Kevin Coppa1, Eun Ji Kim2,3, Michael I Oppenheim1,2, Kevin R Bock1,4, Joseph Conigliaro2,3, Jamie S Hirsch5,6,7. 1. Department of Information Services, Northwell Health, Lake Success, NY, USA. 2. Department of Medicine, Donald and Barbara Zucker School of Medicine at Hofstra/Northwell, Hempstead, NY, USA. 3. Institute of Health Innovations and Outcomes Research, Feinstein Institutes for Medical Research, Manhasset, NY, USA. 4. Department of Pediatrics, Donald and Barbara Zucker School of Medicine at Hofstra/Northwell, Hempstead, NY, USA. 5. Department of Information Services, Northwell Health, Lake Success, NY, USA. jhirsch8@northwell.edu. 6. Department of Medicine, Donald and Barbara Zucker School of Medicine at Hofstra/Northwell, Hempstead, NY, USA. jhirsch8@northwell.edu. 7. Institute of Health Innovations and Outcomes Research, Feinstein Institutes for Medical Research, Manhasset, NY, USA. jhirsch8@northwell.edu.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Post-hospital discharge follow-up appointments are intended to evaluate patients' recovery following a hospitalization, but it is unclear how appointment statuses are associated with readmissions. OBJECTIVE: To examine the association between post-discharge ambulatory follow-up status, (1) having a scheduled appointment and (2) arriving to said appointment, and 30-day readmission. DESIGN AND SETTING: A retrospective cohort study of patients hospitalized at 12 hospitals in an Integrated Delivery Network and their ambulatory appointments in that same network. PATIENTS AND MAIN MEASURES: We included 50,772 patients who had an ambulatory appointment within 18 months of an inpatient admission in 2018. Primary outcome was readmission within 30 days post-discharge. KEY RESULTS: There were 32,108 (63.2%) patients with scheduled follow-up appointments and 18,664 (36.8%) patients with no follow-up; 28,313 (88.2%) patients arrived, 3149 (9.8%) missed, and 646 (2.0%) were readmitted prior to their scheduled appointments. Overall 30-day readmission rate was 7.3%; 6.0% [5.75-6.31] for those who arrived, 8.8% [8.44-9.25] for those without follow-up, and 10.3% [9.28-11.40] for those who missed a scheduled appointment (p < 0.001). After adjusting for covariates, patients who arrived at their appointment in the first week following discharge were significantly less likely to be readmitted than those not having any follow-up scheduled (medical adjusted hazard ratio (aHR) 0.57 [0.47-0.69], p < 0.001; surgical aHR 0.58 [0.44-0.75], p < 0.001) There was an increased risk at weeks 3 and 4 for medical patients who arrived at a follow-up compared to those with no follow-up scheduled (week 3 aHR 1.29 [1.10-1.51], p = 0.001; week 4 aHR 1.46 [1.26-1.70], p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: The benefit of patients arriving to their post-discharge appointments compared with patients who missed their follow-up visits or had no follow-up scheduled, is only significant during first week post-discharge, suggesting that coordination within 1 week of discharge is critical in reducing 30-day readmissions.
BACKGROUND: Post-hospital discharge follow-up appointments are intended to evaluate patients' recovery following a hospitalization, but it is unclear how appointment statuses are associated with readmissions. OBJECTIVE: To examine the association between post-discharge ambulatory follow-up status, (1) having a scheduled appointment and (2) arriving to said appointment, and 30-day readmission. DESIGN AND SETTING: A retrospective cohort study of patients hospitalized at 12 hospitals in an Integrated Delivery Network and their ambulatory appointments in that same network. PATIENTS AND MAIN MEASURES: We included 50,772 patients who had an ambulatory appointment within 18 months of an inpatient admission in 2018. Primary outcome was readmission within 30 days post-discharge. KEY RESULTS: There were 32,108 (63.2%) patients with scheduled follow-up appointments and 18,664 (36.8%) patients with no follow-up; 28,313 (88.2%) patients arrived, 3149 (9.8%) missed, and 646 (2.0%) were readmitted prior to their scheduled appointments. Overall 30-day readmission rate was 7.3%; 6.0% [5.75-6.31] for those who arrived, 8.8% [8.44-9.25] for those without follow-up, and 10.3% [9.28-11.40] for those who missed a scheduled appointment (p < 0.001). After adjusting for covariates, patients who arrived at their appointment in the first week following discharge were significantly less likely to be readmitted than those not having any follow-up scheduled (medical adjusted hazard ratio (aHR) 0.57 [0.47-0.69], p < 0.001; surgical aHR 0.58 [0.44-0.75], p < 0.001) There was an increased risk at weeks 3 and 4 for medical patients who arrived at a follow-up compared to those with no follow-up scheduled (week 3 aHR 1.29 [1.10-1.51], p = 0.001; week 4 aHR 1.46 [1.26-1.70], p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: The benefit of patients arriving to their post-discharge appointments compared with patients who missed their follow-up visits or had no follow-up scheduled, is only significant during first week post-discharge, suggesting that coordination within 1 week of discharge is critical in reducing 30-day readmissions.
Authors: Faraz S Ahmad; Joshua P Metlay; Frances K Barg; Rebecca R Henderson; Rachel M Werner Journal: Am J Med Qual Date: 2012-11-01 Impact factor: 1.852
Authors: Ankur Gupta; Larry A Allen; Deepak L Bhatt; Margueritte Cox; Adam D DeVore; Paul A Heidenreich; Adrian F Hernandez; Eric D Peterson; Roland A Matsouaka; Clyde W Yancy; Gregg C Fonarow Journal: JAMA Cardiol Date: 2018-01-01 Impact factor: 14.676
Authors: Jennifer Meddings; Heidi Reichert; Shawna N Smith; Theodore J Iwashyna; Kenneth M Langa; Timothy P Hofer; Laurence F McMahon Journal: J Gen Intern Med Date: 2016-11-15 Impact factor: 5.128
Authors: Amol S Navathe; Feiran Zhong; Victor J Lei; Frank Y Chang; Margarita Sordo; Maxim Topaz; Shamkant B Navathe; Roberto A Rocha; Li Zhou Journal: Health Serv Res Date: 2017-03-13 Impact factor: 3.402
Authors: Carl van Walraven; Irfan A Dhalla; Chaim Bell; Edward Etchells; Ian G Stiell; Kelly Zarnke; Peter C Austin; Alan J Forster Journal: CMAJ Date: 2010-03-01 Impact factor: 8.262
Authors: Connie N Hess; Bimal R Shah; S Andrew Peng; Laine Thomas; Matthew T Roe; Eric D Peterson Journal: Circulation Date: 2013-08-14 Impact factor: 29.690
Authors: Kumar Dharmarajan; Yongfei Wang; Zhenqiu Lin; Sharon-Lise T Normand; Joseph S Ross; Leora I Horwitz; Nihar R Desai; Lisa G Suter; Elizabeth E Drye; Susannah M Bernheim; Harlan M Krumholz Journal: JAMA Date: 2017-07-18 Impact factor: 56.272