Skip to main content

Advertising Disclaimer »

Main menu

  • Journals
    • Pediatrics
    • Hospital Pediatrics
    • Pediatrics in Review
    • NeoReviews
    • AAP Grand Rounds
    • AAP News
  • Authors/Reviewers
    • Submit Manuscript
    • Author Guidelines
    • Reviewer Guidelines
    • Editorial Policies
    • Open Access
  • Content
    • Current Issue
    • Online First
    • Archive
    • Topic/Program Collections
    • Blog
  • Subscribe
  • Alerts
  • Careers
  • Other Publications
    • American Academy of Pediatrics

User menu

  • Log in
  • My Cart

Search

  • Advanced search
American Academy of Pediatrics

AAP Gateway

Advanced Search

AAP Logo

  • Log in
  • My Cart
  • Journals
    • Pediatrics
    • Hospital Pediatrics
    • Pediatrics in Review
    • NeoReviews
    • AAP Grand Rounds
    • AAP News
  • Authors/Reviewers
    • Submit Manuscript
    • Author Guidelines
    • Reviewer Guidelines
    • Editorial Policies
    • Open Access
  • Content
    • Current Issue
    • Online First
    • Archive
    • Topic/Program Collections
    • Blog
  • Subscribe
  • Alerts
  • Careers
American Academy of Pediatrics
Research Articles

Preventability of 7-Day Versus 30-Day Readmissions at an Academic Children’s Hospital

Tiffany A. Gardner, Louise E. Vaz, Byron A. Foster, Tamara Wagner and Jared P. Austin
Hospital Pediatrics January 2020, 10 (1) 52-60; DOI: https://doi.org/10.1542/hpeds.2019-0124
Tiffany A. Gardner
aDepartment of Pediatrics, School of Medicine, Oregon Health and Science University, Portland, Oregon
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Louise E. Vaz
bDepartments of Pediatrics and
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Byron A. Foster
bDepartments of Pediatrics and
cDermatology,
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Tamara Wagner
bDepartments of Pediatrics and
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Jared P. Austin
bDepartments of Pediatrics and
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • Article
  • Figures & Data
  • Info & Metrics
  • Comments
Loading
Download PDF

Abstract

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: The 30-day readmission rate is a common quality metric used by Medicare for adult patients. However, studies in pediatrics have shown lower readmission rates and potentially less preventability. Therefore, some question the utility of the 30-day readmission time frame in pediatrics. Our objective was to describe the characteristics of patients readmitted within 30 days of discharge over a 1-year period and determine the preventability of readmissions occurring 0 to 7 vs 8 to 30 days after discharge from a pediatric hospitalist service at an academic children’s hospital.

METHODS: Retrospective chart review and hospital administrative data were used to gather medical characteristics, demographics, and process-level metrics for readmitted patients between July 1, 2015, and June 30, 2016. All readmissions were reviewed by 2 senior authors and assigned a preventability category. Subgroup analysis comparing preventability in 0-to-7– and 8-to-30–day readmissions groups was performed. Qualitative thematic analysis was performed on readmissions deemed preventable.

RESULTS: Of 1523 discharges that occurred during the study period, 49 patients, with 65 distinct readmission encounters, were readmitted for an overall 30-day readmission rate of 4.3% (65 of 1523). Twenty-eight percent (9 of 32) of readmissions within 7 days of discharge and 12.1% (4 of 33) occurring 8 to 30 days after discharge were deemed potentially preventable (P = .13). Combined, the 30-day preventable readmission rate was 20% (13 of 65).

CONCLUSIONS: We identified a possible association between preventability and time to readmission. If confirmed by larger studies, the 7-day, rather than 30-day, time frame may represent a better quality metric for readmitted pediatric patients.

