↓ Skip to main content

Improving Outcomes After Hospitalization: A Prospective Observational Multicenter Evaluation of Care Coordination Strategies for Reducing 30-Day Readmissions to Maryland Hospitals

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of General Internal Medicine, November 2017
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
25 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
58 Mendeley
Title
Improving Outcomes After Hospitalization: A Prospective Observational Multicenter Evaluation of Care Coordination Strategies for Reducing 30-Day Readmissions to Maryland Hospitals
Published in
Journal of General Internal Medicine, November 2017
DOI 10.1007/s11606-017-4218-4
Pubmed ID
Authors

Erik H. Hoyer, Daniel J. Brotman, Ariella Apfel, Curtis Leung, Romsai T. Boonyasai, Melissa Richardson, Diane Lepley, Amy Deutschendorf

Abstract

Patients frequently experience suboptimal transitions from the hospital to the community, which can increase the likelihood of readmission. It is not known which care coordination services can lead to improvements in readmission rates. To evaluate the effects of two care coordination interventions on 30-day readmission rates. Prospective multicenter observational study of hospitalized patients eligible for two care coordination services between January 1, 2013, and October 31, 2015. Readmission rates were compared for patients who received each care coordination intervention versus those who did not using multivariable generalized estimating equation logistic regression models. A total of 25,628 patients hospitalized in medicine, neurosciences, or surgical sciences units. Patients discharged home and deemed to be at high risk for readmission were assigned a nurse Transition Guide (TG) for 30 days post-discharge. All other patients were assigned the Patient Access Line (PAL) intervention, which provided a post-discharge phone call from a registered nurse. Two large academic hospitals in Baltimore, MD. Thirty-day all-cause readmission to any Maryland hospital. Among all patients, 14.2% (2409/16,993) of those referred for the PAL intervention and 22.8% (1973/8635) of those referred for the TG intervention were readmitted. PAL-referred patients who did not receive the intervention had an adjusted odds ratio (aOR) for readmission of 1.27 (95% confidence interval [95% CI] 1.12-1.44, p < 0.001) compared with patients who did. TG-referred patients who did not receive the TG intervention had an aOR of 1.83 (95% CI 1.60-2.10, p < 0.001) compared with patients who received the intervention. Younger age, male sex, having more comorbidities, and being discharged from a medicine unit were associated with not receiving an assigned intervention. These characteristics were also associated with higher readmission rates. PAL and TG care coordination interventions were associated with lower rates of 30-day readmission. Our findings underscore the importance of determining the appropriate intervention for the hardest-to-reach patients, who are also at the highest risk of being readmitted.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 58 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 58 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 15 26%
Other 7 12%
Researcher 6 10%
Student > Postgraduate 5 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 4 7%
Other 9 16%
Unknown 12 21%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Nursing and Health Professions 18 31%
Medicine and Dentistry 10 17%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 3 5%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 2 3%
Engineering 2 3%
Other 7 12%
Unknown 16 28%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 26 May 2018.
All research outputs
#19,440,618
of 23,911,072 outputs
Outputs from Journal of General Internal Medicine
#6,622
of 7,806 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#334,395
of 444,839 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of General Internal Medicine
#68
of 84 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,911,072 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,806 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 21.8. This one is in the 7th percentile – i.e., 7% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 444,839 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 14th percentile – i.e., 14% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 84 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 15th percentile – i.e., 15% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.