Prevalence of homelessness among hospitalized patients: A point-in-time survey

Although homelessness is associated with increased acute healthcare utilization and poorer health outcomes, the prevalence of homelessness and housing insecurity in hospitalized patients is poorly characterized. We conducted an in-person survey to determine the prevalence of housing insecurity and homelessness among hospitalized patients at two hospitals in metropolitan Denver in conjunction with the Housing and Urban Development point-in-time count on January 24, 2022. Of the 271 surveyed patients, 79 (29.2%) reported experiencing either housing insecurity (17.3%) or homelessness (11.8%). Of those experiencing housing insecurity or homelessness, 69.6% reported chronic health conditions, 55.7% reported multiple hospitalizations in the preceding year, 38% reported mental health concerns and 39.2% reported substance use. The prevalence of homelessness among a hospitalized patient population was over 20-fold higher than community prevalence estimates. Housing insecurity also impacted a substantial proportion of hospitalized patients and was associated with high rates of co-morbid conditions.

Hospitalization and Housing: A Qualitative Study Exploring the Perspectives of Hospitalized Patients Experiencing Housing Insecurity

Although housing insecurity has clear negative impacts on health, little is known about how it impacts patients' experience of hospitalization. In this qualitative study, we interviewed 22 hospitalized patients experiencing housing insecurity. The following three major themes emerged: 1) adverse social and environmental factors directly contribute to hospitalization, 2) lack of tailored care during hospitalization leaves patients unprepared for discharge, and 3) patients have difficulty recuperating after a hospital stay, leading to the risk of rehospitalization. Within these themes, participants described the roles of extreme physical and psychological hardship, chaotic interpersonal relationships, substance use, and stigma affecting participants' experiences before, during, and following hospitalization. Our results, based directly on the patient experience, suggest a need for hospital systems to invest in universal in-hospital screening for housing insecurity, incorporation of trauma-informed care, and robust partnerships with community organizations. Future research should explore the feasibility and impact of these interventions.

Pain Control Disparities in Acute Pancreatitis

Background and objective

Patient treatments and outcomes have historically differed based on age, sex, race/ethnicity, and social factors, and there is a growing awareness that such disparities still exist. While prior studies have found that patients belonging to minority groups have their pain undertreated, few studies have evaluated pain control based on age, sex, body mass index (BMI), or presence of a substance use disorder (SUD). The studies that do exist have inconsistent results. This study aimed to evaluate pain control in patients admitted to a Denver academic safety net hospital for acute pancreatitis. Pancreatitis is an inherently painful condition involving pancreatic inflammation and for which adequate pain control is a cornerstone of treatment; this makes it an ideal disease state for an exploratory analysis into the experience of pain within different patient groups.

Methods

This was a retrospective cohort study of patients treated at the Denver Health Medical Center from January 1, 2017, through December 31, 2019, for acute pancreatitis; 659 patients met the inclusion criteria and were included in the study. Pain control during the first 24 hours of hospital admission was analyzed by comparing controlled vs. uncontrolled reports of pain and mean pain scores. Patients were stratified by age, sex, self-reported race/ethnicity, BMI, and presence of SUD at the time of admission. Achievement of "controlled pain," as defined by a pain score below the patient’s stated functional pain goal, was then analyzed. Chi-squared analysis was employed to look into differences within and between groups. Additionally, a t-test was used to compare mean pain scores between groups with controlled and uncontrolled pain.

Results

A statistically significant difference in pain control was found when stratified by age or the presence of SUD (p<0.001). Within these groups, 39% of those aged 18-40 years achieved pain control, compared with 49% of those aged 41-64 years and 66% of those aged 65 years and older. Among those with active SUD, only 41% were able to achieve pain control compared with 58% of those without SUD. Among those who achieved pain control, the average mean pain score was 5, which decreased to 4 within 24 hours. Among those who did not achieve pain control, the average mean pain score was 7, which remained at 7 at 24 hours (p<0.001).

Conclusions

We did not find significant differences in the ability to achieve tolerable pain control based on sex or BMI. We were unable to appropriately analyze differences based on race/ethnicity due to an inability to differentiate between White Hispanic and White non-Hispanic populations within Epic. However, we did find significantly poorer pain control in younger patients and those with an active SUD.

Prospective comparison of curbside versus formal consultations

BACKGROUND

Curbside consultations are commonly requested during the care of hospitalized patients, but physicians perceive that the recommendations provided may be based on inaccurate or incomplete information.

OBJECTIVE

To compare the accuracy and completeness of the information received from providers requesting a curbside consultation of hospitalists with that obtained in a formal consultation on the same patients, and to examine whether the recommendations offered in the 2 consultations differed.

DESIGN

Prospective cohort.

