Oncologist- versus hospitalist-led service: Differences in hospital utilization for solid tumor patients.

Authors

null

Lesley Wu

Mount Sinai Beth Israel, New York, NY

Lesley Wu, Minira Aslanova, Haley Hines Theroux, Hsin-hui Huang, Cardinale B. Smith

Organizations

Mount Sinai Beth Israel, New York, NY, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, NY

Research Funding

No funding received
None.

Background: Hospitalists have been practicing alongside oncologists to provide high quality care for hospitalized cancer patients. We examined the differences in hospital utilization and outcomes among solid tumor patients admitted to oncologist-led teams (OT) versus hospitalist-led teams (HT). Methods: We performed a retrospective cohort study of patients with solid tumors admitted to the OT or HT at Mount Sinai Hospital from July to December 2019. We excluded patients less than 18 years of age, primary hematologic malignancies, or admission to intensive care or surgical units. We used the Activity Measure for Post Acute Care (AMPAC) and Charlson Comorbidity Index as a measure of functional ability and illness severity, respectively. We performed bivariate and multivariate analyses comparing differences in length of stay, ICU transfers, palliative care consults, healthcare proxy (HCP) decision, new DNR decision, readmission within 30 days and inpatient mortality by type of admitting service (OT vs HT). Results: A total of 544 patients were identified; 61% (334) admitted to HT. There were significant differences according to race and cancer type (p= 0.001 for both). HT patients had more functional impairment (p<0.0001) and poorer prognosis (p=0.0002). In bivariate analysis, HT had significantly more ICU transfers (OT, 2% vs HT, 8%; p=0.008), new DNR decisions (OT, 7% vs HT, 16%; p=0.002), and inpatient mortality (OT, 4% vs HT, 9%; p=0.02) while OT had significantly more palliative care consults (OT, 45% vs HT, 20%; p<0.0001). Multivariate analysis (Table) demonstrates HT had significantly more new DNR decisions (odds ratio [OR]: 0.46, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.23-0.93) and OT had significantly more palliative care consults (OR: 4.01, 95% CI: 2.51-6.43). Conclusions: At our academic hospital, inpatient cancer care led by hospitalists is comparable to that of oncologists despite HT caring for more severely ill oncology patients. From a value perspective, hospitalists facilitating care for hospitalized cancer patients will allow oncologists to maximize ambulatory time and focus on active cancer treatment.

OR95% CIP-value
Length of stay0.97*0.85 - 1.100.63
HCP decision1.240.75 - 2.050.40
Readmission in 30 days1.260.78 - 2.060.35
ICU transfers0.250.02 - 4.110.33
Palliative care consult4.012.51 - 6.43<0.0001
New DNR decision0.460.23 - 0.930.03
Inpatient mortality0.610.24 - 1.500.27

*Days, not OR

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 Details

Meeting

2020 ASCO Quality Care Symposium

Session Type

Poster Session

Session Title

On-Demand Poster Session: Cost, Value, and Policy

Track

Cost, Value, and Policy

Sub Track

Team-Based Approaches to Care Delivery

Citation

J Clin Oncol 38, 2020 (suppl 29; abstr 53)

DOI

10.1200/JCO.2020.38.29_suppl.53

Abstract #

53

Poster Bd #

Online Only

Abstract Disclosures

Similar Abstracts

Abstract

2022 ASCO Quality Care Symposium

Palliative care utilization and mortality in patients who received inpatient chemotherapy.

First Author: Justine Anderson

Abstract

2022 ASCO Annual Meeting

Palliative care utilization and mortality in patients who received inpatient chemotherapy.

First Author: Justine Anderson

First Author: Therese Marie Mulvey