Erica Sieg1,2, Quan Mai3, Caterina Mosti1,2, Michael Brook1,2. 1. a Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences , Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine , Chicago , IL , USA. 2. b Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences , Northwestern Memorial Hospital , Chicago , IL , USA. 3. c Northwestern University, Clinical and Translational Sciences Institute , Northwestern Enterprise Data Warehouse , Chicago , IL , USA.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: This was a retrospective study designed to examine the relationship between inpatient neuropsychological status and future utilization costs. METHODS: We completed a retrospective chart review of 280 patients admitted to a large academic medical center who were referred for bedside neuropsychological evaluation. Patients were grouped based on neuropsychological recommendation regarding level of supportive needs post-discharge (low, moderate, high). Level of support was used as a gross surrogate indicator of cognitive status in this heterogeneous sample. We also included patients who refused assessment. Outcome variables included time to readmission, number of emergency department visits, inpatient admissions, length of hospitalization, and total costs of hospitalizations, 30 days and 1 year following discharge. RESULTS: Multivariate analysis indicated patients who refused assessment had higher inpatient service utilization (number of ED visits, number of admissions, and total cost of hospitalization) compared to those with moderate needs. Also, high needs patients had higher total cost of hospitalization at 1 year, and those with low needs used the ED more, compared to those with moderate needs. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings replicate prior studies linking refusal of neuropsychological evaluation to higher service utilization costs, and suggest a nonlinear relationship between cognitive impairment severity and future costs for medical inpatients (different groups incur different types of costs). Results preliminarily highlight the potential utility of inpatient neuropsychological assessment in identifying patients at risk for greater hospital utilization, which may allow for the development of appropriate interventions for these patients.
OBJECTIVE: This was a retrospective study designed to examine the relationship between inpatient neuropsychological status and future utilization costs. METHODS: We completed a retrospective chart review of 280 patients admitted to a large academic medical center who were referred for bedside neuropsychological evaluation. Patients were grouped based on neuropsychological recommendation regarding level of supportive needs post-discharge (low, moderate, high). Level of support was used as a gross surrogate indicator of cognitive status in this heterogeneous sample. We also included patients who refused assessment. Outcome variables included time to readmission, number of emergency department visits, inpatient admissions, length of hospitalization, and total costs of hospitalizations, 30 days and 1 year following discharge. RESULTS: Multivariate analysis indicated patients who refused assessment had higher inpatient service utilization (number of ED visits, number of admissions, and total cost of hospitalization) compared to those with moderate needs. Also, high needs patients had higher total cost of hospitalization at 1 year, and those with low needs used the ED more, compared to those with moderate needs. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings replicate prior studies linking refusal of neuropsychological evaluation to higher service utilization costs, and suggest a nonlinear relationship between cognitive impairment severity and future costs for medical inpatients (different groups incur different types of costs). Results preliminarily highlight the potential utility of inpatient neuropsychological assessment in identifying patients at risk for greater hospital utilization, which may allow for the development of appropriate interventions for these patients.
Entities:
Keywords:
Health care utilization; clinical neuropsychology; hospital utilization; neuropsychological assessment
Authors: Ziad S Nasreddine; Natalie A Phillips; Valérie Bédirian; Simon Charbonneau; Victor Whitehead; Isabelle Collin; Jeffrey L Cummings; Howard Chertkow Journal: J Am Geriatr Soc Date: 2005-04 Impact factor: 5.562
Authors: Kathryn K Vankirk; Michael David Horner; Travis H Turner; Clara E Dismuke; Wendy Muzzy Journal: Clin Neuropsychol Date: 2013-04-02 Impact factor: 3.535
Authors: Sonia Conejo-Cerón; Patricia Moreno-Peral; Alberto Rodríguez-Morejón; Emma Motrico; Desirée Navas-Campaña; Alina Rigabert; Carlos Martín-Pérez; Antonina Rodríguez-Bayón; María Isabel Ballesta-Rodríguez; Juan de Dios Luna; Javier García-Campayo; Miquel Roca; Juan Ángel Bellón Journal: Ann Fam Med Date: 2017-05 Impact factor: 5.166
Authors: Kelly M Stanek; John Gunstad; Mary Beth Spitznagel; Donna Waechter; Joel W Hughes; Faith Luyster; Richard Josephson; James Rosneck Journal: Int J Neurosci Date: 2010-11-10 Impact factor: 2.292
Authors: Michael David Horner; Kathryn K VanKirk; Clara E Dismuke; Travis H Turner; Wendy Muzzy Journal: Clin Neuropsychol Date: 2014-06-16 Impact factor: 3.535
Authors: Allan Garland; Clare D Ramsey; Randy Fransoo; Kendiss Olafson; Daniel Chateau; Marina Yogendran; Allen Kraut Journal: CMAJ Date: 2013-08-26 Impact factor: 8.262
Authors: Mieke Deschodt; Els Devriendt; Marc Sabbe; Daniel Knockaert; Peter Deboutte; Steven Boonen; Johan Flamaing; Koen Milisen Journal: BMC Geriatr Date: 2015-04-26 Impact factor: 3.921