Ashley W. Collinsworth Sc.D.

Collinsworth, A.W., Priest, E.L. and Masica, A.L. (2020). “Evaluating the Cost-Effectiveness of the ABCDE Bundle: Impact of Bundle Adherence on Inpatient and 1-Year Mortality and Costs of Care.” Crit Care Med Sep 20. [Epub ahead of print.].

Full text of this article.

OBJECTIVES: Growing evidence supports the Awakening and Breathing Coordination, Delirium monitoring/management, and Early exercise/mobility (ABCDE) bundle processes as improving a number of short- and long-term clinical outcomes for patients requiring ICU care. To assess the cost-effectiveness of this intervention, we determined the impact of ABCDE bundle adherence on inpatient and 1-year mortality, quality-adjusted life-years, length of stay, and costs of care. DESIGN: We conducted a 2-year, prospective, cost-effectiveness study in 12 adult ICUs in six hospitals belonging to a large, integrated healthcare delivery system. SETTING: Hospitals included a large, urban tertiary referral center and five community hospitals. ICUs included medical/surgical, trauma, neurologic, and cardiac care units. PATIENTS: The study included 2,953 patients, 18 years old or older, with an ICU stay greater than 24 hours, who were on a ventilator for more than 24 hours and less than 14 days. INTERVENTION: ABCDE bundle. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: We used propensity score-adjusted regression models to determine the impact of high bundle adherence on inpatient mortality, discharge status, length of stay, and costs. A Markov model was used to estimate the potential effect of improved bundle adherence on healthcare costs and quality-adjusted life-years in the year following ICU admission. We found that patients with high ABCDE bundle adherence (≥ 60%) had significantly decreased odds of inpatient mortality (odds ratio 0.28) and significantly higher costs ($3,920) of inpatient care. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of high bundle adherence was $15,077 (95% CI, $13,675-$16,479) per life saved and $1,057 per life-year saved. High bundle adherence was associated with a 0.12 increase in quality-adjusted life-years, a $4,949 increase in 1-year care costs, and an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of $42,120 per quality-adjusted life-year. CONCLUSIONS: The ABCDE bundle appears to be a cost-effective means to reduce in-hospital and 1-year mortality for patients with an ICU stay.

Shafi, S., A. W. Collinsworth, L. A. Copeland, G. O. Ogola, T. Qiu, M. Kouznetsova, I. C. Liao, N. Mears, A. T. Pham, G. J. Wan and A. L. Masica (2018). “Association of Opioid-Related Adverse Drug Events With Clinical and Cost Outcomes Among Surgical Patients in a Large Integrated Health Care Delivery System.” JAMA Surg. May 23. [Epub ahead of print].

Full text of this article.

Importance: Opioids are commonly used for pain control during and after invasive procedures. However, opioid-related adverse drug events (ORADEs) are common and have been associated with worse patient outcomes. Objectives: To examine the incidence of ORADEs in patients undergoing hospital-based surgical and endoscopic procedures and to evaluate the association of ORADEs with clinical and cost outcomes. Design, Setting, and Participants: In this retrospective study of clinical and administrative data, ORADEs were identified using International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision diagnosis codes for known adverse effects of opioids or by opioid antagonist use. Multivariable regression analysis was used to measure the association of ORADEs with outcomes after adjusting for potential confounding factors. The setting was 21 acute care hospitals in a large integrated health care delivery system. Participants were 135379 patients (aged >/=18 years, admitted from January 1, 2013, to September 30, 2015) who underwent surgical and endoscopic procedures and were given opioids. Exposure: Opioid use, reported as morphine milligram equivalent doses. Main Outcomes and Measures: Opioid-related adverse drug events and their association with inpatient mortality, discharge to another care facility, length of stay, cost of hospitalization, and 30-day readmission. Results: Among 135379 adult patients in this study (67.5% female), 14386 (10.6%) experienced at least one ORADE. Patients with ORADEs were more likely to be older, of white race/ethnicity, and male and have more comorbidities. Patients with ORADEs received a higher total dose of opioids (median morphine milligram equivalent dose, 46.8 vs 30.0 mg; P < .001) and for a longer duration (median, 3.0 vs 2.0 days; P < .001). In adjusted analyses, ORADEs were associated with increased inpatient mortality (odds ratio [OR], 28.8; 95% CI, 24.0-34.5), greater likelihood of discharge to another care facility (OR, 2.9; 95% CI, 2.7-3.0), prolonged length of stay (OR, 3.1; 95% CI, 2.8-3.4), high cost of hospitalization (OR, 2.7; 95% CI, 2.4-3.0), and higher rate of 30-day readmission (OR, 1.3; 95% CI, 1.2-1.4). ORADEs were associated with a 2.9% increase in absolute mortality, an $8225 increase in cost for the index hospitalization, and a 1.6-day increase in length of stay for the index hospitalization. Conclusions and Relevance: Opioid-related adverse drug events were common among patients undergoing hospital-based invasive procedures and were associated with significantly worse clinical and cost outcomes. Hospital-acquired harm from ORADEs in the surgical patient population is an important opportunity for health systems to improve patient safety and reduce cost.

