Risk factors for potentially avoidable readmissions due to end-of-life care issues

BACKGROUND Repeated hospitalizations are frequent toward the end of life, where each admission should be an opportunity to initiate advance-care planning to high-risk patients. OBJECTIVE To identify the risk factors for having a 30-day potentially avoidable readmission due to end-of-life care issues among all medical patients. DESIGN Nested case-control study. SETTING/PATIENTS All 10,275 consecutive discharges from any medical service of an academic tertiary medical center in Boston, Massachusetts between July 1, 2009 and June 30, 2010. MEASUREMENTS A random sample of all the potentially avoidable 30-day readmissions was independently reviewed by 9 trained physicians to identify the ones due to end-of-life issues. RESULTS Among 534, 30-day potentially avoidable readmission cases reviewed, 80 (15%) were due to an end-of-life care issue. In multivariable analysis, the following risk factors were significantly associated with a 30-day potentially avoidable readmission due to end-of-life care issues: number of admissions in the previous 12 months (odds ratio [OR]: 1.10 per admission, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.02-1.20), neoplasm (OR: 5.60, 95% CI: 2.85-10.98), opiate medications at discharge (OR: 2.29, 95% CI: 1.29-4.07), Elixhauser comorbidity index (OR: 1.16 per 5-point increase, 95% CI: 1.10-1.22). The discrimination of the model (C statistic) was 0.85. CONCLUSIONS In a medical population, we identified 4 main risk factors that were significantly associated with 30-day potentially avoidable readmission due to end-of-life care issues, producing a model with very good to excellent discrimination. Patients with these risk factors might benefit from palliative care consultation prior to discharge in order to improve end-of-life care and possibly reduce unnecessary rehospitalizations.

A follow-up on Acute Pain Services in Germany compared to international survey data.

BACKGROUND After the introduction of instruments for benchmarking, certification and a national guideline for acute pain management, the aim of this study was to describe the current structure, processes and quality of German acute pain services (APS). METHODS All directors of German departments of anaesthesiology were invited to complete a postal questionnaire on structures und processes of acute pain management. The survey asked for staff, techniques and quality criteria, which enabled a comparison to previous data from 1999 and surveys from other countries. RESULTS Four hundred and eight (46%) questionnaires were returned. APS have increased considerably and are now available in 81% of the hospitals, mainly anaesthesia based. However, only 45% fulfilled the minimum quality criteria, such as the assignment of personnel, the organization of patient care during nights and weekends, written protocols for postoperative pain management, regular assessments and documenting pain scores. Staff resources varied considerably, but increased compared to 1999. Two daily rounds were performed in 71%, either by physicians and nurses (42%), by physicians only (25%) or by supervised nurses (31%). Most personnel assigned to the APS shared this work along with other duties. Only 53% of the hospitals had an integrated rotation for training their specialty trainees. CONCLUSIONS The availability of APS in Germany and other countries has increased over the last decade; however, the quality of nearly half of the APS is questionable. Against the disillusioning background of recently reported unfavourable pain-related patient outcomes, the structures, organization and quality of APS should be revisited.