Designing and Implementation of a Digitalized Intersectoral Discharge Management System and Its Effect on Readmissions: Mixed Methods Approach

BACKGROUND

Digital transformation offers new opportunities to improve the exchange of information between different health care providers, including inpatient, outpatient and care facilities. As information is especially at risk of being lost when a patient is discharged from a hospital, digital transformation offers great opportunities to improve intersectoral discharge management. However, most strategies for improvement have focused on structures within the hospital.

OBJECTIVE

This study aims to evaluate the implementation of a digitalized discharge management system, the project "Optimizing instersectoral discharge management" (SEKMA, derived from the German Sektorübergreifende Optimierung des Entlassmanagements), and its impact on the readmission rate.

METHODS

A mixed methods design was used to evaluate the implementation of a digitalized discharge management system and its impact on the readmission rate. After the implementation, the congruence between the planned (logic model) and the actual intervention was evaluated using a fidelity analysis. Finally, bivariate and multivariate analyses were used to evaluate the effectiveness of the implementation on the readmission rate. For this purpose, a difference-in-difference approach was adopted based on routine data of hospital admissions between April 2019 and August 2019 and between April 2022 and August 2022. The department of vascular surgery served as the intervention group, in which the optimized discharge management was implemented in April 2022. The departments of internal medicine and cardiology formed the control group.

RESULTS

Overall, 26 interviews were conducted, and we explored 21 determinants, which can be categorized into 3 groups: "optimization potential," "barriers," and "enablers." On the basis of these results, 19 strategies were developed to address the determinants, including a lack of networking among health care providers, digital information transmission, and user-unfriendliness. On the basis of these strategies, which were prioritized by 11 hospital physicians, a logic model was formulated. Of the 19 strategies, 7 (37%; eg, electronic discharge letter, providing mobile devices to the hospital's social service, and generating individual medication plans in the format of the national medication plan) have been implemented in SEKMA. A survey on the fidelity of the application of the implemented strategies showed that 3 of these strategies were not yet widely applied. No significant effect of SEKMA on readmissions was observed in the routine data of 14,854 hospital admissions (P=.20).

CONCLUSIONS

This study demonstrates the potential of optimizing intersectoral collaboration for patient care. Although a significant effect of SEKMA on readmissions has not yet been observed, creating a digital ecosystem that connects different health care providers seems to be a promising approach to ensure secure and fast networking of the sectors. The described intersectoral optimization of discharge management provides a structured template for the implementation of a similar local digital care networking infrastructure in other care regions in Germany and other countries with a similarly fragmented health care system.

Postoperative Discharge Scoring Criteria After Outpatient Anesthesia: A Review of the Literature

PURPOSE

The aim of this review was to explore the existing literature on discharge criteria, tools and strategies used in the postanesthesia care unit (PACU) after ambulatory surgery and to identify the essential components of an effective and feasible scoring system based on applicable criteria for the three phases of anesthesia recovery to assess patient discharge after outpatient anaesthesia.

DESIGN

A review of the literature.

METHODS

In this study, a review of sixteen articles was conducted to analyze the affecting factors, evaluation tools, and the current research status of patients discharge after outpatient anesthesia.

FINDINGS

The main factors affecting the discharge after diagnostic or therapeutic procedures under outpatient anesthesia were hospital management, medical treatment and patients themselves. Physiological systems-based discharge assessment had several advantages over traditional time-based discharge assessment. The Aldrete scoring scale was often used for patients in the first stage of anesthesia recovery to leave the PACU, and the Chung's scoring scale was often used to evaluate patients in the second stage of recovery until they leave the hospital. These two scales were often used in combination for outpatient anesthesia. The Fast-tracking assessment tool was used in patients who directly returned to the ward or discharge of patients after ambulatory surgery. There is currently no uniform standard or tool for assessing patients discharge after diagnostic or therapeutic procedures under the outpatient anesthesia.

CONCLUSIONS

Optimal care under anesthesia should allow the patient to recover from anesthesia smoothly and quickly and leave the hospital safely. When the patients can safely leave the hospital after outpatient anesthesia is still a problem that needs to be solved in the nursing field. Various existing scoring systems have their historical advancements, but we need to formulate more in line with the current status of postoperative patients discharge standards.

