Effect of Implementing Discharge Readiness Assessment in Adult Medical-Surgical Units on 30-Day Return to Hospital: The READI Randomized Clinical Trial

Marianne E Weiss, Olga Yakusheva, Kathleen L Bobay, Linda Costa, Ronda G Hughes, Susan Nuccio, Morris Hamilton, Sarah Bahr, Danielle Siclovan, James Bang, READI Site Investigators, Marianne E Weiss, Olga Yakusheva, Kathleen L Bobay, Linda Costa, Ronda G Hughes, Susan Nuccio, Morris Hamilton, Sarah Bahr, Danielle Siclovan, James Bang, READI Site Investigators

Abstract

Importance: The downward trend in readmissions has recently slowed. New enhancements to hospital readmission reduction efforts are needed. Structured assessment of patient readiness for discharge has been recommended as an addition to discharge preparation standards of care to assist with tailoring of risk-mitigating actions.

Objective: To determine the effect of unit-based implementation of readiness evaluation and discharge intervention protocols on readmissions and emergency department or observation visits.

Design, setting, and participants: The Readiness Evaluation and Discharge Interventions (READI) cluster randomized clinical trial conducted in medical-surgical units of 33 Magnet hospitals between September 15, 2014, and March 31, 2017, included all adult (aged ≥18 years) patients discharged to home. Baseline and risk-adjusted intent-to-treat analyses used difference-in-differences multilevel logistic regression models with controls for patient characteristics.

Interventions: Of 2 adult medical-surgical nursing units from each hospital, 1 was randomized to the intervention and 1 to usual care conditions. Using the 8-item Readiness for Hospital Discharge Scale, the 33 intervention units implemented a sequence of protocols with increasing numbers of components: READI1, in which nurses assessed patients to inform discharge preparation; READI2, which added patient self-assessment; and READI3, which added an instruction to act on a specified Readiness for Hospital Discharge Scale cutoff score indicative of low readiness.

Main outcomes and measures: Thirty-day return to hospital (readmission or emergency department and observation visits). Intervention units above median baseline readmission rate (>11.3%) were categorized as high-readmission units. Among the 33 intervention units, 17 were low-readmission units and 16 were high-readmission units.

Results: The sample included 144 868 patient discharges (mean [SD] age, 59.6 [17.5] years; 51% female; 74 605 in the intervention group and 70 263 in the control group); 17 667 (12.2%) were readmitted and 12 732 (8.8%) had an emergency department visit or observation stay. None of the READI protocols reduced the primary outcome of return to hospital in intent-to-treat analysis of the full sample. In exploratory subgroup analysis, when patient self-assessments were combined with readiness assessment by nurses (READI2), readmissions were reduced by 1.79 percentage points (95% CI, -3.20 to -0.40 percentage points; P = .009) on high-readmission units. With nurse assessment alone and on low-readmission units, results were mixed.

Conclusions and relevance: Implemented in a broad range of hospitals and patients, the READI interventions were not effective in reducing return to hospital. However, adding a structured discharge readiness assessment that incorporates the patient's own perspective to usual discharge care practices holds promise for mitigating high rates of return to the hospital following discharge.

Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01873118.

Conflict of interest statement

Conflict of Interest Disclosures: Dr Weiss reported grants from the American Nurse Credentialing Center (ANCC) during the conduct of the study and is currently a member of the ANCC Research Council. No other disclosures were reported.

Figures

Figure 1.. Study Sample Flow Diagram
Figure 1.. Study Sample Flow Diagram
Figure 2.. Analysis of Readiness Evaluation and…
Figure 2.. Analysis of Readiness Evaluation and Discharge Interventions (READI) Effectiveness for Intervention Units With Low (≤11.3%) and High (>11.3%) Readmission Rate at Baseline
Difference-in-differences predictive margins with 95% CIs (error bars) of the absolute percentage point reduction from the READI intervention by protocol, estimated using a multinomial conditional likelihood difference-in-differences logistic model with adjustment for baseline event rates and patient characteristics with clustering at unit and hospital level. The READI1 protocol used the nurse form of the Readiness for Hospital Discharge Scale (RHDS) with instructions to nurses to use their best judgment with the assessment information to guide actions in completing their patients’ preparation for discharge. The READI2 protocol used patient self-assessment using the patient form of the RHDS followed by nurse assessment using the nurse form of the RHDS with instructions to nurses to use their best judgment. The READI3 protocol used patient self-assessment using the patient form of the RHDS followed by nurse assessment using the nurse form of the RHDS with instruction to nurses to act and document nurse actions if the patient received a low readiness score (