The readmission rate is a common metric used to assess the quality of health care delivered during hospital admissions.1,2 In the adult population, the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) has reduced reimbursement to hospitals for select conditions if their readmission rates reach certain thresholds, providing direct financial incentive to reduce readmission rates.3,4 Although the CMS does not currently reduce reimbursement for pediatric readmissions, readmission rates within pediatrics are still used to assess quality of care but not in the disease-specific manner seen with adults.5–8 Beyond the cost to the health care system, readmissions can represent significant financial and psychological burdens to families, often requiring caregivers to take leave from work, pay for child care for other dependents, or pay for housing and transportation to be nearer to the hospital.9–12

Traditionally, the CMS and insurers have used the 30-day time frame from discharge to readmission as the main readmission-related quality metric.13 In adults, this time frame is used because adults have high rates of readmission within this time period, and many of these readmissions may be preventable.14 Studies in pediatrics, however, have shown lower overall admission and 30-day readmission rates and potentially less preventability.15–17 Hence, the 30-day readmission rate may have limited utility as a quality metric in the pediatric population.

Shorter readmission time frames have been examined in both pediatric and adult populations.16,18–22 An analysis by Hain et al16 of 15-day readmissions in pediatrics found that 20% of cases were deemed preventable, but this was not compared with 30- or 7-day rates. In another study of pediatric patients, using a different readmission preventability tool, Toomey et al19 found that 30% of 30-day readmissions were preventable and that readmissions that occurred closer to the index admission were more likely to be deemed preventable. Studying adult patients, Graham et al18 found that readmissions within 7 days of discharge were preventable 20% of the time compared with 10% for those that occurred 8 to 30 days after discharge. Hence, they proposed that the 7-day readmission rate may be a better quality metric for adult patients. We postulated that similar findings may occur within the pediatric population. We therefore conducted a study to describe the characteristics of readmitted patients over a 12-month period and compare the preventability of readmissions occurring within 7 days of discharge to those occurring 8 to 30 days after discharge.

Methods

Study Design and Participants

We conducted a retrospective cohort study of unplanned hospital readmissions within 30 days of discharge at our 151-bed academic children’s hospital located in the Pacific Northwest. A convenience sample consisting of all patients <18 years of age who had at least 1 discharge from the pediatric hospitalist service between July 1, 2015, and June 30, 2016, were included in the study. Patients with an additional admission occurring ≤30 days after discharge that resulted in another discharge from the pediatric hospitalist service were considered readmitted patients. To account for readmissions of patients discharged during the final month of the study period (June 2016), all patients discharged during this time period were monitored for 30 days, and any readmissions occurring during this time frame were included in analysis. We excluded discharges due to planned readmissions, discharges whose primary admission was to the newborn nursery or NICU, and discharges from services other than the pediatric hospitalist service.

Data Collection

Hospital administrative data for all patients discharged from the pediatric hospitalist service were obtained, deidentified, and secured by using Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act–compliant cloud storage software and used for statistical comparison with readmitted patients. Retrospective chart review and hospital administrative data were used to gather demographic information, medical characteristics, and process-level metrics for readmitted patients. Deidentified study data were entered and managed in a secure, Web-based database called Research Electronic Data Capture.23

Outcomes

We had 2 main aims in the study. The first aim was to describe the characteristics of patients readmitted to the pediatric hospitalist service within 30 days of discharge, and determine the 30-day readmission rate, over a 1-year period. The first discharge from the pediatric hospitalist service during the study period was defined as the index admission regardless of the admitting service (eg, PICU). Any subsequent admissions within 30 days of discharge that resulted in discharge from the pediatric hospitalist service during the study period were defined as readmissions. Patients with multiple admissions during the study period had each admission or readmission encounter included in readmission rate and preventability analyses, but only the index admission was used in demographic analyses. The readmission rate was calculated by using the total number of readmission encounters as the numerator and the total number of discharge encounters as the denominator.

The second aim was to compare the preventability of readmissions occurring in the first 7 days after discharge to those readmitted 8 to 30 days after discharge. Using previously described methods,16 each readmission within 30 days of discharge was reviewed by 2 senior authors, and a preventability category was assigned after consensus was reached. Subgroup analysis was performed to compare the preventability of 0-to-7–day versus 8-to-30–day readmissions. Additionally, directed qualitative content analysis24 was undertaken by 2 senior authors to determine themes for those readmissions deemed preventable.

