Cleveland Clinic Foundation, Cleveland, OH
Wee Christopher, Lindsey Martin Goodman, Lisa A. Rybicki, Alberto J. Montero, Bassam N. Estfan, Carolyn Best, James Stevenson
Background: The quality of care transfers is known to influence clinical outcomes. In an inpt onc setting at a major tertiary care referral center, patient (pt) adm originate from many different areas and times. A detailed evaluation of onc adm by source of transfer, admission time, and provider type, may identify opportunities to improve inpt clinical outcomes. Methods: We retrospectively reviewed all adm to the inpt solid tumor onc service from July - December 2014 from CCF regional hospital emergency departments (ED), outside hospital (OSH) ED, OSH inpt services, and CCF outpt clinics. Pts were excluded if the adm was planned or if admitted from the CCF Main Campus ED. Data collected included pt and encounter characteristics and provider type (house-staff or nocturnal hospitalist). Clinical outcomes, including activation of the adult medical emergency team (AMET), ICU transfers, length of stay (LOS), and in-hospital mortality were compared using chi-squared test; ECOG PS and LOS with the Kruskal-Wallis tests and Wilcoxon rank sum test. Results: A total of 413 unique pt admissions were reviewed. 213 were included after exclusion criteria were applied. The probability of AMET activation, mortality, and LOS differed by origin of transfer. Pts admitted from CCF regional EDs had the lowest median LOS and no deaths. OSH int transfers demonstrated significantly higher mortality vs other origins of transfer. Pts whose first orders were placed after 5pm had no significant differences in AMET activation, ICU transfers, LOS, or mortality vs daytime adm. There were no differences in adverse outcomes by the type of admitting provider. Conclusions: Onc inpts transferred from an outside healthcare setting were at highest risk for adverse outcomes (AMETs, increased LOS, and mortality) include those originating from OSH inpt services. Process and communication interventions focused on transfers from outside inpt facilities may improve safety and outcomes in this population.
CCF ED (n = 49) | OSH ED (n = 51) | OSH inpt (n = 35) | Outpt (n = 78) | p-value | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
AMETS | 2 (4.1%) | 7 (13.7%) | 1 (2.9%) | 2 (2.6%) | 0.038 |
ICU Transfers | 2 (4.1%) | 2 (3.9%) | 3 (8.6%) | 4 (5.1%) | 0.78 |
In Hospital Death | 0 | 5 (9.8%) | 4 (11.4%) | 2 (2.6%) | 0.032 |
LOS | 3.6 | 4.3 | 7.4 | 5.0 | < 0.001 |
Disclaimer
This material on this page is ©2024 American Society of Clinical Oncology, all rights reserved. Licensing available upon request. For more information, please contact licensing@asco.org
Abstract Disclosures
2024 ASCO Annual Meeting
First Author: Arun Kumar
2022 ASCO Annual Meeting
First Author: Manan P Shah
2022 ASCO Quality Care Symposium
First Author: Julie Jiyun Lee
2023 ASCO Annual Meeting
First Author: Zunairah Shah