readmission risk
Recently Published Documents


TOTAL DOCUMENTS

369
(FIVE YEARS 171)

H-INDEX

24
(FIVE YEARS 4)

2022 ◽  
Vol 13 (2) ◽  
pp. 1-27
Author(s):  
Jiaheng Xie ◽  
Bin Zhang ◽  
Jian Ma ◽  
Daniel Zeng ◽  
Jenny Lo-Ciganic

Hospital readmission refers to the situation where a patient is re-hospitalized with the same primary diagnosis within a specific time interval after discharge. Hospital readmission causes $26 billion preventable expenses to the U.S. health systems annually and often indicates suboptimal patient care. To alleviate those severe financial and health consequences, it is crucial to proactively predict patients’ readmission risk. Such prediction is challenging because the evolution of patients’ medical history is dynamic and complex. The state-of-the-art studies apply statistical models which use static predictors in a period, failing to consider patients’ heterogeneous medical history. Our approach – Trajectory-BAsed DEep Learning (TADEL) – is motivated to tackle the deficiencies of the existing approaches by capturing dynamic medical history. We evaluate TADEL on a five-year national Medicare claims dataset including 3.6 million patients per year over all hospitals in the United States, reaching an F1 score of 87.3% and an AUC of 88.4%. Our approach significantly outperforms all the state-of-the-art methods. Our findings suggest that health status factors and insurance coverage are important predictors for readmission. This study contributes to IS literature and analytical methodology by formulating the trajectory-based readmission prediction problem and developing a novel deep-learning-based readmission risk prediction framework. From a health IT perspective, this research delivers implementable methods to assess patients’ readmission risk and take early interventions to avoid potential negative consequences.


2022 ◽  
Vol ahead-of-print (ahead-of-print) ◽  
Author(s):  
Michelle Louise Gatt ◽  
Maria Cassar ◽  
Sandra C. Buttigieg

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to identify and analyse the readmission risk prediction tools reported in the literature and their benefits when it comes to healthcare organisations and management.Design/methodology/approach Readmission risk prediction is a growing topic of interest with the aim of identifying patients in particular those suffering from chronic diseases such as congestive heart failure, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease and diabetes, who are at risk of readmission. Several models have been developed with different levels of predictive ability. A structured and extensive literature search of several databases was conducted using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analysis strategy, and this yielded a total of 48,984 records.Findings Forty-three articles were selected for full-text and extensive review after following the screening process and according to the eligibility criteria. About 34 unique readmission risk prediction models were identified, in which their predictive ability ranged from poor to good (c statistic 0.5–0.86). Readmission rates ranged between 3.1 and 74.1% depending on the risk category. This review shows that readmission risk prediction is a complex process and is still relatively new as a concept and poorly understood. It confirms that readmission prediction models hold significant accuracy at identifying patients at higher risk for such an event within specific context.Research limitations/implications Since most prediction models were developed for specific populations, conditions or hospital settings, the generalisability and transferability of the predictions across wider or other contexts may be difficult to achieve. Therefore, the value of prediction models remains limited to hospital management. Future research is indicated in this regard.Originality/value This review is the first to cover readmission risk prediction tools that have been published in the literature since 2011, thereby providing an assessment of the relevance of this crucial KPI to health organisations and managers.


2022 ◽  
Vol Publish Ahead of Print ◽  
Author(s):  
Gregory W. Ruhnke ◽  
Peter K. Lindenauer ◽  
Christopher S. Lyttle ◽  
David O. Meltzer

Author(s):  
Daniel J Rubin ◽  
Preethi Gogineni ◽  
Andrew Deak ◽  
Cherie L Vaz ◽  
Samantha Watts ◽  
...  

