Menu Close
  • Clinical
    • In the Literature
    • Key Clinical Questions
    • Interpreting Diagnostic Tests
    • Coding Corner
    • Clinical
    • Clinical Guidelines
    • COVID-19
    • POCUS
  • Practice Management
    • Quality
    • Public Policy
    • How We Did It
    • Key Operational Question
    • Technology
    • Practice Management
  • Diversity
  • Career
    • Leadership
    • Education
    • Movers and Shakers
    • Career
    • Learning Portal
    • The Hospital Leader Blog
  • Pediatrics
  • HM Voices
    • Commentary
    • In Your Eyes
    • In Your Words
    • The Flipside
  • SHM Resources
    • Society of Hospital Medicine
    • Journal of Hospital Medicine
    • SHM Career Center
    • SHM Converge
    • Join SHM
    • Converge Coverage
    • SIG Spotlight
    • Chapter Spotlight
    • #JHM Chat
  • Industry Content
    • Patient Monitoring with Tech
An Official Publication of
  • Clinical
    • In the Literature
    • Key Clinical Questions
    • Interpreting Diagnostic Tests
    • Coding Corner
    • Clinical
    • Clinical Guidelines
    • COVID-19
    • POCUS
  • Practice Management
    • Quality
    • Public Policy
    • How We Did It
    • Key Operational Question
    • Technology
    • Practice Management
  • Diversity
  • Career
    • Leadership
    • Education
    • Movers and Shakers
    • Career
    • Learning Portal
    • The Hospital Leader Blog
  • Pediatrics
  • HM Voices
    • Commentary
    • In Your Eyes
    • In Your Words
    • The Flipside
  • SHM Resources
    • Society of Hospital Medicine
    • Journal of Hospital Medicine
    • SHM Career Center
    • SHM Converge
    • Join SHM
    • Converge Coverage
    • SIG Spotlight
    • Chapter Spotlight
    • #JHM Chat
  • Industry Content
    • Patient Monitoring with Tech

The latest research you need to know

Literature at a Glance

  • Discharge innovation and readmission rates.
  • Electronic medical records and outcomes.
  • CXR findings predict outcomes.
  • NSAIDs and congestive heart failure morbidity.
  • Outcomes of interpreter use.
  • Predictors and outcomes of postoperative delirium.
  • Perioperative beta-blockers.
  • Perioperative stroke risk.

Standardized Discharge Intervention Decreases Readmission Rates

Clinical question: Does a standardized discharge intervention lead to a decrease in ED visits and readmission rates following hospital discharge?

Background: Hospital discharge is a complex process that is not standardized at many institutions. Deficiencies in the process can lead to poor outcomes, unnecessary rehospitalizations, and increased costs. Previous studies of peridischarge interventions have yielded mixed results and typically focus on specific patient populations.

Study design: Randomized trial.

Setting: Boston Medical Center, a large, urban, academic medical center.

Synopsis: In this single-institution study, 749 English-speaking hospitalized adults were randomly assigned one of two discharge plans: a multidisciplinary package of discharge services or the usual discharge process. Patients in the intervention group were assigned a nurse discharge advocate who performed patient education, medication reconciliation, discharge coordination, and scheduled follow-up appointments. A pharmacist also telephoned participants two to four days after discharge to reinforce the discharge plan and review medications.

Participants in the intervention group had a 30% relative reduction in hospital utilization (defined as ED visit or hospital readmission) at 30 days. Overall, 21.6% of intervention patients and 26.9% of usual-discharge patients had at least one hospital utilization within 30 days of discharge.

This study was limited to a single center, and 27% of the patients did not meet eligibility criteria. The applicability also is limited by the resource utilization required for the intervention. The authors estimated that 0.5 full-time-equivalent (FTE) nursing time and 0.15 FTE pharmacist time was required to maintain 14 patients per week.

Bottom line: A systematic, intensive approach to discharges can reduce ED return visits and readmission rates.

Citation: Jack B, Chetty V, Anthony D, et al. A re-engineered hospital discharge program to decrease re-hospitalization. Ann Intern Med. 2009:150(3):178-187.

PEDIATRIC LITERATURE

VATS Doesn’t Shorten Hospital Stays for Children with Empyema

Clinical question: Should video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery (VATS) or tube thoracostomy with fibrinolysis be the primary intervention of choice in children with an empyema?

Background: Rates of pediatric parapneumonic empyema are increasing, but optimal treatment has yet to be defined. VATS has gained attention in recent years as reports have publicized improved outcomes with early operative management of empyema in childhood when compared with primary tube thoracostomy alone. However, clear advantages of VATS over primary chest tube drainage with fibrinolytic therapy have not been demonstrated.

Study design: Prospective, randomized trial.

Setting: A U.S. tertiary-care children’s hospital.

Synopsis: Eighteen children under 18 with empyema—defined as loculated pleural fluid by computed tomography or ultrasound, or pleural fluid white blood cell count >10,000 cells/µl—were randomized to receive either VATS or percutaneous chest tube placement with alteplase infusion. Length of post-therapy hospitalization was nearly identical between the two groups. Cost was significantly higher in the VATS patient group.

This is the second prospective, randomized trial to demonstrate that VATS does not shorten hospital length of stay in children with empyema when compared with tube thoracostomy with fibrinolysis. Both studies enrolled a small sample size according to power calculations, based on retrospective data suggesting that VATS results in two fewer days of hospitalization when compared with chest tube with fibrinolysis. Additionally, both studies revealed nearly identical lengths of stay between the two groups, with significantly higher costs in those undergoing VATS.

Bottom line: Primary tube thoracostomy with fibrinolysis does not prolong hospitalization in children with empyema when compared with VATS.

Citation: St. Peter S, Tsao K, Harrison C, et al. Thoracoscopic decortication vs. tube thoracostomy with fibrinolysis for empyema in children: a prospective, randomized trial. J Pediatr Surg. 2009;44(1):106-111.

  • The latest research you need to know

    May 2, 2009

  • 2010: HM Goes to Washington

    May 2, 2009

  • SHM’s Down with Digital

    May 2, 2009

  • 1

    Salary One Part of the Compensation Package

    May 1, 2009

  • Under Pressure

    May 1, 2009

  • 1

    Bright Lights, Big City

    May 1, 2009

  • 1

    The Bigger They Are …

    May 1, 2009

  • 1

    Read All About It

    May 1, 2009

  • New Medicare Rule Reduces Retroactive Billing Period

    April 30, 2009

  • Pandemic Preparation

    April 30, 2009

1 … 875 876 877 878 879 … 973
  • About The Hospitalist
  • Contact Us
  • The Editors
  • Editorial Board
  • Authors
  • Publishing Opportunities
  • Subscribe
  • Advertise
  • Copyright © 2025 by John Wiley & Sons, Inc. All rights reserved, including rights for text and data mining and training of artificial technologies or similar technologies.
    ISSN 1553-085X
  • Privacy Policy
  • Terms and Conditions
  • SHM’s DE&I Statement
  • Cookie Preferences