Covariates of Interest

We characterized the demographic makeup of the readmitted population and assessed for differences when compared with nonreadmitted patients. Demographic variables included age, sex, race, ethnicity, primary language, and insurance type. Similarly, process metrics, including length of stay (LOS), day of the week of discharge (calculated as a categorical variable), and percentage originating from an emergency department were compared between the readmitted and nonreadmitted groups. Problem list diagnosis categories, the presence of durable medical devices, and the number of specialties consulted during hospitalization were obtained during chart review of readmitted patients and used as proxies for medical complexity.

Statistical Analysis

Data were analyzed by using SPSS statistical analysis software (version 24; IBM SPSS Statistics, IBM Corporation). We used descriptive statistics to characterize the overall population and χ2, t, or Mann-Whitney rank-sum tests to compare groups. We compared 0-to-7–day readmissions to 8-to-30–day readmissions on demographic variables and preventability using χ2, t, or Fisher’s exact tests.

Ethical Considerations

This study was approved by the Oregon Health and Science University institutional review board (00016971).

Results

Demographics

Of 1390 individual patients discharged from the pediatric hospitalist service during the study period, 49 were readmitted with 65 distinct readmission encounters (Table 1). The total number of discharge encounters during the study period was 1523 (each patient could have multiple admissions and/or discharge encounters) for an overall readmission rate of 4.3% (65 of 1523). Bivariate analysis did not demonstrate significant differences between those who were readmitted versus those who were not in regard to age, sex, race, or ethnicity (Table 1). However, more readmitted patients had public insurance compared with nonreadmitted patients (87.8% vs 60%; P = .008; Table 1).

View this table:
  • View inline
  • View popup
TABLE 1

Demographics and Process Measures

Process Measures

Readmitted patients had longer median LOS for their index admissions than nonreadmitted patients (4 vs 2 days, respectively; P < .001; Table 1). There was no difference in likelihood of the index admission originating in the emergency department between the readmitted and nonreadmitted groups (36.7% vs 29.5%; P = .27). The day of the week of discharge from the hospital did not differ between the 2 groups (Table 1).

Description of Readmitted Patients

Thirty-two readmissions (49.2%), involving 27 individual patients, occurred within 7 days of discharge, and 33 readmissions (50.7%), involving 29 individual patients, occurred from 8 to 30 days after discharge (Table 2). Neurologic conditions accounted for the most common diagnostic category among readmitted patients at 59.2%, followed by pulmonary conditions at 49.0% and gastrointestinal and genetic and/or metabolic conditions, each present in 42.9% of patients (Table 2). Sixty-one percent of patients had diagnoses in at least 4 categories. Nearly two-thirds (65.3%) of readmitted patients used a durable medical device, the most common being a feeding tube (87.5%), followed by tracheostomy (15.6%). Readmitted patients received a median of 2 specialty consults (range 0–7; Table 2).

View this table:
  • View inline
  • View popup
TABLE 2

Description of Readmitted Patients

Subgroup Analysis: 0-to-7–Day Versus 8-to-30–Day Readmissions

Twenty patients had readmissions in the 0-to-7–day time frame, 22 patients had readmissions in the 8-to-30–day time frame, and 7 patients had readmission encounters in both time frames. The 7 patients with readmission encounters in both time frames were assigned to the 0-to-7–day group for demographic analysis (Table 3). Bivariate analysis comparing 0-to-7– to 8-to-30–day readmissions did not demonstrate any significant differences in demographics (Table 3). In analyzing preventability, 28.1% (9 of 32) of 0-to-7–day readmissions and 12.1% (4 of 33) of 8-to-30–day readmissions were deemed potentially preventable (P = .13; Table 4). The combined 0-to-30–day preventability rate was 20.0% (13 of 65). Qualitative analysis of preventable cases revealed several themes: discharge too early, inadequate outpatient equipment services, inadequate in-hospital care, inadequate follow-up, inadequate communication between care teams, and inadequate outpatient management (Table 5).