Hospital readmission within 30 days of discharge (30-day readmission) is a high-priority quality measure and cost target. The purpose of this study was to explore the feasibility and efficacy of the Diabetes Transition of Hospital Care (DiaTOHC) Program on readmission risk in high-risk adults with diabetes. This was a non-blinded pilot randomized controlled trial (RCT) that compared usual care (UC) to DiaTOHC at a safety-net hospital. The primary outcome was all-cause 30-day readmission. Between 10/16/2017 and 05/30/2019, 115 patients were randomized. In the intention-to-treat (ITT) population, 14 (31.1%) of 45 DiaTOHC subjects and 15 (32.6%) of 46 UC subjects had a 30-day readmission (p=0.88) while 35.6% DiaTOHC and 39.1% UC subjects had a 30-day readmission or ED visit (p=0.72). The Intervention:UC cost ratio was 0.33 (0.13-0.79)95%CI (p<0.01). Among the 69 subjects with baseline HbA1c >7.0% (53 mmol/mol), 30-day readmission rates were 23.5% (DiaTOHC) and 31.4% (UC, p=0.46) and composite 30-day readmission or ED visit rates were 26.5% (DiaTOHC) and 40.0% (UC, p=0.23). In this subgroup, the Intervention:UC cost ratio was 0.21 (0.08-0.58)95%CI (p=0.002). The DiaTOHC Program is feasible and may decrease combined 30-day readmission/ED visit risk as well as healthcare costs among patients with higher HbA1c levels.


2022 ◽  
Vol 226 (1) ◽  
pp. S283
Author(s):  
Timothy Wen ◽  
Brittany Arditi ◽  
Nasim C. Sobhani ◽  
Chiara Corbetta-Rastelli ◽  
Brian Liu ◽  
...  

2022 ◽  
Vol 42 (1) ◽  
pp. 37-42
Author(s):  
Maria F. Strømme ◽  
Liv S. Mellesdal ◽  
Christoffer A. Bartz-Johannesen ◽  
Rune A. Kroken ◽  
Marianne L. Krogenes ◽  
...  

2021 ◽  
Vol Publish Ahead of Print ◽  
Author(s):  
Stephen L. Jones ◽  
Ohbet Cheon ◽  
Joanna-Grace Mayo Manzano ◽  
Anne K. Park ◽  
Heather Y. Lin ◽  
...  

2021 ◽  
Vol 50 (1) ◽  
pp. 719-719
Author(s):  
Michael Young ◽  
Jordan DeWitt ◽  
Brian Peifer ◽  
John Elliott

PLoS ONE ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 16 (12) ◽  
pp. e0260943
Author(s):  
Sakina Walji ◽  
Warren McIsaac ◽  
Rahim Moineddin ◽  
Sumeet Kalia ◽  
Michelle Levy ◽  
...  

Purpose This study aims to determine if the primary care provider (PCP) assessment of readmission risk is comparable to the validated LACE tool at predicting readmission to hospital. Methods A prospective observational study of recently discharged adult patients clustered by PCPs in the primary care setting. Physician readmission risk assessment was determined via a questionnaire after the PCP reviewed the hospital discharge summary. LACE scores were calculated using administrative data and the discharge summary. The sensitivity and specificity of the physician assessment and the LACE tool in predicting readmission risk, agreement between the 2 assessments and the area under receiver operating characteristic (AUROC) curves were calculated. Results 217 patient readmission encounters were included in this study from September 2017 till June 2018. The rate of readmission within 30 days was 14.7%, and 217 discharge summaries were used for analysis. The weighted kappa coefficient was 0.41 (95% CI: 0.30–0.51) demonstrating a moderate level of agreement. Sensitivity of physician assessment was 0.31 (95% CI: 0.22–0.40) and specificity was 0.80 (95% CI: 0.77–0.83). The sensitivity of the LACE assessment was 0.42 (95% CI: 0.25–0.59) and specificity was 0.79 (95% CI: 0.73–0.85). The AUROC for the LACE readmission risk was 0.65 (95% C.I. 0.55–0.76) demonstrating modest predictive power and was 0.57 (95% C.I. 0.46–0.68) for physician assessment, demonstrating low predictive power. Conclusion The LACE index shows moderate discriminatory power in identifying high-risk patients for readmission when compared to the PCP’s assessment. If this score can be provided to the PCP, it may help identify patients who requires more intensive follow-up after discharge.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document