First Place Award Multidisciplinary care of the hip fracture patient: a case control analysis of differing treatment protocols

Comanagement of surgical patients between neurosurgeons and internal-medicine clinicians: observational cohort study

The rising prevalence of chronic diseases have contributed to a population with high complexity of care. There has been an increasing need for a new organizational model based on the interaction in the same department between the specialist skills of surgical and medical disciplines. This study aims to describe the implementation of a hospitalist co-management program in a Neurosurgery Department (ND) and its impact on the incidence of medical complications, 30 days readmission rate for medical causes, number of transfers to Intensive Care Units (ICU)/Neurosurgical Intensive Care Unit (NICU) or to medical wards (MW), length-of stay (LOS), mortality and satisfaction of health workers. We conducted an observational study comparing changes before and after the Internal medicine-Neurosurgical Comanagement (INC) intervention. We conducted a retrospective evaluation of patients enrolled before the INC intervention and a prospective evaluation of those enrolled after the INC intervention was implemented. We defined the pre-INC intervention group as 380 patients admitted to the ND for neurosurgical disease between January 2022 and April 2022 and the post-INC intervention group as 367 patients admitted to the ND between January 2023 and April 2023. INC intervention was associated with a significant decrease in medical complications during the hospital stay (OR 0.52; 95% CI; 0.39-0.70, p < 0.001), 30 days in-hospital readmission for medical reasons (OR 0.95; 95% CI 0.93-0.97, p < 0.001) and numbers of transfers to ICU/NICU (OR 0.31; 95% CI; 0.17-0.55, p < 0.001) or MW (OR 0.51; 95% CI 0.33-0.77, p = 0.002). During the INC intervention period, we observed a high satisfaction rate in health workers, evaluated by standardized questionnaire. In our study, LOS, in-hospital mortality and 30-day mortality were not significantly associated with INC. Hospitalist co-management in Neurosurgical Departments was associated with a reduced incidence of medical complications, 30-days in-hospital readmission and numbers of transfers to ICU/NICU or MW with a high satisfaction rate among healthcare workers, but without a significant decrease in LOS and mortality rate.

Hospitalist Co-Management of Urethroplasty Patients in an Academic Center: Implementation of a Standardized Postoperative Care Model

Objectives: to evaluate whether hospitalist co-management would lead to improved outcomes and value in patients undergoing urethroplasty (UPL) with a single surgeon for urethral stricture disease (USD). Material: A co-management model with hospitalists was introduced in August 2019 for all patients undergoing UPL for USD with a single surgeon in a United States teaching center. The hospitalist worked closely with the urologic surgeon and the support staff. The hospitalist managed post-operative concerns, such as pain and comorbidities, as well as conducted rounds with the urological team for disposition planning and addressing interdisciplinary needs. Retrospective analysis compared a 42-month period before initiation of co-management (Jan 2016–July 2019) with a 32-month period after initiation (Aug 2019–March 2022). Outcomes assessed were recurrence of stricture, complications, length of stay, readmission, and emergency room visits. Results: A total of 135 patients (71 surgeon-managed, 64 co-managed) underwent urethroplasty from January 2016 to March 2022. Hospitalist co-management did not affect complications, length of stay, readmission, and emergency room visits. Accounting for confounding variables using multivariable analysis, no factors were independently associated with recurrence. There were no demographic, comorbidity, or American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) score differences between the two groups. Conclusions: This study suggests that hospitalist care for patients undergoing urethroplasty may be non-inferior to surgeon care, based on similar outcomes between the two groups. There were no significant differences in the total length of stay or blood pressure readings, and the complication rates and hospital readmission rates were also similar.

Evaluation of Systemwide Improvement Programs to Optimize Time to Surgery for Patients With Hip Fractures: A Systematic Review

IMPORTANCE

Longer time to surgery (TTS) for hip fractures has been associated with higher rates of postoperative complications and mortality. Given that more than 300 000 adults are hospitalized for hip fractures in the United States each year, various improvement programs have been implemented to reduce TTS with variable results, attributed to contextual patient- and system-level factors.

OBJECTIVE

To catalog TTS improvement programs, identify their results, and categorize program strategies according to Expert Recommendations for Implementing Change (ERIC), highlighting components of successful improvement programs within their associated contexts and seeking to guide health care systems in implementing programs designed to reduce TTS.

