ArticleBMC health services research2013
Does implementation of a hospitalist program in a Canadian community hospital improve measures of quality of care and utilization? an observational comparative analysis of hospitalists vs. traditional care providers.
Article in BMC health services research, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed, 12 citations in OpenAlex.
- Impact of hospitalist care model on patient outcomes in acute medical unit: a retrospective cohort study.BMJ open · 2023Article
- Hospitalists reduce harm and improve care for hospitalized patients.Canadian family physician Medecin de famille canadien · 2017Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundDespite the growth of hospitalist programs in Canada, little is known about their effectiveness for improving quality of care and use of scarce healthcare resources. The objective of this study is to compare measures of cost and quality of care (in-hospital mortality, 30-day same-facility readmission, and length of stay) of hospitalists vs. traditional physician providers in a large Canadian community hospital setting.
methodsWe performed a retrospective analysis of data from the Canadian Institute for Health Information (CIHI) Discharge Abstract Database, using multivariate logistic and linear regression analyses comparing performance of four provider groups of traditional family physicians (FPs), traditional internal medicine subspecialists (other-IM), family physician-trained hospitalists (FP-Hospitalist), and general internal medicine-trained hospitalists (GIM-Hospitalist).
resultsCompared to traditional FPs, FP-Hospitalists and GIM-Hospitalists demonstrate lower mortality [OR 0.881, (CI 0.779 - 0.996); and OR 0.355, (CI 0.288 - 0.436)] and readmission rates [OR 0.766, (CI 0.678 - 0.867); and OR 0.800, (CI 0.675 - 0.948)]. Compared to traditional FPs, GIM-Hospitalists appear to improve length of stay [OR-2.975, (CI -3.302 - -2.647)] while FP-Hospitalists perform similarly [OR 0.096, (CI -0.136 - 0.329)]. Compared to other-IM, GIM-Hospitalists have similar performance on all measures while FP-Hospitalists show a mixed impact.
conclusionsCompared to traditional family physicians, hospitalists appear to improve measures of quality and resource utilization. Specifically, hospitalists demonstrate lower in-hospital mortality and 30-day readmission rates while improving (or at least showing similar) length of stay. Compared to traditional subspecialists, hospitalists demonstrate similar performance despite looking after sicker and more complex medical patients.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.