View this table:
  • View inline
  • View popup
TABLE 3

Comparison of Readmitted Patients by Readmission Time Frame

View this table:
  • View inline
  • View popup
TABLE 4

Readmission Preventability: 0 to 7 vs 8 to 30 Days After Discharge

View this table:
  • View inline
  • View popup
TABLE 5

Description of <30-Day Preventable Readmissions

Discussion

We found that ∼1 in 5 readmissions occurring in the first 30 days after discharge were potentially preventable. Readmissions occurring within 7 days were more than twice as likely to be judged as preventable as those occurring between 8 and 30 days after discharge, although this result was not statistically significant. However, this difference is consistent with other studies of preventability,16,18,19,22 and this finding supports the notion that using a shorter readmission time frame could represent a more meaningful quality metric. Our study also confirmed findings from other studies concerning the readmitted patient population: that they have high medical complexity, have longer LOS, and are more likely to have public insurance.7,25–27

Using qualitative methods, we found that the reasons for preventability were varied and specific to the patient care delivered during admission. Use of discharge checklists and readiness tools,28–30 which stress process metrics (such as medications available at discharge and primary care provider notification), would have mitigated perhaps 3 readmissions (1 with a medication error [coded as inadequate outpatient management], 1 without appropriate home supplies [coded as inadequate outpatient equipment services], and 1 without timely follow-up with a primary care provider [coded as inadequate follow-up]). Each of these readmissions occurred within the 7-day time frame, showing the potential importance of such tools for this group of patients. Such checklists would not have addressed the majority of the preventable readmissions, especially those occurring in the 8-to-30–day time frame.

Development of appropriate contingency care plans for parents and ambulatory providers would have addressed those patients whose readmissions were related to the themes of inadequate follow-up and inadequate outpatient management. Better communication among primary care and subspecialist providers, and tools to improve in-hospital care, may have mitigated those readmissions related to the themes of inadequate communication between care teams and inadequate in-hospital care. Challenges around inpatient to outpatient communication, frequent staff turnover, quality metrics related to decreasing LOS, and institutional pressures to optimize bed capacities will need to be considered to address some of these issues. Despite these challenges, the use of qualitative methods to identify themes related to preventable readmissions was useful for identifying potential solutions and could be further refined in future studies.

The readmission preventability rate within our cohort of 20% was similar to that reported by Hain et al16 but lower than that reported by Toomey et al.19 The difference in these numbers may reflect the unique characteristics of the preventability scale used. For example, Hain et al16 proposed a 5-point scale, whereas Toomey et al19 used a 4-point scale. The main difference between these scales was the presence of a category for uncertain preventability. Among others, reasons for readmission may be related to the medical condition of the patient, caregiver driven, or due to health system limitations in the patient’s geographic area. Given the complexity of factors leading to readmission, we believe including a category of uncertainty is important and more accurately reflects the reality of the readmission process. However, in our study, only 5% of patients fell into the uncertain preventability category.

A recent study by Rodriguez et al22 further highlights the challenge of determining preventability. The researchers deemed 48% of 3-day readmissions preventable by external chart review, but only 29% to 35% were preventable when determined by discharging and readmitting providers. Furthermore, when taking into account parental opinions, preventability dropped to 25%. This study reinforced the difficulty of determining preventability by chart review, wherein the various nuances of clinical situations may not be fully realized, and hence, preventability rates may be overestimated. Although it is tempting to suggest that the solution to this problem is the development of better prediction models using hospital administrative databases, these analytical models can easily miss unique aspects of clinical management and patient influences. Instead, because the overall numbers of readmissions are low (4.3% in our study), and only a fraction of those are potentially preventable (20% in our study), focusing on individual patient populations, mainly those with complex medical conditions, who consume a larger proportion of health care resources and the bulk of readmissions is more likely to be fruitful.27,31–36 Intensifying efforts around care coordination,37,38 particularly involving communication between inpatient and outpatient providers, and primary care and subspecialty providers may be beneficial in reducing overall health care use for this patient population.