Comparison between the Chief Care Manager and the Normal Care Manager on Hospitalization and Discharge Coordination Activities in Japan: An Online Cross-Sectional Study of Care Managers in Aichi Prefecture

The Japanese long-term care insurance system came into operation in the year 2000 and the chief care manager certification system was established in 2006 to improve the quality of care management. Certified chief care managers are expected to perform the role of a specialist. The purpose of this study was to determine the impact of the chief care manager certificate in coordination with hospitals. In this online cross-sectional survey, responses were obtained from 448 care managers engaged in long-term care activities with all in-home long-term care support providers. Among these 448 care managers, 301 had the chief care manager certificate. Of these care managers, ≥90% regularly asked their patients about their "values" and ≥80% provided their patients with hospitalization and discharge support. Of the care managers who provided their patients with hospitalization support, 80% provided the hospitals with information regarding patient "values" at the time of hospitalization, and 50% provided the hospitals with information regarding patient "values" and information. The chief care manager certificate had positive effects on confidence in hospitalization and discharge support. However, no significant difference was observed between the activities of chief and normal care managers in terms of hospitalization and discharge support.

Changing the medication documentation process for discharge: impact on clinical routine and documentation quality-a process analysis

OBJECTIVES

In 2017, an in-house best-practice process for medication documentation was developed and implemented to meet the new German legal requirements concerning the management of patient discharge from the hospital. Because this law regulates the common steps of good discharge practices (eg, specification of discharge mediation documentation), we used its implementation to assess the impact of such a measure on the quality of medication documentation and related workflows in clinical routine.

METHODS

By observing workflows and interviewing the affected employees, we analysed the medication workflow processes from admission to discharge of seven representative departments of a large university hospital before and early after implementation of a newly defined best-practice process. To investigate the implementation impact, following measures were determined overall and for five key process steps: quality of medication documentation as measured by predefined criteria, the adherence to the best-practice process (range 0%-100%), workload and potential shifts in responsibilities.

RESULTS

Already early after implementation, all departments met the legal requirements and the quality of the medication documentation increased from low to high quality in most departments. Mean adherence to the best-practice process was 77% (range 60%-100%) with strictest adherence of 100% in one department. Thereby, the number of process steps and hence, likely also the workload increased in all departments. New tasks were mainly performed by physicians and in one department by pharmacists.

CONCLUSIONS

The new lawful best-practice process led to a higher quality in medication documentation at the cost of a higher workload for physicians, potentially limiting time for other care tasks. Therefore, it could be important to define areas of the medication documentation process in which physicians could be supported by other professions or new tools facilitating accurate medication documentation as the basis of continuity of care.

Quality of and Recommendations for Relevant Clinical Practice Guidelines for COVID-19 Management: A Systematic Review and Critical Appraisal

Background: The morbidity and mortality of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) are still increasing. This study aimed to assess the quality of relevant COVID-19 clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) and to compare the similarities and differences between recommendations. Methods: A comprehensive search was conducted using electronic databases (PubMed, Embase, and Web of Science) and representative guidelines repositories from December 1, 2019, to August 11, 2020 (updated to April 5, 2021), to obtain eligible CPGs. The Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation (AGREE II) tool was used to evaluate the quality of CPGs. Four authors extracted relevant information and completed data extraction forms. All data were analyzed using R version 3.6.0 software. Results: In total, 39 CPGs were identified and the quality was not encouragingly high. The median score (interquartile range, IQR) of every domain from AGREE II for evidence-based CPGs (EB-CPGs) versus (vs.) consensus-based CPG (CB-CPGs) was 81.94% (75.00-84.72) vs. 58.33% (52.78-68.06) in scope and purpose, 59.72% (38.89-75.00) vs. 36.11% (33.33-36.11) in stakeholder involvement, 64.58% (32.29-71.88) vs. 22.92% (16.67-26.56) in rigor of development, 75.00% (52.78-86.81) vs. 52.78% (50.00-63.89) in clarity of presentation, 40.63% (22.40-62.50) vs. 20.83% (13.54-25.00) in applicability, and 58.33% (50.00-100.00) vs. 50.00% (50.00-77.08) in editorial independence, respectively. The methodological quality of EB-CPGs were significantly superior to the CB-CPGs in the majority of domains (P < 0.05). There was no agreement on diagnosis criteria of COVID-19. But a few guidelines show Remdesivir may be beneficial for the patients, hydroxychloroquine +/- azithromycin may not, and there were more consistent suggestions regarding discharge management. For instance, after discharge, isolation management and health status monitoring may be continued. Conclusions: In general, the methodological quality of EB-CPGs is greater than CB-CPGs. However, it is still required to be further improved. Besides, the consistency of COVID-19 recommendations on topics such as diagnosis criteria is different. Of them, hydroxychloroquine +/- azithromycin may be not beneficial to treat patients with COVID-19, but remdesivir may be a favorable risk-benefit in severe COVID-19 infection; isolation management and health status monitoring after discharge may be still necessary. Chemoprophylaxis, including SARS-CoV 2 vaccines and antiviral drugs of COVID-19, still require more trials to confirm this.

