Exploring the influence of a financial incentive scheme on early mobilization and rehabilitation in ICU patients: an interrupted time-series analysis

BACKGROUND

Clinical guidelines recommend early mobilization and rehabilitation (EMR) for patients who are critically ill. However, various barriers impede its implementation in real-world clinical settings. In 2018, the Japanese universal healthcare coverage system announced a unique financial incentive scheme to facilitate EMR for patients in intensive care units (ICU). This study evaluated whether such an incentive improved patients' activities of daily living (ADL) and reduced their hospital length of stay (LOS).

METHODS

Using the national inpatient database in Japan, we identified patients admitted to the ICU, who stayed over 48 hours between April 2017 and March 2019. The financial incentive required medical institutions to form a multidisciplinary team approach for EMR, development and periodic review of the standardized rehabilitation protocol, starting rehabilitation within 2 days of ICU admission. The incentive amounted to 34.6 United States Dollars per patient per day with limit 14 days, structured as a per diem payment. Hospitals were not mandated to provide detailed information on individual rehabilitation for government, and the insurer made payments directly to the hospitals based on their claims. Exposure was the introduction of the financial incentive defined as the first day of claim by each hospital. We conducted an interrupted time-series analysis to assess the impact of the financial incentive scheme. Multivariable radon-effects regression and Tobit regression analysis were performed with random intercept for the hospital of admission.

RESULTS

A total of 33,568 patients were deemed eligible. We confirmed that the basic assumption of ITS was fulfilled. The financial incentive was associated with an improvement in the Barthel index at discharge (0.44 points change in trend per month; 95% confidence interval = 0.20-0.68) and shorter hospital LOS (- 0.66 days change in trend per month; 95% confidence interval = - 0.88 - -0.44). The sensitivity and subgroup analyses showed consistent results.

CONCLUSIONS

The study suggests a potential association between the financial incentive for EMR in ICU patients and improved outcomes. This incentive scheme may provide a unique solution to EMR barrier in practice, however, caution is warranted in interpreting these findings due to recent changes in ICU care practices.

Serum Lactate Dehydrogenase Level One Week after Admission Is the Strongest Predictor of Prognosis of COVID-19: A Large Observational Study Using the COVID-19 Registry Japan

Clinical features of COVID-19 are diverse, and a useful tool for predicting clinical outcomes based on clinical characteristics of COVID-19 is needed. This study examined the laboratory values and trends that influence mortality in hospitalised COVID-19 patients. Data on hospitalised patients enrolled in a registry study in Japan (COVID-19 Registry Japan) were obtained. Patients with records on basic information, outcomes, and laboratory data on the day of admission (day 1) and day 8 were included. In-hospital mortality was set as the outcome, and associated factors were identified by multivariate analysis using the stepwise method. A total of 8860 hospitalised patients were included. The group with lactate dehydrogenase (LDH) levels >222 IU/L on day 8 had a higher mortality rate compared to the group with LDH levels ≤222 IU/L. Similar results were observed in subgroups formed by age, body mass index (BMI), underlying disease, and mutation type, except for those aged <50 years. When age, sex, BMI, underlying disease, and laboratory values on days 1 and 8 were tested for factors strongly associated with in-hospital mortality, LDH on day 8 was most strongly associated with mortality. LDH level on day 8 was the strongest predictor of in-hospital mortality in hospitalised COVID-19 patients, indicating its potential usefulness in post-treatment decision-making in severe COVID-19 cases.

Mass Screening of Asymptomatic Persons for Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 Using Saliva

Background

COVID-19 has rapidly evolved to become a global pandemic due largely to the transmission of its causative virus through asymptomatic carriers. Detection of SARS-CoV-2 in asymptomatic people is an urgent priority for the prevention and containment of disease outbreaks in communities. However, few data are available in asymptomatic persons regarding the accuracy of PCR testing. Additionally, although self-collected saliva has significant logistical advantages in mass screening, its utility as an alternative specimen in asymptomatic persons is yet to be determined.

Methods

We conducted a mass-screening study to compare the utility of nucleic acid amplification, such as reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) testing, using nasopharyngeal swabs (NPS) and saliva samples from each individual in two cohorts of asymptomatic persons: the contact tracing cohort and the airport quarantine cohort.