References

    1. Yakusheva O, Hoffman GJ. Does a reduction in readmissions result in net savings for most hospitals? an examination of Medicare’s Hospital Readmissions Reduction Program [published online August 24, 2018]. Med Care Res Rev. doi:10.1177/1077558718795745
    1. Medicare Payment Advisory Commission Report to the Congress: Medicare and Health Care Delivery System Washington, DC: Medicare Payment Advisory Commission; 2018. . Accessed September 20, 2018.
    1. Bradley EH, Curry L, Horwitz LI, et al. . Contemporary evidence about hospital strategies for reducing 30-day readmissions: a national study. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2012;60(7):-. doi:10.1016/j.jacc.2012.03.067
    1. Bradley EH, Curry L, Horwitz LI, et al. . Hospital strategies associated with 30-day readmission rates for patients with heart failure. Circ Cardiovasc Qual Outcomes. 2013;6(4):444-450. doi:10.1161/CIRCOUTCOMES.111.000101
    1. Joynt KE, Sarma N, Epstein AM, Jha AK, Weissman JS. Challenges in reducing readmissions: Lessons from leadership and frontline personnel at eight minority-serving hospitals. Jt Comm J Qual Patient Saf. 2014;40(10):435-437. doi:10.1016/S1553-7250(14)40056-4
    1. Bobay K, Bahr SJ, Weiss ME, Hughes R, Costa L. Models of discharge care in Magnet hospitals. J Nurs Adm. 2015;45(10):485-491. doi:10.1097/NNA.0000000000000239
    1. Project RED. . Accessed September 20, 2018.
    1. Transitional Care Model . Accessed September 20, 2018.
    1. The Care Transitions Program . Accessed September 20, 2018.
    1. Society of Hospital Medicine Better outcomes by optimizing safe transitions. . Accessed September 20, 2018.
    1. Hospital to Home . Accessed September 20, 2018.
    1. Naylor MD, Aiken LH, Kurtzman ET, Olds DM, Hirschman KB. The care span: the importance of transitional care in achieving health reform. Health Aff (Millwood). 2011;30(4):746-754. doi:10.1377/hlthaff.2011.0041
    1. Wasfy JH, Zigler CM, Choirat C, Wang Y, Dominici F, Yeh RW. Readmission rates after passage of the hospital readmissions reduction program: a pre-post analysis. Ann Intern Med. 2017;166(5):324-331. doi:10.7326/M16-0185
    1. Jha AK. To fix the hospital readmissions program, prioritize what matters. JAMA. 2018;319(5):431-433. doi:10.1001/jama.2017.21623
    1. Weiss M, Yakusheva O, Bobay K. Quality and cost analysis of nurse staffing, discharge preparation, and postdischarge utilization. Health Serv Res. 2011;46(5):1473-1494. doi:10.1111/j.1475-6773.2011.01267.x
    1. Weiss ME, Costa LL, Yakusheva O, Bobay KL. Validation of patient and nurse short forms of the Readiness for Hospital Discharge Scale and their relationship to return to the hospital. Health Serv Res. 2014;49(1):304-317. doi:10.1111/1475-6773.12092
    1. Weiss ME, Piacentine LB. Psychometric properties of the Readiness for Hospital Discharge Scale. J Nurs Meas. 2006;14(3):163-180. doi:10.1891/jnm-v14i3a002
    1. Weiss ME, Piacentine LB, Lokken L, et al. . Perceived readiness for hospital discharge in adult medical-surgical patients. Clin Nurse Spec. 2007;21(1):31-42. doi:10.1097/00002800-200701000-00008
    1. Weiss M, Yakusheva O, Bobay K. Nurse and patient perceptions of discharge readiness in relation to postdischarge utilization. Med Care. 2010;48(5):482-486. doi:10.1097/MLR.0b013e3181d5feae
