Shift-to-shift transitions in care among house staff are associated with adverse events. However, the association between end-of-rotation transition (in which care of the patient is transferred) and adverse events is uncertain.OBJECTIVE To examine the association of end-of-rotation house staff transitions with mortality among hospitalized patients. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTSRetrospective multicenter cohort study of patients admitted to internal medicine services (N = 230 701) at 10 university-affiliated US Veterans Health Administration hospitals (2008)(2009)(2010)(2011)(2012)(2013)(2014).EXPOSURES Transition patients (defined as those admitted prior to an end-of-rotation transition who died or were discharged within 7 days following transition) were stratified by type of transition (intern only, resident only, or intern + resident) and compared with all other discharges (control). An alternative analysis comparing admissions within 2 days before transition with admissions on the same 2 days 2 weeks later was also conducted. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURESThe primary outcome was in-hospital mortality. Secondary outcomes included 30-day and 90-day mortality and readmission rates. A difference-in-difference analysis assessed whether outcomes changed after the 2011 Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) duty hour regulations. Adjustments included age, sex, race/ethnicity, month, year, length of stay, comorbidities, and hospital. RESULTS Among 230 701 patient discharges (mean age, 65.6 years; men, 95.8%; median length of stay, 3.0 days), 25 938 intern-only, 26 456 resident-only, and 11 517 intern + resident end-of-rotation transitions occurred. Overall mortality was 2.18% in-hospital, 9.45% at 30 days, and 14.43% at 90 days. Adjusted hospital mortality was significantly greater in transition vs control patients for the intern-only and intern + resident groups, but not for the resident-only group. Adjusted 30-day and 90-day mortality rates were greater in all transition vs control comparisons. Duty hour changes were associated with greater adjusted hospital mortality for transition patients in the intern-only and intern + resident groups than for controls (intern-only: odds ratio [OR], 1.11 [95% CI, 1.02-1.21]; intern + resident: OR, 1.17 [95% CI, 1.02-1.34]). The alternative analyses did not demonstrate any significant differences in mortality between transition and control groups.

Panel management, a set of tools and processes for proactively caring for patient populations, has potential to reduce morbidity and improve outcomes between office visits. We examined primary care staff's self-efficacy in implementing panel management, its correlates, and an intervention's impact on this self-efficacy. Primary care teams at two Veterans Health Administration (VA) hospitals were assigned to control or intervention conditions. Staff were surveyed at baseline and postintervention, with a random subset interviewed postintervention. Panel management self-efficacy was higher among staff participating in the panel management intervention. Self-efficacy was significantly correlated with sufficient training, aspects of team member interaction, and frequency of panel management use. Panel management self-efficacy was modest among primary care staff at two VA hospitals. Team level interventions may improve primary care staff's confidence in practicing panel management, with this greater confidence related to greater team involvement with, and use of panel management.

BACKGROUND: Panel Management can expand prevention and chronic illness management beyond the office visit, but there is limited evidence for its effectiveness or guidance on how best to incorporate it into practice. OBJECTIVE: We aimed to test the effectiveness of incorporating panel management into clinical practice by incorporating Panel Management Assistants (PMAs) into primary care teams with and without panel management education. DESIGN: We conducted an 8-month cluster-randomized controlled trial of panel management for improving hypertension and smoking cessation outcomes among veterans. PATRICIPANTS: Twenty primary care teams from the Veterans Affairs New York Harbor were randomized to control, panel management support, or panel management support plus education groups. Teams included 69 clinical staff serving 8,153 hypertensive and/or smoking veterans. INTERVENTIONS: Teams assigned to the intervention groups worked with non-clinical Panel Management Assistants (PMAs) who monitored care gaps and conducted proactive patient outreach, including referrals, mail reminders and motivational interviewing by telephone. MAIN MEASURES: Measurements included mean systolic and diastolic blood pressure, proportion of patients with controlled blood pressure, self-reported quit attempts, nicotine replacement therapy (NRT) prescriptions, and referrals to disease management services. KEY RESULTS: Change in mean blood pressure, blood pressure control, and smoking quit rates were similar across study groups. Patients on intervention teams were more likely to receive NRT (OR=1.4; 95 % CI 1.2-1.6) and enroll in the disease management services MOVE! (OR=1.2; 95 % CI 1.1-1.6) and Telehealth (OR=1.7, 95 % CI 1.4-2.1) than patients on control teams. CONCLUSIONS: Panel Management support for primary care teams improved process, but not outcome variables among veterans with hypertension and smoking. Incorporating PMAs into teams was feasible and highly valued by the clinical staff, but clinical impact may require a longer intervention.KEY WORDS: panel management; hypertension; smoking; PCMH. J Gen Intern Med 30(7):916-23

United States Veterans are at excess risk for type 2 diabetes, but population differentials in risk have not been characterized. We determined risk of type 2 diabetes in relation to prediabetes and dyslipidemic profiles in Veterans at the VA New York Harbor (VA NYHHS) during 2004–2014. Prediabetes was based on American Diabetes Association hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) testing cut-points, one of several possible criteria used to define prediabetes. We evaluated transition to type 2 diabetes in 4,297 normoglycemic Veterans and 7,060 Veterans with prediabetes. Cox proportional hazards regression was used to relate HbA1c levels, lipid profiles, demographic, anthropometric and comorbid cardiovascular factors to incident diabetes (Hazard Ratio [HR] and 95% confidence intervals). Compared to normoglycemic Veterans (HbA1c: 5.0–5.6%; 31–38 mmol/mol), risks for diabetes were >2-fold in the moderate prediabetes risk group (HbA1c: 5.7–5.9%; 39–41 mmol/mol) (HR 2.37 [1.98–2.85]) and >5-fold in the high risk prediabetes group (HbA1c: 6.0–6.4%; 42–46 mmol/mol) (HR 5.59 [4.75–6.58]). Risks for diabetes were increased with elevated VLDL (≥40mg/dl; HR 1.31 [1.09–1.58]) and TG/HDL (≥1.5mg/dl; HR 1.34 [1.12–1.59]), and decreased with elevated HDL (≥35mg/dl; HR 0.80 [0.67–0.96]). Transition to diabetes in Veterans was related in age-stratified risk score analyses to HbA1c, VLDL, HDL and TG/HDL, BMI, hypertension and race, with 5-year risk differentials of 62% for the lowest (5-year risk, 13.5%) vs. the highest quartile (5-year risk, 21.9%) of the risk score. This investigation identified substantial differentials in risk of diabetes in Veterans, based on a readily-derived risk score suitable for risk stratification for type 2 diabetes prevention.