Jose F Figueroa1, Karen E Joynt, Xiner Zhou, Endel J Orav, Ashish K Jha. 1. *Department of Health Policy and Management, Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health †Department of Medicine, Division of General Internal Medicine, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Cambridge ‡Department of Health Policy and Management, Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health §Department of Medicine, Division of Cardiovascular Medicine, Brigham and Women's Hospital ∥Department of Biostatistics, Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health ¶Department of Medicine, Division of General Internal Medicine, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston #Division of Medicine, Veterans Affairs Boston Healthcare System, Cambridge, MA.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: US hospitals that care for vulnerable populations, "safety-net hospitals" (SNHs), are more likely to incur penalties under the Hospital Readmissions Reduction Program, which penalizes hospitals with higher-than-expected readmissions. Understanding whether SNHs face unique barriers to reducing readmissions or whether they underuse readmission-prevention strategies is important. DESIGN: We surveyed leadership at 1600 US acute care hospitals, of whom 980 participated, between June 2013 and January 2014. Responses on 28 questions on readmission-related barriers and strategies were compared between SNHs and non-SNHs, adjusting for nonresponse and sampling strategy. We further compared responses between high-performing SNHs and low-performing SNHs. RESULTS: We achieved a 62% response rate. SNHs were more likely to report patient-related barriers, including lack of transportation, homelessness, and language barriers compared with non-SNHs (P-values<0.001). Despite reporting more barriers, SNHs were less likely to use e-tools to share discharge summaries (70.1% vs. 73.7%, P<0.04) or verbally communicate (31.5% vs. 39.8%, P<0.001) with outpatient providers, track readmissions by race/ethnicity (23.9% vs. 28.6%, P<0.001), or enroll patients in postdischarge programs (13.3% vs. 17.2%, P<0.001). SNHs were also less likely to use discharge coordinators, pharmacists, and postdischarge programs. When we examined the use of strategies within SNHs, we found trends to suggest that high-performing SNHs were more likely to use several readmission strategies. CONCLUSIONS: Despite reporting more barriers to reducing readmissions, SNHs were less likely to use readmission-reduction strategies. This combination of higher barriers and lower use of strategies may explain why SNHs have higher rates of readmissions and penalties under the Hospital Readmissions Reduction Program.
OBJECTIVE: US hospitals that care for vulnerable populations, "safety-net hospitals" (SNHs), are more likely to incur penalties under the Hospital Readmissions Reduction Program, which penalizes hospitals with higher-than-expected readmissions. Understanding whether SNHs face unique barriers to reducing readmissions or whether they underuse readmission-prevention strategies is important. DESIGN: We surveyed leadership at 1600 US acute care hospitals, of whom 980 participated, between June 2013 and January 2014. Responses on 28 questions on readmission-related barriers and strategies were compared between SNHs and non-SNHs, adjusting for nonresponse and sampling strategy. We further compared responses between high-performing SNHs and low-performing SNHs. RESULTS: We achieved a 62% response rate. SNHs were more likely to report patient-related barriers, including lack of transportation, homelessness, and language barriers compared with non-SNHs (P-values<0.001). Despite reporting more barriers, SNHs were less likely to use e-tools to share discharge summaries (70.1% vs. 73.7%, P<0.04) or verbally communicate (31.5% vs. 39.8%, P<0.001) with outpatient providers, track readmissions by race/ethnicity (23.9% vs. 28.6%, P<0.001), or enroll patients in postdischarge programs (13.3% vs. 17.2%, P<0.001). SNHs were also less likely to use discharge coordinators, pharmacists, and postdischarge programs. When we examined the use of strategies within SNHs, we found trends to suggest that high-performing SNHs were more likely to use several readmission strategies. CONCLUSIONS: Despite reporting more barriers to reducing readmissions, SNHs were less likely to use readmission-reduction strategies. This combination of higher barriers and lower use of strategies may explain why SNHs have higher rates of readmissions and penalties under the Hospital Readmissions Reduction Program.
Authors: Charles N Kahn; Thomas Ault; Lisa Potetz; Thomas Walke; Jayne Hart Chambers; Samantha Burch Journal: Health Aff (Millwood) Date: 2015-08 Impact factor: 6.301
Authors: Rachael B Zuckerman; Steven H Sheingold; E John Orav; Joel Ruhter; Arnold M Epstein Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2016-02-24 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Sameed Ahmed M Khatana; Rishi K Wadhera; Eunhee Choi; Peter W Groeneveld; Dennis P Culhane; Margot Kushel; Dhruv S Kazi; Robert W Yeh; Changyu Shen Journal: J Gen Intern Med Date: 2020-06-17 Impact factor: 5.128
Authors: Alison A Galbraith; David J Meyers; Dennis Ross-Degnan; Marguerite E Burns; Catherine E Vialle-Valentin; Marc R Larochelle; Sharon Touw; Fang Zhang; Meredith Rosenthal; Richard B Balaban Journal: Health Serv Res Date: 2017-12 Impact factor: 3.402
Authors: Jason H Wasfy; Vijeta Bhambhani; Emma W Healy; Christine Choirat; Francesca Dominici; Rishi K Wadhera; Changyu Shen; Yun Wang; Robert W Yeh Journal: Med Care Date: 2019-12 Impact factor: 2.983
Authors: Joshua M Liao; Paula Chatterjee; Erkuan Wang; John Connolly; Jingsan Zhu; Deborah S Cousins; Amol S Navathe Journal: J Hosp Med Date: 2021-12 Impact factor: 2.960
Authors: Kevin N Griffith; David A Schwartzman; Steven D Pizer; Jacob Bor; Vijaya B Kolachalama; Brian Jack; Melissa M Garrido Journal: Health Aff (Millwood) Date: 2022-07 Impact factor: 9.048
Authors: Charleen Hsuan; Alexis Zebrowski; Michelle P Lin; David G Buckler; Brendan G Carr Journal: BMC Health Serv Res Date: 2022-07-02 Impact factor: 2.908
Authors: Jonathan D Wolfe; Arnold M Epstein; Jie Zheng; E John Orav; Karen E Joynt Maddox Journal: J Gen Intern Med Date: 2021-05-04 Impact factor: 5.128