OBJECTIVE: We sought to achieve 100% compliance with all 3 Children’s Asthma Care (CAC; CAC-1, CAC-2, CAC-3) measures and track attendance at follow-up appointments with the patient-centered medical home. The impact of these measures on readmission and emergency department utilization rates was evaluated. METHODS: This quality improvement study evaluated compliance with CAC measures in pediatric patients aged 2 to 18 years old hospitalized with a primary diagnosis of asthma from January 1, 2008, through June 30, 2012. A multidisciplinary Asthma Task Force was assembled to develop interventions. Attendance at the follow-up appointment was tracked monthly from January 1, 2009. Readmission and emergency department utilization rates were compared between the preimplementation period (January 1, 2006, through December 31, 2007) and the postimplementation period (January 1, 2008, through June 30, 2012). RESULTS: The preimplementation period included 231 subjects and the postimplementation period included 532 subjects. Compliance with CAC-3 was 95% from October 1, 2009, through June 30, 2012. Compliance with the postdischarge follow-up appointment was 69% from January 1, 2009 through September 30, 2009, increasing significantly to 90% from October 1, 2009, through June 30, 2012 (P < .001). Postimplementation readmission rates significantly decreased in the 91- to 180-day postdischarge interval (odds ratio: 0.29; 95% confidence interval: 0.11–0.78). CONCLUSIONS: In children hospitalized with asthma, compliance with the asthma core measures and the postdischarge follow-up appointment with the primary care provider was associated with reduced readmission rates at 91 to 180 days after discharge. We attribute our results to a comprehensive set of interventions designed by our multidisciplinary Asthma Task Force.

Objective Effective communication between inpatient and outpatient providers may mitigate risks of adverse events associated with hospital discharge. However, there is an absence of pediatric literature defining effective discharge communication strategies at both freestanding children’s hospitals and general hospitals. The objectives of this study were to assess associations between pediatric primary care providers’ (PCPs) reported receipt of discharge communication and referral hospital type, and to describe PCPs’ perspectives regarding effective discharge communication and areas for improvement. Methods We administered a questionnaire to PCPs referring to sixteen pediatric hospital medicine programs nationally. Multivariable models were developed to assess associations between referral hospital type and receipt and completeness of discharge communication. Open-ended questions asked respondents to describe effective strategies and areas requiring improvement regarding discharge communication. Conventional qualitative content analysis was performed to identify emergent themes. Results Responses were received from 201 PCPs, representing a response rate of 63%. While there were no differences between referral hospital type and PCP-reported receipt of discharge communication (RR 1.61,95%CI 0.97–2.67), PCPs referring to general hospitals more frequently reported completeness of discharge communication relative to those referring to freestanding children’s hospitals (RR 1.78,95%CI 1.26–2.51). Analysis of free text responses yielded four major themes: (i) structured discharge communication; (ii) direct personal communication; (iii) reliability and timeliness of communication; and (iv) communication for effective post-discharge care. Conclusions This study highlights potential differences in the experiences of PCPs referring to general hospitals and freestanding children’s hospitals, and presents valuable contextual data for future quality improvement initiatives.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES Professional medical societies endorse prompt, consistent discharge communication to primary care providers (PCPs) on discharge. However, evidence is limited about what clinical elements to communicate. Our main goal was to identify and compare the clinical elements considered by PCPs and pediatric hospitalists to be essential to communicate to PCPs within 2 days of pediatric hospital discharge. A secondary goal was to describe experiences of the PCPs and pediatric hospitalists regarding sending and receiving discharge information. METHODS A survey of physician preferences and experiences regarding discharge communication was sent to 320 PCPs who refer patients to 16 hospitals, with an analogous survey sent to 147 hospitalists. Descriptive statistics were calculated, and χ2 analyses were performed. RESULTS A total of 201 PCPs (63%) and 71 hospitalists (48%) responded to the survey. Seven clinical elements were reported as essential by >75% of both PCPs and hospitalists: dates of admission and discharge; discharge diagnoses; brief hospital course; discharge medications; immunizations given during hospitalization; pending laboratory or test results; and follow-up appointments. PCPs reported reliably receiving discharge communication significantly less often than hospitalists reported sending it (71.8% vs 85.1%; P < .01), and PCPs considered this communication to be complete significantly less often than hospitalists did (64.9% vs 79.1%; P < .01). CONCLUSIONS We identified 7 core clinical elements that PCPs and hospitalists consider essential in discharge communication. Consistently and promptly communicating at least these core elements after discharge may enhance PCP satisfaction and patient-level outcomes. Reported rates of transmission and receipt of this information were suboptimal and should be targeted for improvement.