    1. Weiss ME, Sawin KJ, Gralton K, et al. . Discharge teaching, readiness for discharge, and post-discharge outcomes in parents of hospitalized children. J Pediatr Nurs. 2017;34:58-64. doi:10.1016/j.pedn.2016.12.021
    1. Bobay KL, Weiss ME, Oswald D, Yakusheva O. Validation of the registered nurse assessment of readiness for hospital discharge scale. Nurs Res. 2018;67(4):305-313.
    1. Imbens GW, Rubin DB. Causal Inference for Statistics, Social and Biomedical Sciences. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press; 2015. doi:10.1017/CBO9781139025751
    1. Dimick JB, Ryan AM. Methods for evaluating changes in health care policy: the difference-in-differences approach. JAMA. 2014;312(22):2401-2402. doi:10.1001/jama.2014.16153
    1. Ender PB. STATA: Power Logistic Regression (Powerlog): Stata Statistical Software: Release 12. College Station, TX: StataCorp LP; 2011.
    1. Kansagara D, Englander H, Salanitro A, et al. . Risk prediction models for hospital readmission: a systematic review. JAMA. 2011;306(15):1688-1698. doi:10.1001/jama.2011.1515
    1. Major Diagnostic Categories . Accessed 09-24-2018.
    1. Elixhauser A, Steiner C, Harris DR, Coffey RM. Comorbidity measures for use with administrative data. Med Care. 1998;36(1):8-27. doi:10.1097/00005650-199801000-00004
    1. Gupta SK. Intention-to-treat concept: a review. Perspect Clin Res. 2011;2(3):109-112. doi:10.4103/2229-3485.83221
    1. Bobay KL. Assessing readiness for discharge, multi-site research. Presented at: ANCC National Magnet Conference; October 26, 2018; Denver, CO.
    1. Foronda C, MacWilliams B, McArthur E. Interprofessional communication in healthcare: an integrative review. Nurse Educ Pract. 2016;19:36-40. doi:10.1016/j.nepr.2016.04.005
    1. Tan T-C, Zhou H, Kelly M. Nurse-physician communication—an integrated review. J Clin Nurs. 2017;26(23-24):3974-3989. doi:10.1111/jocn.13832
    1. Wang Y-Y, Wan Q-Q, Lin F, Zhou W-J, Shang S-M. Interventions to improve communication between nurses and physicians in the intensive care unit: an integrative literature review. Int J Nurs Sci. 2018;5(1):81-88. doi:10.1016/j.ijnss.2017.09.007
    1. Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality TeamSTEPPS: Research/Evidence Base. . Updated July 2015. Accessed April 27, 2018.
    1. Newell S, Jordan Z. The patient experience of patient-centered communication with nurses in the hospital setting: a qualitative systematic review protocol. JBI Database System Rev Implement Rep. 2015;13(1):76-87. doi:10.11124/jbisrir-2015-1072
    1. Friese CR, Xia R, Ghaferi A, Birkmeyer JD, Banerjee M. Hospitals in ‘Magnet’ program show better patient outcomes on mortality measures compared to non-‘Magnet’ hospitals. Health Aff (Millwood). 2015;34(6):986-992. doi:10.1377/hlthaff.2014.0793
    1. McHugh MD, Kelly LA, Smith HL, Wu ES, Vanak JM, Aiken LH. Lower mortality in Magnet hospitals. Med Care. 2013;51(5):382-388. doi:10.1097/MLR.0b013e3182726cc5
    1. Daskivich TJ, Abedi G, Kaplan SH, et al. . Electronic health record problem lists: accurate enough for risk adjustment? Am J Manag Care. 2018;24(1):e24-e29.

Source: PubMed

3
Tilaa