Patient readmissions, emergency visits, and adverse events after software-assisted discharge from hospital: Cluster randomized trial

BACKGROUND: One of the causes of postdischarge adverse events is poor discharge communication between hospital‐based physicians, patients, and outpatient physicians. The value of hospital discharge software to improve communication and clinically relevant outcomes is unknown. OBJECTIVE: To measure e...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Journal of hospital medicine 2009-09, Vol.4 (7), p.E11-E19
Main Authors: Graumlich, James F., Novotny, Nancy L., Stephen Nace, G., Kaushal, Himangi, Ibrahim-Ali, Waleed, Theivanayagam, Shoba, William Scheibel, L., Aldag, Jean C.
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Cluster Analysis
continuity of patient care
Continuity of Patient Care - organization & administration
electronic discharge summary
Emergency Service, Hospital - utilization
Female
health care surveys
hospital information systems
hospitalists
Humans
Male
Medical Records Systems, Computerized
medication reconciliation
patient care transitions
patient discharge
Patient Discharge - standards
Patient Discharge - statistics & numerical data
Patient Readmission - statistics & numerical data
Patient Satisfaction
Sample Size
Software
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:BACKGROUND: One of the causes of postdischarge adverse events is poor discharge communication between hospital‐based physicians, patients, and outpatient physicians. The value of hospital discharge software to improve communication and clinically relevant outcomes is unknown. OBJECTIVE: To measure effects of a discharge software application of computerized physician order entry (CPOE). DESIGN: Cluster randomized controlled trial. SETTING: Tertiary care, teaching hospital in central Illinois. PATIENTS: A total of 631 inpatients discharged to home with high risk for readmission. INTERVENTION: Seventy internal medicine hospital physicians were randomly assigned (allocation concealed) to discharge software versus usual care, handwritten discharge. MEASUREMENTS: Blinded assessment of patient readmission, emergency department visit, and postdischarge adverse event. RESULTS: A total of 590 (94%) patients provided 6‐month follow‐up data. Generalized estimating equations gave intervention variable coefficients with 95% confidence interval (CI). When comparing patients assigned to discharge software versus usual care, there was no difference in hospital readmission within 6 months (37.0% versus 37.8%; coefficient −0.005 [95% CI, −0.074 to 0.065]; P = 0.894), emergency department visit within 6 months (35.4% versus 40.6%; coefficient −0.052 [95% CI, −0.115 to 0.011]; P = 0.108), or adverse event within 1 month (7.3% versus 7.3%; coefficient 0.003 [95% CI; −0.037 to 0.043]; P = 0.884). CONCLUSIONS: Discharge software with CPOE did not affect readmissions, emergency department visits, or adverse events after discharge. Future studies should assess other endpoints such as patient perceptions or physician perceptions to see if discharge software has value. Journal of Hospital Medicine 2009;4:E11–E19. © 2009 Society of Hospital Medicine.
ISSN:1553-5592
1553-5606
DOI:10.1002/jhm.469