Alexandra W Acher1, Tamara J LeCaire2, Ann Schoofs Hundt3, Caprice C Greenberg4, Pascale Carayon5, Amy J Kind6, Sharon M Weber7. 1. Wisconsin Surgical Outcomes Research Program, Department of Surgery, University of Wisconsin School of Medicine and Public Health, Madison, WI; William S Middleton Memorial Veterans Hospital, Madison, WI. 2. Wisconsin Surgical Outcomes Research Program, Department of Surgery, University of Wisconsin School of Medicine and Public Health, Madison, WI; Department of Surgery, University of Wisconsin School of Medicine and Public Health, Madison, WI. 3. Center for Quality and Productivity Improvement, Madison, WI. 4. Wisconsin Surgical Outcomes Research Program, Department of Surgery, University of Wisconsin School of Medicine and Public Health, Madison, WI; Department of Surgery, University of Wisconsin School of Medicine and Public Health, Madison, WI; Center for Quality and Productivity Improvement, Madison, WI; Department of Industrial and Systems Engineering, College of Engineering, University of Wisconsin, Madison, WI. 5. Center for Quality and Productivity Improvement, Madison, WI; Department of Industrial and Systems Engineering, College of Engineering, University of Wisconsin, Madison, WI. 6. Department of Medicine, University of Wisconsin School of Medicine and Public Health, Madison, WI; William S Middleton Memorial Veterans Hospital, Madison, WI. 7. Wisconsin Surgical Outcomes Research Program, Department of Surgery, University of Wisconsin School of Medicine and Public Health, Madison, WI; Department of Surgery, University of Wisconsin School of Medicine and Public Health, Madison, WI; William S Middleton Memorial Veterans Hospital, Madison, WI. Electronic address: webers@surgery.wisc.edu.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Our objective was to use a human factors and systems engineering approach to understand contributors to surgical readmissions from a patient and provider perspective. Previous studies on readmission have neglected the patient perspective. To address this gap and to better inform intervention design, we evaluated how transitions of care relate to and influence readmission from the patient and clinician perspective using the Systems Engineering Initiative for Patient Safety (SEIPS) model. STUDY DESIGN: Patients readmitted within 30 days of discharge after complex abdominal surgery were interviewed. A focus group of inpatient clinician providers was conducted. Questions were guided by the SEIPS framework and content was analyzed. Data were collected concurrently from the medical record for a mixed-methods approach. RESULTS: Readmission occurred a median of 8 days (range 1 to 25 days) after discharge. All patients had follow-up scheduled with their surgeon, but readmission occurred before this in 72% of patients. Primary readmission diagnoses included infection, gastrointestinal complications, and dehydration. Patients (n = 18) and clinician providers (n = 6) identified a number of factors during the transition of care that may have contributed to readmission, including poor patient and caregiver understanding; inadequate discharge preparation for home care; insufficient educational process and materials, negatively affected by electronic health record design; and inadequate care team communication. CONCLUSIONS: This is the first study to use a human factors and systems engineering approach to evaluate the impact of the quality of the transition of care and its influence on readmission from the patient and clinician perspective. Important targets for future interventions include enhancing the discharge process, improving education materials, and increasing care team coordination, with the overarching theme that improved patient and caregiver understanding and engagement are essential to decrease readmission and postdischarge health care use.
BACKGROUND: Our objective was to use a human factors and systems engineering approach to understand contributors to surgical readmissions from a patient and provider perspective. Previous studies on readmission have neglected the patient perspective. To address this gap and to better inform intervention design, we evaluated how transitions of care relate to and influence readmission from the patient and clinician perspective using the Systems Engineering Initiative for Patient Safety (SEIPS) model. STUDY DESIGN:Patients readmitted within 30 days of discharge after complex abdominal surgery were interviewed. A focus group of inpatient clinician providers was conducted. Questions were guided by the SEIPS framework and content was analyzed. Data were collected concurrently from the medical record for a mixed-methods approach. RESULTS: Readmission occurred a median of 8 days (range 1 to 25 days) after discharge. All patients had follow-up scheduled with their surgeon, but readmission occurred before this in 72% of patients. Primary readmission diagnoses included infection, gastrointestinal complications, and dehydration. Patients (n = 18) and clinician providers (n = 6) identified a number of factors during the transition of care that may have contributed to readmission, including poor patient and caregiver understanding; inadequate discharge preparation for home care; insufficient educational process and materials, negatively affected by electronic health record design; and inadequate care team communication. CONCLUSIONS: This is the first study to use a human factors and systems engineering approach to evaluate the impact of the quality of the transition of care and its influence on readmission from the patient and clinician perspective. Important targets for future interventions include enhancing the discharge process, improving education materials, and increasing care team coordination, with the overarching theme that improved patient and caregiver understanding and engagement are essential to decrease readmission and postdischarge health care use.
Authors: Sabha Ganai; K Francis Lee; Andrea Merrill; Maggie H Lee; Sandra Bellantonio; Maura Brennan; Peter Lindenauer Journal: Arch Surg Date: 2007-11
Authors: Richard J Holden; Pascale Carayon; Ayse P Gurses; Peter Hoonakker; Ann Schoofs Hundt; A Ant Ozok; A Joy Rivera-Rodriguez Journal: Ergonomics Date: 2013-10-03 Impact factor: 2.778
Authors: Alexandra W Acher; Stephanie A Campbell-Flohr; Maria Brenny-Fitzpatrick; Kristine M Leahy-Gross; Sara Fernandes-Taylor; Alexander V Fisher; Suresh Agarwal; Amy J Kind; Caprice C Greenberg; Pascale Carayon; Sharon M Weber Journal: J Am Coll Surg Date: 2017-05-23 Impact factor: 6.113
Authors: Anuj K Dalal; Theresa Fuller; Pam Garabedian; Awatef Ergai; Corey Balint; David W Bates; James Benneyan Journal: J Am Med Inform Assoc Date: 2019-06-01 Impact factor: 4.497
Authors: Amye J Tevaarwerk; Jennifer R Klemp; Gijsberta J van Londen; Bradford W Hesse; Mary E Sesto Journal: Cancer Date: 2018-09-12 Impact factor: 6.860
Authors: Rizwan A Manji; Rakesh C Arora; Rohit K Singal; Brett M Hiebert; Alan H Menkis Journal: J Am Heart Assoc Date: 2017-02-07 Impact factor: 5.501
Authors: Jaya Aysola; Justin T Clapp; Patricia Sullivan; Patrick J Brennan; Eve J Higginbotham; Matthew D Kearney; Chang Xu; Rosemary Thomas; Sarah Griggs; Mohamed Abdirisak; Alec Hilton; Toluwa Omole; Sean Foster; Mira Mamtani Journal: J Gen Intern Med Date: 2021-08-02 Impact factor: 5.128
Authors: Sonali D Advani; Catherine A Gao; Rupak Datta; Lawrence Sann; Cindy Smith; Michael S Leapman; Adam B Hittelman; James Sabetta; Louise-Marie Dembry; Richard A Martinello; Manisha Juthani-Mehta Journal: Open Forum Infect Dis Date: 2019-08-01 Impact factor: 3.835