1 / 12

JAMA Pediatrics Journal Club Slides: Decreasing Hospital LOS for Bronchiolitis

JAMA Pediatrics Journal Club Slides: Decreasing Hospital LOS for Bronchiolitis.

cicero
Download Presentation

JAMA Pediatrics Journal Club Slides: Decreasing Hospital LOS for Bronchiolitis

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. JAMA Pediatrics Journal Club Slides: Decreasing Hospital LOS for Bronchiolitis Sandweiss DR, Mundorff MB, Hill T, et al. Decreasing hospital length of stay for bronchiolitis by using an observation unit and home oxygen therapy. JAMA Pediatr. Published online March 11, 2013. doi:10.1001/jamapediatrics.2013.1435.

  2. Introduction • Inpatient management for bronchiolitis accounts for frequent health care use in the United States. • Hypoxia is a major component of clinical decision making regarding admission and discharge criteria. • Findings from emerging research demonstrate that using home oxygen therapy (HOT) for a subset of hypoxic patients with bronchiolitis can avoid hospitalization and reduce hospital length of stay (LOS). • Study Objective • To test the hypothesis that using an observation unit (OU)–HOT protocol for bronchiolitis would decrease LOS.

  3. Methods • Study Design • Retrospective cohort study. • Setting • Urban tertiary care children’s hospital. • Patients • Patients with uncomplicated bronchiolitis younger than 2 years admitted during the winter seasons of 2005 through 2011. • Case definition for the uncomplicated bronchiolitis cohort (low severity of illness without comorbid conditions younger than 2 years at admission) was based on a predetermined set of discharge codes and inclusion/exclusion criteria developed in 2005 and updated to reflect ongoing changes in International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision. • Cohort included patients admitted to both the inpatient unit (IU) and OU.

  4. Methods • Treatment Protocol • Between 2005 and 2010, most patients were admitted to the IU. • For the 2010-2011 bronchiolitis season, the care process was modified to more actively use the OU for admitted patients with bronchiolitis. • A subset of patients presenting to the emergency department (ED) with bronchiolitis were started on the OU-HOT protocol. The OU-HOT subset included patients who were both hypoxic and nonhypoxic on admission, since nonhypoxic patients with bronchiolitis often develop hypoxia during hospitalization, thus qualifying for HOT. • If inclusion criteria were met in the ED, patients were admitted to the OU on the OU-HOT protocol under the care of the OU physician. • Patients with bronchiolitis admitted to the OU required a minimum of 8 hours of observation prior to discharge to ensure stability, with 24-hour primary care physician follow-up if discharged on HOT.

  5. Methods • Outcomes • Primary: Mean hospital LOS, comparing the 2009-2010 and 2010-2011 bronchiolitis season cohorts, before and after implementation of the OU-HOT protocol. • Secondary: Discharge within 24 hours, ED bronchiolitis admission rates, ED revisit/readmission rates, and inflation-adjusted cost. • Mean LOS and proportion of HOT discharges by unit (OU vs IU), comparing the 2009-2010 and 2010-2011 seasons, were also included. • Safety was defined as no increase in ED revisit/readmission rates or pediatric intensive care unit (PICU) admissions, and no apnea or need for advanced airway management after discharge.

  6. Methods • Limitations • Not a controlled trial to determine the influence of OU care and HOT independently. • HOT data were unavailable for 39% of the 2009-2010 cohort and 17% of the 2010-2011 cohort owing to inconsistency in provider discharge documentation. • Given that hypoxia may be more common in patients with bronchiolitis admitted in higher-altitude regions (this study took place at an altitude of approximately 5000 ft above sea level), this experience may not be generalizable to lower-altitude regions. • HOT shifts resources to outpatient settings in ways that have not been evaluated, and estimated cost savings do not include outpatient primary care physician and respiratory care clinic visits.

  7. Results • 692 patients from the 2010-2011 cohort were compared with 725 patients from the 2009-2010 cohort. • Mean LOS decreased by 22.1%, from 63.3 hours to 49.3 hours (P < .001), after implementation of the OU-HOT protocol. Similar decreases were seen for median LOS values, before and after covariate adjustment.

  8. Results Mean LOS and Proportion of Admissions Discharged Receiving HOT for Patients Admitted to the IU vs OU, Comparing 2009-2010 and 2010-2011 Seasons, Before and After Implementation of the OU and HOT Protocol

  9. Results • ED admission rates for patients with bronchiolitis as well as ED revisit/readmission rates remained stable from 2005-2011, ranging from 40.9% to 46.7% and 2.4% to 4.3%, respectively. • The protocol was safe, with no reported apnea after discharge. Only 1 patient discharged from the OU was readmitted to the PICU 2 days after discharge for progression of respiratory distress, which was no different from readmission rates to the PICU in previous years. This patient did not require intubation. • Compared with the 2009-2010 season, the mean cost per admitted cohort case decreased by 25.4% ($4800 vs $3582; P < .001) after implementation of the OU-HOT protocol for the 2010-2011 bronchiolitis season.

  10. Comment • Implementation of a new bronchiolitis care process aggressively using an OU-HOT protocol, when indicated, led to a significant decrease in mean LOS, resulting in 404 avoided patient hospital days for the 2010-2011 season (692 cohort patients x 14.0 hours’ decrease in mean LOS/24 hours), with savings of approximately $830 000. • The OU-HOT protocol was safe and not associated with an increase in ED revisits/readmissions. • It was not until a protocol facilitating rapid discharge and HOT deployment was implemented in a dedicated OU, with its culture for rapid discharge, that dramatic gains in LOS and discharges within 24 hours were seen.

  11. Comment • Although most of the published experience with HOT is at higher altitude, a similar protocol could be tested at lower altitude for any inpatient setting with appropriate staffing and infrastructure to promote discharge within 24 hours. • HOT shifts resources to outpatient settings in ways that have not been evaluated, and estimated cost savings in this study do not include outpatient primary care physician and respiratory care clinic visits. • A formal cost-effectiveness analysis that considers resource and cost shifting from inpatient care to outpatient management with HOT must be performed.

  12. Contact Information • If you have questions, please contact the corresponding author: • David R. Sandweiss, MD, Division of Pediatric Emergency Medicine, Department of Pediatrics, University of Utah, Williams Bldg, PO Box 581289, Salt Lake City, UT 84158 (david.sandweiss@hsc.utah.edu). Conflict of Interest Disclosures • None reported.

More Related