Our study had several important limitations. First, it was conducted within a single pediatric hospital medicine service at a medium-sized academic health center over a 1-year period, which limits its overall generalizability and statistical power. Hence, although we did not see a statistical difference in preventability between 0-to-7– and 8-to-30–day readmission time frames, given the sample size, this may reflect a type II error. Assuming a 20% difference in preventability between the 2 groups (30% vs 10%) powered at 80% with an α of .05, a study would need to include ∼124 encounters to detect a significant difference. Thus, conducting larger studies over multiple years, and including additional inpatient services, would address these problems of power and generalizability. Second, we used a tool for determining preventability that is imperfect and subject to interpretation. Additionally, having >2 researchers reach consensus when coding preventability, and using blinded methodology, would reduce the risk of decision bias. Further research into developing more accurate, objective tools to assess and code preventability are needed to address these issues.

Conclusions

Readmissions occurring within 0 to 7 days of discharge were more likely to be preventable than those occurring 8 to 30 days after discharge. Hence, the 7-day time frame may represent a better quality metric than the 30-day time frame for readmissions of pediatric patients. The overall preventability rate of 20% for all readmissions within 30 days was similar to other studies. Future efforts focused on improving care coordination and discharge planning, especially for patients with complex medical conditions, should be prioritized.

Footnotes

  • FINANCIAL DISCLOSURE: The authors have indicated they have no financial relationships relevant to this article to disclose.

  • FUNDING: No external funding.

  • POTENTIAL CONFLICT OF INTEREST: The authors have indicated they have no potential conflicts of interest to disclose.