Results

In this mass-screening study including 1,924 individuals, the sensitivity of nucleic acid amplification testing with nasopharyngeal and saliva specimens were 86% (90%CI:77-93%) and 92% (90%CI:83-97%), respectively, with specificities greater than 99.9%. The true concordance probability between the nasopharyngeal and saliva tests was estimated at 0.998 (90%CI:0.996-0.999) on the estimated airport prevalence at 0.3%. In positive individuals, viral load was highly correlated between NPS and saliva.

Conclusion

Both nasopharyngeal and saliva specimens had high sensitivity and specificity. Self-collected saliva is a valuable specimen to detect SARS-CoV-2 in mass screening of asymptomatic persons.

A novel strategy for SARS-CoV-2 mass screening with quantitative antigen testing of saliva: a diagnostic accuracy study

Background

Quantitative RT-PCR (RT-qPCR) of nasopharyngeal swab (NPS) samples for SARS-CoV-2 detection requires medical personnel and is time consuming, and thus is poorly suited to mass screening. In June, 2020, a chemiluminescent enzyme immunoassay (CLEIA; Lumipulse G SARS-CoV-2 Ag kit, Fujirebio, Tokyo, Japan) was developed that can detect SARS-CoV-2 nucleoproteins in NPS or saliva samples within 35 min. In this study, we assessed the utility of CLEIA in mass SARS-CoV-2 screening.

Methods

We did a diagnostic accuracy study to develop a mass-screening strategy for salivary detection of SARS-CoV-2 by CLEIA, enrolling hospitalised patients with clinically confirmed COVID-19, close contacts identified at community health centres, and asymptomatic international arrivals at two airports, all based in Japan. All test participants were enrolled consecutively. We assessed the diagnostic accuracy of CLEIA compared with RT-qPCR, estimated according to concordance (Kendall's coefficient of concordance, W), and sensitivity (probability of CLEIA positivity given RT-qPCR positivity) and specificity (probability of CLEIA negativity given RT-qPCR negativity) for different antigen concentration cutoffs (0·19 pg/mL, 0·67 pg/mL, and 4·00 pg/mL; with samples considered positive if the antigen concentration was equal to or more than the cutoff and negative if it was less than the cutoff). We also assessed a two-step testing strategy post hoc with CLEIA as an initial test, using separate antigen cutoff values for test negativity and positivity from the predefined cutoff values. The proportion of intermediate results requiring secondary RT-qPCR was then quantified assuming prevalence values of RT-qPCR positivity in the overall tested population of 10%, 30%, and 50%.

Findings

Self-collected saliva was obtained from 2056 participants between June 12 and Aug 6, 2020. Results of CLEIA and RT-qPCR were concordant in 2020 (98·2%) samples (Kendall's W=0·99). Test sensitivity was 85·4% (76 of 89 positive samples; 90% credible interval [CrI] 78·0-90·3) at the cutoff of 0·19 pg/mL; 76·4% (68 of 89; 68·2-82·8) at the cutoff of 0·67 pg/mL; and 52·8% (47 of 89; 44·1-61·3) at the cutoff of 4·0 pg/mL. Test specificity was 91·3% (1796 of 1967 negative samples; 90% CrI 90·2-92·3) at the cutoff of 0·19 pg/mL, 99·2% (1952 of 1967; 98·8-99·5) at the cutoff of 0·67 pg/mL, and 100·0% (1967 of 1967; 99·8-100·0) at the cutoff of 4·00 pg/mL. Using a two-step testing strategy with a CLEIA negativity cutoff of 0·19 pg/mL (to maximise sensitivity) and a CLEIA positivity cutoff of 4·00 pg/mL (to maximise specificity), the proportions of indeterminate results (ie, samples requiring secondary RT-qPCR) would be approximately 11% assuming a prevalence of RT-qPCR positivity of 10%, 16% assuming a prevalence of RT-qPCR positivity of 30%, and 21% assuming a prevalence of RT-qPCR positivity of 50%.

Interpretation

CLEIA testing of self-collected saliva is simple and provides results quickly, and is thus suitable for mass testing. To improve accuracy, we propose a two-step screening strategy with an initial CLEIA test followed by confirmatory RT-qPCR for intermediate concentrations, varying positive and negative thresholds depending on local prevalence. Implementation of this strategy has expedited sample processing at Japanese airports since July, 2020, and might apply to other large-scale mass screening initiatives.

Funding

Ministry of Health, Labour and Welfare, Japan.