» Articles » PMID: 26954564

Preventability and Causes of Readmissions in a National Cohort of General Medicine Patients

Abstract

Importance: Readmission penalties have catalyzed efforts to improve care transitions, but few programs have incorporated viewpoints of patients and health care professionals to determine readmission preventability or to prioritize opportunities for care improvement.

Objectives: To determine preventability of readmissions and to use these estimates to prioritize areas for improvement.

Design, Setting, And Participants: An observational study was conducted of 1000 general medicine patients readmitted within 30 days of discharge to 12 US academic medical centers between April 1, 2012, and March 31, 2013. We surveyed patients and physicians, reviewed documentation, and performed 2-physician case review to determine preventability of and factors contributing to readmission. We used bivariable statistics to compare preventable and nonpreventable readmissions, multivariable models to identify factors associated with potential preventability, and baseline risk factor prevalence and adjusted odds ratios (aORs) to determine the proportion of readmissions affected by individual risk factors.

Main Outcome And Measure: Likelihood that a readmission could have been prevented.

Results: The study cohort comprised 1000 patients (median age was 55 years). Of these, 269 (26.9%) were considered potentially preventable. In multivariable models, factors most strongly associated with potential preventability included emergency department decision making regarding the readmission (aOR, 9.13; 95% CI, 5.23-15.95), failure to relay important information to outpatient health care professionals (aOR, 4.19; 95% CI, 2.17-8.09), discharge of patients too soon (aOR, 3.88; 95% CI, 2.44-6.17), and lack of discussions about care goals among patients with serious illnesses (aOR, 3.84; 95% CI, 1.39-10.64). The most common factors associated with potentially preventable readmissions included emergency department decision making (affecting 9.0%; 95% CI, 7.1%-10.3%), inability to keep appointments after discharge (affecting 8.3%; 95% CI, 4.1%-12.0%), premature discharge from the hospital (affecting 8.7%; 95% CI, 5.8%-11.3%), and patient lack of awareness of whom to contact after discharge (affecting 6.2%; 95% CI, 3.5%-8.7%).

Conclusions And Relevance: Approximately one-quarter of readmissions are potentially preventable when assessed using multiple perspectives. High-priority areas for improvement efforts include improved communication among health care teams and between health care professionals and patients, greater attention to patients' readiness for discharge, enhanced disease monitoring, and better support for patient self-management.

Citing Articles

Resources and Readmission for COPD Exacerbation in Pneumology Units in Spain: The COPD Observatory Project.

Calle Rubio M, Cebollero Rivas P, Esteban C, Fuster Gomila A, Garcia Guerra J, Golpe R Healthcare (Basel). 2025; 13(3).

PMID: 39942506 PMC: 11817094. DOI: 10.3390/healthcare13030317.


Implementation of the Robocare nursing model for patients undergoing da Vinci robot-assisted radical gastrectomy for gastric cancer.

Wang J, Chen R, Tang J J Robot Surg. 2024; 18(1):405.

PMID: 39527138 DOI: 10.1007/s11701-024-02159-3.


Agreement and comparative accuracy of instability criteria at discharge for predicting adverse events in patients with community-acquired pneumonia.

Danjou A, Bouisse M, Boussat B, Blaise S, Gaillat J, Francois P BMJ Open Respir Res. 2024; 11(1).

PMID: 39510793 PMC: 11551989. DOI: 10.1136/bmjresp-2024-002289.


Nurse Telephone Support for Caregivers of Older Adults at Hospital Discharge: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

Hill A, Moyle W, Slatyer S, Bryant C, Hill K, Waldron N JAMA Netw Open. 2024; 7(10):e2441019.

PMID: 39453654 PMC: 11581515. DOI: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2024.41019.


Emerging lessons from experiences at transitions in care among hospitalised patients with cancer with postdischarge frequent emergency department use: a qualitative study using linked clinical and patient-reported interview data from Quebec, Canada.

Kurteva S, Nassar N, Tamblyn R BMJ Open. 2024; 14(10):e085219.

PMID: 39424388 PMC: 11492942. DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2024-085219.


References
1.
van Walraven C, Jennings A, Forster A . A meta-analysis of hospital 30-day avoidable readmission rates. J Eval Clin Pract. 2011; 18(6):1211-8. DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2753.2011.01773.x. View

2.
Schnipper J, Roumie C, Cawthon C, Businger A, Dalal A, Mugalla I . Rationale and design of the Pharmacist Intervention for Low Literacy in Cardiovascular Disease (PILL-CVD) study. Circ Cardiovasc Qual Outcomes. 2010; 3(2):212-9. PMC: 3021350. DOI: 10.1161/CIRCOUTCOMES.109.921833. View

3.
Elizabeth Goldman L, Sarkar U, Kessell E, Guzman D, Schneidermann M, Pierluissi E . Support from hospital to home for elders: a randomized trial. Ann Intern Med. 2014; 161(7):472-81. DOI: 10.7326/M14-0094. View

4.
Stewart A, Perez-Stable E . Interpersonal processes of care in diverse populations. Milbank Q. 1999; 77(3):305-39, 274. PMC: 2751132. DOI: 10.1111/1468-0009.00138. View

5.
Schnipper J, Kirwin J, Cotugno M, Wahlstrom S, Brown B, Tarvin E . Role of pharmacist counseling in preventing adverse drug events after hospitalization. Arch Intern Med. 2006; 166(5):565-71. DOI: 10.1001/archinte.166.5.565. View