This paper investigates patient outcomes including length of stay (LOS), cost of hospitalization, bounce-back rates, transition to hospice care, and mortality, following back-transfer.
This study was an observational case-control study of adults hospitalized in Iowa between 2005 and 2013 to identify back-transferred patients. Back-transfer was defined as the transfer of rural patients near the end of their acute hospitalization in a comprehensive medical center back to a local community hospital for the completion of their medical care. Demographic, geographic, rurality, procedural, and disease information was compared between case and control groups, then propensity score (PS) matching was performed to create comparable groups to perform analyses.
Over the 9-year period, 1,056,773 patients meeting inclusion criteria were admitted, of which 430 (0.04%) were back-transferred. After PS matching, LOS was 60% (95% CI: 0.50-0.71) higher and costs were 42% (95% CI: 0.33-0.50) higher in the back-transferred group. Back-transferred cases had 8.34 (95% CI: 3.66-19.0) times the odds of hospice transition and 2.17 (95% CI: 1.37-3.46) the odds of mortality compared to controls. Four percent of back-transfers "failed" with the patient being returned to the larger hospital before discharge.
Back-transfer is a rare occurrence, and it is associated with longer LOS, higher hospitalization cost, higher mortality, more hospice transfers, and occasional bounce-backs to comprehensive medical centers. Future work should focus more on prospective indications for transfer, the role of end-of-life care, financial impact, and identifying patient populations for whom back-transfer is safest.
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 03 October 2017.
All research outputs
#22,050,459
of 34,372,222 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Rural Health
#863
of 1,272 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#207,227
of 356,325 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Rural Health
#12
of 19 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 34,372,222 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,272 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.9. This one is in the 31st percentile – i.e., 31% 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 356,325 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 19 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 36th percentile – i.e., 36% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
