No abstract

Background: Patients with COVID-19 infection requiring in-hospital care are frequently managed by Internal Medicine hospitalists, comprised of physicians, nurse practitioners and physician assistants. There is sparse information on the psychological impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on Internal Medicine hospitalists. Methods: We surveyed Internal Medicine hospitalists at Mayo Clinic sites in four states (Arizona, Florida, Minnesota, and Wisconsin). We collected demographic information, and used Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS®) measures to assess global well-being, anxiety, social isolation, and emotional support. Descriptive statistics were used to compare responses between two periods: prior to the pandemic (before March 15 th , 2020), and during the pandemic (March 15 through 30 April 2020). The survey was conducted from May 4-25, 2020. Results: Of 295 Internal Medicine hospitalists, 154 (52%) responded. Fifty-six percent were women (n = 85/ 154) and 54% were physicians (n = 84/154). Most hospitalists (75%; n = 115/154) reported concerns about contracting COVID-19 infection at work, and 5% (n = 8/154) reported changing where they lived during the pandemic. Most hospitalists (73%; n = 112/154) reported relying primarily on institutional resources for COVID-19 information. During the pandemic, the percentage of participants with excellent or very good global well-being decreased (90% prior to pandemic vs. 53% during pandemic), with increases in mean anxiety (-4.88 [95% confidence interval,-5.61 to-4.16]; P<.001) and social isolation (-3.91[95% confidence interval,-4.68 to-3.13]; P<.001). During the same period, there was a small decrease in mean emotional support (1.46 [95% confidence interval, 0.83 to 2.09]; P<.001). Conclusion: During the COVID-19 pandemic, Internal Medicine hospitalists reported lower global wellbeing, higher anxiety and social isolation, and a small decrease in emotional support. These results provide a framework to develop programs to support hospitalists and potentially mitigate long-term psychological sequelae including burnout.

No abstract

Objectives: Traditional hospital at home models often have high patient experience scores. The purpose of this study is to look at the patient experience of a new virtual hybrid model of hospital at home called Advanced Care at Home. Methods: Patients in Mayo Clinic’s Advanced Care at Home program received a survey via email from 1 January–31 May 2021. Each survey consisted of 20 questions divided into 18 multiple-choice and two open-ended questions. Results: Ninety-nine surveys were sent and 41 partially or completely finished surveys were returned for a response rate of 41.4%. Patients responded positively, denoted by answering “strongly agree or somewhat agree,” with regard to the ability to reach the team right away 100% of the time, being kept informed 92% of the time, the command center responding promptly to their needs 95% of the time, the team providing comfort and support 98% of the time, feeling comfortable with interacting with their provider by phone or tablet 95% of the time, the ease of use from the equipment 97% of the time, the virtual and in-person staff working well together 98% of the time, the staff treating patients with courtesy and respect 100% of the time, and the ease of understanding the discharge process and feeling ready to leave the program 100% of the time. All providers received positive responses on listening ⩾88% of the time. Patients gave a top rating in likelihood to recommend the program 100% of the time. Conclusion: Overall, the Advanced Care at Home model of hospital at home was highly recommended by patients. Patients scored the program high on responsiveness, staff engagement and communication, ease of equipment use, and readiness for discharge, strengthening the overall confidence in this novel program.

BACKGROUND: Home telemonitoring has been used with discharged patients in an attempt to reduce 30-day readmissions with mixed results. OBJECTIVE: To assess whether home 30-day telemonitoring after discharge for patients at high risk of readmission would reduce readmissions or mortality. DESIGN: Prospective, randomized controlled trial. PATIENTS: We compared 30-day readmission rates and mortality for patients at high risk for readmission who received home telemonitoring versus standard care between November 1, 2014, and November 30, 2018, in 2 tertiary care hospitals. INTERVENTIONS:The intervention group received home-installed equipment to measure blood pressure, heart rate, pulse oximetry, weight if heart failure was present, and glucose if diabetes was present. Results were transmitted daily and reviewed by a nurse. Both groups received standard care. MAIN MEASURES: The primary outcome was a composite end point of hospital readmission or death within 30 days after discharge. The secondary outcome was an emergency department visit within 30 days after discharge. KEY RESULTS: A total of 1380 participants (mean [SD] age, 66 [14] years; 722 [52.3%] men and 658 [47.7%] women) participated in this study. Using a modified intention-to-treat analysis, the risk of readmission or death within 30 days among patients at high readmission risk was 23.7% (137/578) in the control group and 18.2% (87/477) in the telemonitoring group (absolute risk difference, − 5.5% [95% CI, − 10.4 to − 0.6%]; relative risk, 0.77 [95% CI, 0.61 to 0.98]; P = .03). Emergency department visits occurred within 30 days after discharge in 14.2% (81/570) of patients in the control group and 8.6% (40/ 464) of patients in the telemonitoring group (absolute risk difference, − 5.6% [95% CI, − 9.4 to − 1.8%]; relative risk, 0.61 [95% CI, 0.42 to 0.87]; P = .005). CONCLUSIONS: Thirty days of postdischarge telemonitoring may reduce readmissions of high-risk patients.