↓ Skip to main content

Characterizing Potentially Preventable Admissions: A Mixed Methods Study of Rates, Associated Factors, Outcomes, and Physician Decision-Making

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of General Internal Medicine, January 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
16 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
49 Mendeley
Title
Characterizing Potentially Preventable Admissions: A Mixed Methods Study of Rates, Associated Factors, Outcomes, and Physician Decision-Making
Published in
Journal of General Internal Medicine, January 2018
DOI 10.1007/s11606-017-4285-6
Pubmed ID
Authors

Lisa M. Daniels, Atsushi Sorita, Deanne T. Kashiwagi, Masashi Okubo, Evan Small, Eric C. Polley, Adam P. Sawatsky

Abstract

Potentially preventable admissions are a target for healthcare cost containment. To identify rates of, characterize associations with, and explore physician decision-making around potentially preventable admissions. A comparative cohort study was used to determine rates of potentially preventable admissions and to identify associated factors and patient outcomes. A qualitative case study was used to explore physicians' clinical decision-making. Patients admitted from the emergency department (ED) to the general medicine (GM) service over a total of 4 weeks were included as cases (N = 401). Physicians from both emergency medicine (EM) and GM that were involved in the cases were included (N = 82). Physicians categorized admissions as potentially preventable. We examined differences in patient characteristics, admission characteristics, and patient outcomes between potentially preventable and control admissions. Interviews with participating physicians were conducted and transcribed. Transcriptions were systematically analyzed for key concepts regarding potentially preventable admissions. EM and GM physicians categorized 22.2% (90/401) of admissions as potentially preventable. There were no significant differences between potentially preventable and control admissions in patient or admission characteristics. Potentially preventable admissions had shorter length of stay (2.1 vs. 3.6 days, p < 0.001). There was no difference in other patient outcomes. Physicians discussed several provider, system, and patient factors that affected clinical decision-making around potentially preventable admissions, particularly in the "gray zone," including risk of deterioration at home, the risk of hospitalization, the cost to the patient, and the presence of outpatient resources. Differences in provider training, risk assessment, and provider understanding of outpatient access accounted for differences in decisions between EM and GM physicians. Collaboration between EM and GM physicians around patients in the gray zone, focusing on patient risk, cost, and outpatient resources, may provide an avenues for reducing potentially preventable admissions and lowering healthcare spending.

Timeline
X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
As of 1 July 2024, you may notice a temporary increase in the numbers of X profiles with Unknown location. Click here to learn more.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 49 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 49 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 9 18%
Other 6 12%
Student > Doctoral Student 4 8%
Student > Bachelor 3 6%
Student > Ph. D. Student 3 6%
Other 10 20%
Unknown 14 29%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 16 33%
Nursing and Health Professions 4 8%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 3 6%
Social Sciences 3 6%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 2 4%
Other 4 8%
Unknown 17 35%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 06 March 2018.
All research outputs
#16,794,410
of 26,454,856 outputs
Outputs from Journal of General Internal Medicine
#5,973
of 8,397 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#263,862
of 457,731 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of General Internal Medicine
#98
of 140 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 26,454,856 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 34th percentile – i.e., 34% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 8,397 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 22.5. This one is in the 26th percentile – i.e., 26% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 457,731 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 39th percentile – i.e., 39% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 140 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 25th percentile – i.e., 25% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.