ADVERTISEMENT

Describing Variability of Inpatient Consultation Practices: Physician, Patient, and Admission Factors

Journal of Hospital Medicine 15(3). 2020 March;164-168. Published Online First February 19, 2020. | 10.12788/jhm.3355
Author and Disclosure Information

Appropriate use of consultation can improve patient outcomes, but inappropriate use may cause harm. Factors affecting the variability of inpatient consultation are poorly understood. We aimed to describe physician-, patient-, and admission-level factors influencing the variability of inpatient consultations on general medicine services. We conducted a retrospective study of patients hospitalized from 2011 to 2016 and enrolled in the University of Chicago Hospitalist Project, which included 6,153 admissions of 4,772 patients under 69 attendings. Consultation use varied widely; a 5.7-fold difference existed between the lowest (mean, 0.613) and highest (mean, 3.47) quartiles of use (P <.01). In mixed-effect Poisson regression, consultations decreased over time, with 45% fewer consultations for admissions in 2015 than in 2011 (P <.01). Patients on nonteaching hospitalist teams received 9% more consultations than did those on teaching services (P =.02). Significant variability exists in inpatient consultation use. Further understanding may help to identify groups at high-risk for underuse/overuse and aid in the development of interventions to improve high-value care.

© 2020 Society of Hospital Medicine

Hospitalists on nonteaching services called more consultations, which may reflect a higher workload on these services. Busy hospitalists on nonteaching teams may lack time to delve deeply into clinical problems and require more consultations, especially for work with heavy cognitive loads such as diagnosis. “Outsourcing” tasks when workload increases occurs in other cognitive activities such as teaching.10 The association between work interrupting personal life and fewer consultations may also implicate the effects of time. Attendings who are experiencing work encroaching on their personal lives may be those spending more time with patients and consulting less. This finding merits further study, especially with increasing concern about balancing time spent in meaningful patient care activities with risk of physician burnout.

This finding could also indicate that trainee participation modifies consultation use for hospitalists. Teaching service teams with more individual members may allow a greater pool of collective knowledge, decreasing the need for consultation to answer clinical questions.11 Interestingly, there was no difference in consultation use between generalists or subspecialists and hospitalists on teaching services, possibly suggesting a unique effect in hospitalists who vary clinical practice depending on team structure. These differences deserve further investigation, with implications for education and resource utilization.

We were surprised by the finding that consultations decreased each year, despite increasing patient complexity and availability of consultation services. This could be explained by a growing emphasis on shortening LOS in our institution, thus shifting consultative care to outpatient settings. Understanding these effects is critically important with growing evidence that consultation improves patient outcomes because these external pressures could lead to unintended consequences for quality or access to care.

Several findings related to patient factors additionally emerged, including age and insurance status. Although related to medical complexity, these effects persist despite adjustment, which raises the question of whether they contribute to the decision to seek consultation. Older patients received fewer consultations, which could reflect the use of more conservative practice models in the elderly,12 or ageism, which is associated with undertreatment.13 With respect to insurance status, Medicaid patients were associated with fewer consultations. This finding is consistent with previous work showing the decreased intensity of hospital services used for Medicaid patients.14Our study has limitations. Our data were from one large urban academic center that limits generalizability. Although systematic and redundant, attending attribution may have been flawed: incomplete or erroneous documentation could have led to attribution error, and we cannot rule out the possibility of service handoffs. We used a LOS ≤ 5 days to minimize this possibility, but this limits the applicability of our findings to longer admissions. Unsurprisingly, longer LOS correlated with the increased use of consultation even within our restricted sample, and future work should examine the effects of prolonged LOS. As a retrospective analysis, unmeasured confounders due to our limited adjustment will likely explain some findings, although we took steps to address this in our statistical design. Finally, we could not measure patient outcomes and, therefore, cannot determine the value of more or fewer consultations for specific patients or illnesses. Positive and negative outcomes of increased consultation are described, and understanding the impact of consultation is critical for further study.2,3

Online-Only Materials

Attachment
Size