summary

Understanding illness severity and prognosis allows people to make decisions and prioritize areas of their lives that are important to them. We undertook a scoping review to explore how long dialysis recipients expect to live. We found significant mismatches between the perceived life expectancy of people treated with dialysis and their health care providers. Perceived life expectancy influenced treatment choices; thus, those who thought they would die sooner prioritized care focusing on relieving pain and discomfort. Those who thought they had a higher chance of survival were more likely to prefer life-extending care (with potential effects on quality of life). It is important to have frank discussions about prognosis with people receiving dialysis, to empower individuals and help them make informed decisions about their care.

Association of Prognostic Understanding With Health Care Use Among Older Adults With Advanced Cancer: A Secondary Analysis of a Cluster Randomized Clinical Trial

IMPORTANCE

A poor prognostic understanding regarding curability is associated with lower odds of hospice use among patients with cancer. However, the association between poor prognostic understanding or prognostic discordance and health care use among older adults with advanced incurable cancers is not well characterized.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the association of poor prognostic understanding and patient-oncologist prognostic discordance with hospitalization and hospice use among older adults with advanced cancers.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

This was a post hoc secondary analysis of a cluster randomized clinical trial that recruited patients from October 29, 2014, to April 28, 2017. Data were collected from community oncology practices affiliated with the University of Rochester Cancer Center National Cancer Institute Community Oncology Research Program. The parent trial enrolled 541 patients who were aged 70 years or older and were receiving or considering any line of cancer treatment for incurable solid tumors or lymphomas; the patients' oncologists and caregivers (if available) were also enrolled. Patients were followed up for at least 1 year. Data were analyzed from January 3 to 16, 2021.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

At enrollment, patients and oncologists were asked about their beliefs regarding cancer curability (100%, >50%, 50%, <50%, and 0%; answers other than 0% reflected poor prognostic understanding) and life expectancy (≤6 months, 7-12 months, 1-2 years, 2-5 years, and >5 years; answers of >5 years reflected poor prognostic understanding). Any difference between oncologist and patient in response options was considered discordant. Outcomes were any hospitalization and hospice use at 6 months captured by the clinical research associates.

RESULTS

Among the 541 patients, the mean (SD) age was 76.6 (5.2) years, 264 of 540 (49%) were female, and 486 of 540 (90%) were White. Poor prognostic understanding regarding curability was reported for 59% (206 of 348) of patients, and poor prognostic understanding regarding life expectancy estimates was reported for 41% (205 of 496) of patients. Approximately 60% (202 of 336) of patient-oncologist dyads were discordant regarding curability, and 72% (356 of 492) of patient-oncologist dyads were discordant regarding life expectancy estimates. Poor prognostic understanding regarding life expectancy estimates was associated with lower odds of hospice use (adjusted odds ratio, 0.30; 95% CI, 0.16-0.59). Discordance regarding life expectancy estimates was associated with greater odds of hospitalization (adjusted odds ratio, 1.64; 95% CI, 1.01-2.66).

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

This study highlights different constructs of prognostic understanding and the need to better understand the association between prognostic understanding and health care use among older adult patients with advanced cancer.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02107443.

Disease-dependent variations in the timing and causes of readmissions in Germany: A claims data analysis for six different conditions

BACKGROUND

Hospital readmissions place a major burden on patients and health care systems worldwide, but little is known about patterns and timing of readmissions in Germany.

METHODS

We used German health insurance claims (AOK, 2011-2016) of patients ≥ 65 years hospitalized for acute myocardial infarction (AMI), heart failure (HF), a composite of stroke, transient ischemic attack, or atrial fibrillation (S/AF), chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), type 2 diabetes mellitus, or osteoporosis to identify hospital readmissions within 30 or 90 days. Readmissions were classified into all-cause, specific, and non-specific and their characteristics were analyzed.

RESULTS

Within 30 and 90 days, about 14-22% and 27-41% index admissions were readmitted for any reason, respectively. HF and S/AF contributed most index cases, and HF and COPD accounted for most all-cause readmissions. Distributions and ratios of specific to non-specific readmissions were disease-specific with highest specific readmissions rates among COPD and AMI.

CONCLUSION

German claims are well-suited to investigate readmission causes if longer periods than 30 days are evaluated. Conditions closely related with the primary disease are the most frequent readmission causes, but multiple comorbidities among readmitted cases suggest that a multidisciplinary care approach should be implemented vigorously addressing comorbidities already during the index hospitalization.