SETTING

University-affiliated, urban safety net hospital.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Proportion of curbside consultations with inaccurate or incomplete information; frequency with which recommendations in the formal consultation differed from those in the curbside consultation.

RESULTS

Curbside consultations were requested for 50 patients, 47 of which were also evaluated in a formal consultation performed on the same day by a hospitalist other than the one performing the curbside consultation. Based on information collected in the formal consultation, information was either inaccurate or incomplete in 24/47 (51%) of the curbside consultations. Management advice after formal consultation differed from that given in the curbside consultation for 28/47 patients (60%). When inaccurate or incomplete information was received, the advice provided in the formal versus the curbside consultation differed in 22/24 patients (92%, P < 0.0001).

CONCLUSIONS

Information presented during inpatient curbside consultations of hospitalists is often inaccurate or incomplete, and this often results in inaccurate management advice.

Effectiveness of a course designed to teach handoffs to medical students

INTRODUCTION

Handoffs of patient care are increasingly common and are known to contribute to medical errors. A significant number, if not the large majority, of first-year Internal Medicine residents have not received formal education pertaining to handoffs during medical school.

AIM

To develop a program designed to teach handoffs to medical students entering their fourth year of training.

SETTING

University of Colorado Denver School of Medicine.

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

Our Handoff Selective was first offered in April 2007 as part of a 2-week Integrated Clinician's Course conducted once yearly between the third and fourth years of medical school. The Selective consisted of a didactic session in which communication theory and elements were discussed and a practicum in which students used faculty-developed case scenarios to practice both giving and receiving handoffs.

PROGRAM EVALUATION

Sixty (the maximum number of spots available) out of 150 students participated in the course, although many more students chose the course than spots available. Prior to taking the Selective, medical students' confidence in performing handoffs was poor, but it improved after the course (P < 0.001); 92% of students felt the Handoff Selective was "useful" or "extremely useful." While both components of the course were thought to be useful to the large majority of students, the practicum portion was thought to be more useful (P < 0.001).

DISCUSSION

Formal education on handoffs is well received by medical students and improves their self-perceived understanding and performance of handoffs.

EFFECTIVENESS AND SAFETY OF CHOLINESTERASE INHIBITORS IN ELDERLY SUBJECTS WITH ALZHEIMER’S DISEASE: A “REAL WORLD” STUDY

Clinical trials have demonstrated the efficacy of cholinesterase inhibitors (ChEI) in improving cognitive status and disability in subjects with mild to moderate Alzheimer's disease (AD). However, little is known about the effectiveness of ChEI in clinical practice, and no large clinical trials comparing different ChEI are available at present. Aim of this study was to evaluate safety and effectiveness of ChEI in a sample of elderly outpatients diagnosed with mild to moderate AD. We selected 407 subjects for ChEI treatment (donepezil,rivastigmine or galantamine). Their cognitive function was evaluated by means of the mini mental state examination (MMSE), and the global functional status was estimated by using the activities of daily living (ADL) and the instrumental activities of daily living (IADL) scales at baseline (To), then after 1 (T1), 3 (T2) and 9 months (T3), respectively. T3 follow-up was completed by 212 subjects. The patients were considered as responders (R), if the MMSEscore at T2 was unchanged or improved, if compared to that of T0. In 35 patients (8.6 %)treatment was withdrawn because of mostly gastrointestinal adverse events. Compared to the other drugs, donepezil was associated with a lower incidence of withdrawals due to adverse events. Subjects who completed T3 follow-up (age 78 +/- 6 years, MMSE scores 18.8 +/- 3.9) showed an increase at T2 of 0.7 +/- 2.7 (p = 0.001) and a decrease at T3 of -0.6 +/- 3.4 (p = 0.008) in the MMSE scores, as compared to To . The ADL and IADL scores did not show significant changes at T2; however, both decreased significantly at T3. The patients Rat-T2 showed a better cognitive and functional outcome at T3 , compared to the nonresponders(NR-at-T2), displaying values of MMSE R-at-T2 0.4 +/- 3.1 vs. NR-at-T2 -3.0 +/- 2.5, p = 0.001, and ADL values of -0.3 +/- 1.2 vs. -0.7 +/- 1.3, p = 0.03, respectively. No significant difference was found in the changes of MMSE scores between donepezil and rivastigmine (galantamine was not included in the comparison due to the small number of treated subjects). In conclusion, in this sample of elderly subjects with mild to moderate AD,treated with ChEI, a small but significant decline in cognitive and functional status was observed after 9 months. Subjects who showed a good response to treatment after 3 months, had a better cognitive and functional outcome at 9 months. No significant difference in cognitive outcome was found between drugs, while donepezil was better tolerated.