EVIDENCE REVIEW

A systematic review was conducted per the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses guideline. Three databases (MEDLINE/PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane Trials) were searched for studies published between 2000 and 2021 that reported on improvement programs for hip fracture TTS. Observational studies in high-income country settings, including patients with surgical, low-impact, nonpathological hip fractures aged 50 years or older, were considered for review. Improvement programs were assessed for their association with decreased TTS, and ERIC strategies were matched to improvement program components.

FINDINGS

Preliminary literature searches yielded 1683 articles, of which 69 articles were included for final analysis. Among the 69 improvement programs, 49 were associated with significantly decreased TTS, and 20 programs did not report significant decreases in TTS. Among 49 successful improvement programs, the 5 most common ERIC strategies were (1) assess for readiness and identify barriers and facilitators, (2) develop a formal implementation blueprint, (3) identify and prepare champions, (4) promote network weaving, and (5) develop resource-sharing agreements.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

In this systematic review, certain components (eg, identifying barriers and facilitators to program implementation, developing a formal implementation blueprint, preparing intervention champions) are common among improvement programs that were associated with reducing TTS and may inform the approach of hospital systems developing similar programs. Other strategies had mixed results, suggesting local contextual factors (eg, operating room availability) may affect their success. To contextualize the success of a given improvement program across different clinical settings, subsequent investigation must elucidate the association between interventional success and facility-level factors influencing TTS, such as hospital census and type, teaching status, annual surgical volume, and other factors.

Evaluation of Internal Medicine Physician or Multidisciplinary Team Comanagement of Surgical Patients and Clinical Outcomes: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

Importance

Older patients who undergo surgery may benefit from geriatrician comanagement. It is unclear whether other internal medicine (IM) physician involvement improves outcomes for adults who undergo surgery.

Objective

To evaluate the association of IM physician involvement with clinical and health system outcomes compared with usual surgical care among adults who undergo surgery.

Data Sources

MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, and CENTRAL databases were searched for studies published in English from database inception to April 2, 2019.

Study Selection

Prospective randomized or nonrandomized clinical studies comparing IM physician consultation or comanagement with usual surgical care were selected by consensus of 2 reviewers.

Data Extraction and Synthesis

Data were extracted using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guideline by 2 authors independently. Intervention characteristics were described using existing indicators. Risk of bias was assessed using Risk of Bias 2.0 and Risk of Bias in Nonrandomized Studies of Interventions tools. Studies were pooled when appropriate in meta-analysis using random-effects models. Prespecified subgroups included IM physician-only vs multidisciplinary team interventions and patients undergoing elective vs emergency procedures.

Main Outcomes and Measures

The prespecified primary outcome was length of stay; other outcomes included 30-day readmissions, inpatient mortality, medical complications, functional outcomes, and costs.

Results

Of 6027 records screened, 14 studies (with 1 randomized clinical trial) involving 35 800 patients (13 142 [36.7%] in intervention groups) were eligible for inclusion. Interventions varied substantially among studies and settings; most interventions described comanagement by a hospitalist or internist; 7 (50%) included a multidisciplinary team, and 9 (64%) studied predominantly patients who had elective procedures. Risk of bias in 10 studies (71%) was serious. Meta-analysis showed no significant association with length of stay (mean difference, -1.02 days; 95% CI, -2.09 to 0.04 days; P = .06) or mortality (odds ratio, 0.79; 95% CI, 0.56 to 1.11; P = .18), but multidisciplinary team involvement was associated with significant reduction in length of stay (mean difference, -2.03 days; 95% CI, -4.05 to -0.01 days; P = .05) and mortality (odds ratio, 0.67; 95% CI, 0.51 to 0.88; P = .004). There was no difference in 30-day readmissions (odds ratio, 0.89; 95% CI, 0.68 to 1.16; P = .39). Data could not be pooled for complications or costs. Only 1 study (7%) reported functional outcomes.

Conclusions and Relevance

The findings of this study suggest that IM physician comanagement that includes multidisciplinary team involvement may be associated with reduced length of stay and mortality in adults undergoing surgery. Evidence was low quality, and well-designed prospective studies are still needed.