References

  1. ↵
    1. Stefan MS,
    2. Pekow PS,
    3. Nsa W,
    4. et al
    . Hospital performance measures and 30-day readmission rates. J Gen Intern Med. 2013;28(3):377–385
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  2. ↵
    1. Fontanarosa PB,
    2. McNutt RA
    . Revisiting hospital readmissions. JAMA. 2013;309(4):398–400
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  3. ↵
    Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services. Readmission reduction program. Available at: https://www.cms.gov/medicare/medicare-fee-for-service-payment/acuteinpatientpps/readmissions-reduction-program.html. Accessed March 22, 2019
  4. ↵
    1. Chen M,
    2. Grabowski DC
    . Hospital readmissions reduction program: intended and unintended effects. Med Care Res Rev. 2019;76(5):643–660
    OpenUrl
  5. ↵
    1. Bardach NS,
    2. Vittinghoff E,
    3. Asteria-Peñaloza R,
    4. et al
    . Measuring hospital quality using pediatric readmission and revisit rates. Pediatrics. 2013;132(3):429–436
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
    1. Berry JG,
    2. Gay JC,
    3. Joynt Maddox K,
    4. et al
    . Age trends in 30 day hospital readmissions: US national retrospective analysis. BMJ. 2018;360:k497
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  6. ↵
    1. Berry JG,
    2. Hall DE,
    3. Kuo DZ,
    4. et al
    . Hospital utilization and characteristics of patients experiencing recurrent readmissions within children’s hospitals. JAMA. 2011;305(7):682–690
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  7. ↵
    1. Nakamura MM,
    2. Toomey SL,
    3. Zaslavsky AM,
    4. et al
    . Measuring pediatric hospital readmission rates to drive quality improvement. Acad Pediatr. 2014;14(suppl 5):S39–S46
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  8. ↵
    1. Amin D,
    2. Ford R,
    3. Ghazarian SR,
    4. Love B,
    5. Cheng TL
    . Parent and physician perceptions regarding preventability of pediatric readmissions. Hosp Pediatr. 2016;6(2):80–87
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
    1. Jones J,
    2. Nowacki AS,
    3. Greene A,
    4. Traul C,
    5. Goldfarb J
    . Investigating parent needs, participation, and psychological distress in the children’s hospital. Hosp Pediatr. 2017;7(7):385–394
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
    1. Nassery W,
    2. Landgren K
    . Parents’ experience of their sleep and rest when admitted to hospital with their ill child: a qualitative study. Compr Child Adolesc Nurs. 2018;2:1–15
    OpenUrl
  9. ↵
    1. Sin AT,
    2. Damman JL,
    3. Ziring DA,
    4. et al
    . Out-of-pocket cost burden in pediatric inflammatory bowel disease: a cross-sectional cohort analysis. Inflamm Bowel Dis. 2015;21(6):1368–1377
    OpenUrl
  10. ↵
    1. Bailey MK,
    2. Weiss AJ,
    3. Barrett ML,
    4. Jiang HJ
    . Characteristics of 30-day all-cause hospital readmissions, 2010-2016: statistical brief #248. In: Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project (HCUP) Statistical Briefs. Rockville, MD: Agency for Health Care Policy and Research (US); 2006
  11. ↵
    1. Zuckerman RB,
    2. Sheingold SH,
    3. Orav EJ,
    4. Ruhter J,
    5. Epstein AM
    . Readmissions, observation, and the hospital readmissions reduction program. N Engl J Med. 2016;374(16):1543–1551
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  12. ↵
    1. Berry JG,
    2. Toomey SL,
    3. Zaslavsky AM,
    4. et al
    . Pediatric readmission prevalence and variability across hospitals [published correction appears in JAMA. 2013;309(10):986]. JAMA. 2013;309(4):372–380
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  13. ↵
    1. Hain PD,
    2. Gay JC,
    3. Berutti TW,
    4. Whitney GM,
    5. Wang W,
    6. Saville BR
    . Preventability of early readmissions at a children’s hospital. Pediatrics. 2013;131(1). Available at: www.pediatrics.org/cgi/content/full/131/1/e171
  14. ↵
    1. Medford-Davis LN,
    2. Shah R,
    3. Kennedy D,
    4. Becker E
    . Factors associated with potentially preventable pediatric admissions vary by diagnosis: findings from a large state. Hosp Pediatr. 2016;6(10):595–606
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  15. ↵
    1. Graham KL,
    2. Auerbach AD,
    3. Schnipper JL,
    4. et al
    . Preventability of early versus late hospital readmissions in a national cohort of general medicine patients. Ann Intern Med. 2018;168(11):766–774
    OpenUrl
  16. ↵
    1. Toomey SL,
    2. Peltz A,
    3. Loren S,
    4. et al
    . Potentially preventable 30-day hospital readmissions at a children’s hospital. Pediatrics. 2016;138(2):e20154182
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
    1. Winer JC,
    2. Aragona E,
    3. Fields AI,
    4. Stockwell DC