Liver function recovery of COVID-19 patients after discharge, a follow-up study

Objective: The aim of this study was to observe the liver function recovery of COVID-19 patients after discharge. Patients and Methods: A total of 253 discharged COVID-19 patients in Shenzhen city, China were selected. The clinical characteristics of these patients were assessed. A 2-month follow-up and laboratory hematology test were performed to examine the status of patients' liver function. Results: Patients combined with liver diseases, especially fatty liver, are more likely to progress to severe condition (P<0.05). Patients in severe condition and those with liver diseases have higher rates of liver injuries during hospitalization, characterized by a significant increase in alanine aminotransferase (ALT) and aspartate aminotransferase (AST, P<0.01). The ALT, AST/ALT, gamma-glutamyl transferase (GGT), alkaline phosphatase (ALP), total protein (TP), albumin (ALB), and A/G levels showed significant differences in comparison with the control group (P<0.05, and P<0.001); and the outlier ratio of A/G, ALT, GGT and ALP of patients remained abnormal higher within 14 days after discharge (P<0.001). Liver injuries of COVID-19 patients may be related to the epidemiological characteristics, clinical indexes, basic diseases, symptoms, drug treatment during hospitalization and the complications. Indicators of liver function were correlated with cardiac function, renal function, thyroid function, lipid metabolism, glucose metabolism, immune index, leukocyte, erythrocyte, hemoglobin and platelet related indexes. The outlier ratio of TP, ALB and GLB remained extremely low throughout the follow-up period; the outlier ratio of ALT, AST and GGT decreased below 10% from a high level at 40 days after discharged. However, the outlier ratio of A/G, AST/ALT and ALP remained high during the follow-up period. Conclusions: Abnormal liver function might indicate worse recovery of COVID-19 patients. Changes in liver function should be emphasized during long-term follow-up of COVID-19 patients after hospital discharge; the necessity of employing appropriate interventions for liver function repair should be emphasized.

Improving continuity of patient care across sectors: study protocol of the process evaluation of a quasi-experimental multi-centre study regarding an admission and discharge model in Germany (VESPEERA)

INTRODUCTION

Hospital stays are critical events as they often disrupt continuity of care. This process evaluation aims to describe and explore the implementation of the VESPEERA programme (Improving continuity of patient care across sectors: An admission and discharge model in general practices and hospitals, Versorgungskontinuitaet sichern: Patientenorientiertes Einweisungs- und Entlassmanagement in Hausarztpraxen und Krankenhauesern). The evaluation concerns the intervention fidelity, reach in targeted populations, perceived effects, working mechanisms, feasibility, determinants for implementation, including contextual factors, and associations with the outcomes evaluation. The aim of the VESPEERA programme is the development, implementation and evaluation of a structured admission and discharge programme in general practices and hospitals.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

The process evaluation is linked to the VESPEERA outcomes evaluation, which has a quasi-experimental multi-centre design with four study arms and is conducted in hospitals and general practices in Germany. The VESPEERA programme comprises several components: an assessment before admission, an admission letter, a telephonic discharge conversation between hospital and general practice before discharge, discharge information for patients, structured planning of follow-up care after discharge in the general practice and a telephone monitoring for patients with a risk of rehospitalisation. The process evaluation has a mixed-methods design, incorporating interviews (patients, both care providers who do and do not participate in the VESPEERA programme, total n=75), questionnaires (patients and care providers who participate in the VESPEERA programme, total n=475), implementation plans of hospitals, data documented in general practices, claims-based data and hospital process data. Data analysis is descriptive and explorative. Qualitative data will be transcribed and analysed using framework analysis based on the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research. Associations between the outcomes of the program and measures in the process evaluation will be explored in regression models.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

Ethics approval has been obtained by the ethics committee of the Medical Faculty Heidelberg prior to the start of the study (S-352/2018). Results will be disseminated through a final report to the funding agency, articles in peer-reviewed journals and conferences.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

http://www.drks.de/DRKS00015183.

TRIAL STATUS

The study protocol on hand is the protocol V.1.1 from 18 June 2018. Recruitment for interviews started on 3 September 2018 and will approximately be completed by the end of May 2019.