The Impact of Accountable Care Units on Patient Outcomes

D. Howard, S. Shapiro, D. J. Murphy, E. Overton, L. Chadwick, Jason M. Stein
{"title":"The Impact of Accountable Care Units on Patient Outcomes","authors":"D. Howard, S. Shapiro, D. J. Murphy, E. Overton, L. Chadwick, Jason M. Stein","doi":"10.31038/imroj.2019414","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background: Effective hospital teams can improve outcomes, yet, traditional hospital staffing, leadership, and rounding practices discourage effective teamwork and communication. Under the Accountable Care Unit model, physicians are assigned to units, team members conduct daily structured interdisciplinary bedside rounds, and physicians and nurses are jointly responsible for unit outcomes. Objectives: To evaluate the impact of ACUs on patient outcomes. Design: Retrospective, pre-post design with concurrent controls. Patients: 23,406 patients admitted to ACU and non-ACU medical wards at a large academic medical center between January 1, 2008 and December 31, 2012. Measures: In-hospital mortality and discharge to hospice, length of stay, 30-day readmission. Results: Patients admitted to ACUs were less likely to be discharged dead or to hospice (-1.8 percentage point decline [95% CI: -3.3, -0.3; p = .015]) ACUs did not reduce 30 day readmission rates or have a significant effect on length-of-stay. Conclusions: Results suggest ACUs improved patient outcomes. However, it is difficult to identify the impact of ACUs against a backdrop of low inpatient mortality and the development of a hospice unit during the study period.","PeriodicalId":158740,"journal":{"name":"Internal Medicine Research Open Journal","volume":"61 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-05-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Internal Medicine Research Open Journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.31038/imroj.2019414","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

Background: Effective hospital teams can improve outcomes, yet, traditional hospital staffing, leadership, and rounding practices discourage effective teamwork and communication. Under the Accountable Care Unit model, physicians are assigned to units, team members conduct daily structured interdisciplinary bedside rounds, and physicians and nurses are jointly responsible for unit outcomes. Objectives: To evaluate the impact of ACUs on patient outcomes. Design: Retrospective, pre-post design with concurrent controls. Patients: 23,406 patients admitted to ACU and non-ACU medical wards at a large academic medical center between January 1, 2008 and December 31, 2012. Measures: In-hospital mortality and discharge to hospice, length of stay, 30-day readmission. Results: Patients admitted to ACUs were less likely to be discharged dead or to hospice (-1.8 percentage point decline [95% CI: -3.3, -0.3; p = .015]) ACUs did not reduce 30 day readmission rates or have a significant effect on length-of-stay. Conclusions: Results suggest ACUs improved patient outcomes. However, it is difficult to identify the impact of ACUs against a backdrop of low inpatient mortality and the development of a hospice unit during the study period.
负责任的护理单位对患者预后的影响
背景:有效的医院团队可以改善结果,然而,传统的医院人员配置、领导和舍入实践阻碍了有效的团队合作和沟通。在责任医疗单位模式下,医生被分配到各个单位,团队成员每天进行结构化的跨学科床边查房,医生和护士共同负责单位的结果。目的:评价acu对患者预后的影响。设计:回顾性,前后设计,并发控制。患者:2008年1月1日至2012年12月31日期间,一家大型学术医疗中心的ACU和非ACU病房收治了23,406名患者。措施:院内死亡率、出院至安宁疗护、住院时间、30天再入院。结果:入住acu的患者出院时死亡或临终关怀的可能性较低(下降-1.8个百分点[95% CI: -3.3, -0.3;p = 0.015]) acu没有降低30天再入院率或对住院时间有显著影响。结论:结果表明acu改善了患者的预后。然而,在研究期间,在住院病人死亡率低和安宁疗护单位发展的背景下,很难确定acu的影响。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信