    . Comparison of clinical risk factors among pediatric patients with single admission, multiple admissions (without any 7-day readmissions), and 7-day readmission. Hosp Pediatr. 2016;6(3):119–125
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
    1. Shermont H,
    2. Pignataro S,
    3. Humphrey K,
    4. Bukoye B
    . Reducing pediatric readmissions: using a discharge bundle combined with teach-back methodology. J Nurs Care Qual. 2016;31(3):224–232
    OpenUrlPubMed
  17. ↵
    1. Rodriguez VA,
    2. Goodman DM,
    3. Bayldon B,
    4. et al
    . Pediatric readmissions within 3 days of discharge: preventability, contributing factors, and necessity. Hosp Pediatr. 2019;9(4):241–248
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  18. ↵
    1. Harris PA,
    2. Taylor R,
    3. Thielke R,
    4. Payne J,
    5. Gonzalez N,
    6. Conde JG
    . Research Electronic Data Capture (REDCap)–a metadata-driven methodology and workflow process for providing translational research informatics support. J Biomed Inform. 2009;42(2):377–381
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  19. ↵
    1. Hsieh HF,
    2. Shannon SE
    . Three approaches to qualitative content analysis. Qual Health Res. 2005;15(9):1277–1288
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  20. ↵
    1. Bucholz EM,
    2. Toomey SL,
    3. Schuster MA
    . Trends in pediatric hospitalizations and readmissions: 2010-2016. Pediatrics. 2019;143(2):e20181958
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
    1. Auger KA,
    2. Simon TD,
    3. Cooperberg D,
    4. et al
    . Summary of STARNet: Seamless Transitions and (Re)admissions Network. Pediatrics. 2015;135(1):164–175
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  21. ↵
    1. Stephens JR,
    2. Kimple KS,
    3. Steiner MJ,
    4. Berry JG
    . Discharge interventions and modifiable risk factors for preventing hospital readmissions in children with medical complexity. Rev Recent Clin Trials. 2017;12(4):290–297
    OpenUrl
  22. ↵
    1. Prince M,
    2. Allen D,
    3. Chittenden S,
    4. Misuraca J,
    5. Hockenberry MJ
    . Improving transitional care: the role of handoffs and discharge checklists in hematologic malignancies. Clin J Oncol Nurs. 2019;23(1):36–42
    OpenUrl
    1. Miller KK,
    2. Lin SH,
    3. Neville M
    . From hospital to home to participation: a position paper on transition planning poststroke. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2019;100(6):1162–1175
    OpenUrl
  23. ↵
    1. Khan SS,
    2. Gheorghiade M,
    3. Dunn JD,
    4. Pezalla E,
    5. Fonarow GC
    . Managed care interventions for improving outcomes in acute heart failure syndromes. Am J Manag Care. 2008;14(suppl 12):S273–S286; quiz S287–291
    OpenUrlPubMed
  24. ↵
    1. Wagner DV,
    2. Barry SA,
    3. Stoeckel M,
    4. Teplitsky L,
    5. Harris MA
    . NICH at its best for diabetes at its worst: texting teens and their caregivers for better outcomes. J Diabetes Sci Technol. 2017;11(3):468–475
    OpenUrlPubMed
    1. Wagner DV,
    2. Barry S,
    3. Teplitsky L,
    4. et al
    . Texting adolescents in repeat DKA and their caregivers. J Diabetes Sci Technol. 2016;10(4):831–839
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
    1. Harris MA,
    2. Wagner DV,
    3. Wilson AC,
    4. Spiro K,
    5. Heywood M,
    6. Hoehn D
    . Novel interventions in children’s healthcare for youth hospitalized for chronic pain. Clin Pract Pediatr Psychol. 2015;3(1):48–58
    OpenUrl
    1. Harris MA,
    2. Wagner DV,
    3. Heywood M,
    4. Hoehn D,
    5. Bahia H,
    6. Spiro K
    . Youth repeatedly hospitalized for DKA: proof of concept for novel interventions in children’s healthcare (NICH). Diabetes Care. 2014;37(6):e125–e126
    OpenUrlFREE Full Text
    1. Barry SA,
    2. Teplitsky L,
    3. Wagner DV,
    4. Shah A,
    5. Rogers BT,
    6. Harris MA
    . Partnering with insurers in caring for the most vulnerable youth with diabetes: NICH as an integrator. Curr Diab Rep. 2017;17(4):26
    OpenUrl
  25. ↵
    1. Bedoya P,
    2. Neuhausen K,
    3. Dow AW,
    4. Brooks EM,
    5. Mautner D,
    6. Etz RS
    . Student hotspotting: teaching the interprofessional care of complex patients. Acad Med. 2018;93(1):56–59
    OpenUrl
  26. ↵
    1. Hamline MY,
    2. Speier RL,
    3. Vu PD,
    4. et al
    . Hospital-to-Home interventions, use, and satisfaction: a meta-analysis. Pediatrics. 2018;142(5):e20180442
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  27. ↵
    1. Leyenaar JK,
    2. Rizzo PA,
    3. O’Brien ER,
    4. Lindenauer PK
    . Paediatric hospital admission processes and outcomes: a qualitative study of parents’ experiences and priorities. BMJ Qual Saf. 2018;27(10):790–798
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  • Copyright © 2020 by the American Academy of Pediatrics
View Abstract
PreviousNext
Back to top

Advertising Disclaimer »

In this issue

Hospital Pediatrics: 10 (1)
Hospital Pediatrics
Vol. 10, Issue 1
1 Jan 2020
  • Table of Contents
  • Table of Contents (PDF)
  • Index by author
View this article with LENS
PreviousNext
Email Article

Thank you for your interest in spreading the word on American Academy of Pediatrics.

NOTE: We only request your email address so that the person you are recommending the page to knows that you wanted them to see it, and that it is not junk mail. We do not capture any email address.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
Preventability of 7-Day Versus 30-Day Readmissions at an Academic Children’s Hospital
(Your Name) has sent you a message from American Academy of Pediatrics
(Your Name) thought you would like to see the American Academy of Pediatrics web site.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Request Permissions
Article Alerts
Log in
You will be redirected to aap.org to login or to create your account.
Or Sign In to Email Alerts with your Email Address
Citation Tools
Preventability of 7-Day Versus 30-Day Readmissions at an Academic Children’s Hospital
Tiffany A. Gardner, Louise E. Vaz, Byron A. Foster, Tamara Wagner, Jared P. Austin
Hospital Pediatrics Jan 2020, 10 (1) 52-60; DOI: 10.1542/hpeds.2019-0124

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
Share
Preventability of 7-Day Versus 30-Day Readmissions at an Academic Children’s Hospital
Tiffany A. Gardner, Louise E. Vaz, Byron A. Foster, Tamara Wagner, Jared P. Austin
Hospital Pediatrics Jan 2020, 10 (1) 52-60; DOI: 10.1542/hpeds.2019-0124
del.icio.us logo Digg logo Reddit logo Twitter logo CiteULike logo Facebook logo Google logo Mendeley logo
Print
Download PDF
Insight Alerts
  • Table of Contents

Jump to section

  • Article
    • Abstract
    • Methods
    • Results
    • Discussion
    • Conclusions
    • Footnotes
    • References
  • Figures & Data
  • Info & Metrics
  • Comments

Related Articles

  • No related articles found.
  • PubMed
  • Google Scholar

Cited By...

  • No citing articles found.
  • Google Scholar

More in this TOC Section

  • Management of Pediatric Nonpathogenic Blood Cultures After Introduction of PCR Technology
  • “You Have Made All the Loving Choices": Good Parent Praise in Pediatric Critical Care Conferences
  • Improving Timeliness of Hepatitis B Vaccine Birth Dose Administration
Show more Research Articles

Similar Articles

Subjects

  • Hospital Medicine
    • Hospital Medicine
    • Continuity of Care Transition & Discharge Planning
  • Administration/Practice Management
    • Quality Improvement
    • Administration/Practice Management
  • Journal Info
  • Editorial Board
  • Editorial Policies
  • Overview
  • Licensing Information
  • Authors/Reviewers
  • Author Guidelines
  • Reviewer Guidelines
  • Submit My Manuscript
  • Open Access
  • Librarians
  • Institutional Subscriptions
  • Usage Stats
  • Support
  • Subscribe
  • Contact Us
  • Resources
  • Media Kit
  • About
  • International Access
  • Terms of Use
  • Privacy Statement
  • FAQ
  • RSS Feeds
  • shopAAP
  • AAP.org
  • Follow American Academy of Pediatrics on Instagram
  • Visit American Academy of Pediatrics on Facebook
  • Follow American Academy of Pediatrics on Twitter
  • Follow American Academy of Pediatrics on Youtube
American Academy of Pediatrics

© 2021 American Academy of Pediatrics