Filardo, G., B. L. Hamman, B. da Graca, D. M. Sass, N. J. Machala, S. Ismail, B. D. Pollock, A. W. Collinsworth and P. A. Grayburn (2018). “Efficacy and effectiveness of on- versus off-pump coronary artery bypass grafting: A meta-analysis of mortality and survival.” J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 155(1): 172-179.e175.

Full text of this article.

BACKGROUND: Despite many studies comparing on- versus off-pump coronary artery bypass graft (CABG), there is no consensus as to whether one of these techniques offers patients better outcomes. METHODS: We searched PubMed from inception to June 30, 2015, and identified additional studies from bibliographies of meta-analyses and reviews. We identified 42 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and 31 rigorously adjusted observational studies (controlling for the Society of Thoracic Surgeons-recognized risk factors for mortality) reporting mortality for off-pump versus on-pump CABG at specified time points. Trial data were extracted independently by 2 researchers using a standardized form. Differences in probability of mortality (DPM) were estimated for the RCTs and observational studies separately and combined, for time points ranging from 30 days to 10 years. RESULTS: RCT-only data showed no significant differences at any time point, whereas observational-only data and the combined analysis showed short-term mortality favored off-pump CABG (n = 1.2 million patients; 36 RCTs, 26 observational studies; DPM [95% confidence interval (CI)], -44.8% [-45.4%, -43.8%]) but that at 5 years it was associated with significantly greater mortality (n = 60,405 patients; 3 RCTs, 5 observational studies; DPM [95% CI], 10.0% [5.0%, 15.0%]). At 10 years, only observational data were available, and off-pump CABG showed significantly greater mortality (DPM [95% CI], 14.0% [11.0%, 17.0%]). CONCLUSIONS: Evidence from RCTs showed no differences between the techniques, whereas rigorously adjusted observational studies (with >1.1 million patients) and the combined analysis indicated that off-pump CABG offers lower short-term mortality but poorer long-term survival. These results suggest that, in real-world settings, greater operative safety with off-pump CABG comes at the expense of lasting survival gains.

Callender, L., R. Brown, S. Driver, M. Dahdah, A. Collinsworth and S. Shafi (2017). “Process for developing rehabilitation practice recommendations for individuals with traumatic brain injury.” BMC Neurol 17(1): 54.

Full text of this article.

BACKGROUND: Attempts at measuring quality of rehabilitation care are hampered by a gap in knowledge translation of evidence-based approaches and lack of consensus on best practices. However, adoption of evidence-based best practices is needed to minimize variations and improve quality of care. Therefore, the objective of this project was to describe a process for assessing the quality of evidence of clinical practices in traumatic brain injury (TBI) rehabilitative care. METHODS: A multidisciplinary team of clinicians developed discipline-specific clinical questions using the Population, Intervention, Control, Outcome process. A systematic review of the literature was conducted for each question using Pubmed, CINAHL, PsychInfo, and Allied Health Evidence databases. Team members assessed the quality, level, and applicability of evidence utilizing a modified Oxford scale, the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality Methods Guide, and a modified version of the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation scale. RESULTS: Draft recommendations for best-practice were formulated and shared with a Delphi panel of clinical representatives and stakeholders to obtain consensus. CONCLUSION: Evidence-based practice guidelines are essential to improve the quality of TBI rehabilitation care. By using a modified quality of evidence assessment tool, we established a process to gain consensus on practice recommendations for individuals with TBI undergoing rehabilitation.

Kane, E. P., A. W. Collinsworth, K. L. Schmidt, R. M. Brown, C. A. Snead, S. A. Barnes, N. S. Fleming and J. W. Walton (2016). “Improving diabetes care and outcomes with community health workers.” Fam Pract 33(5): 523-528.

Full text of this article.

BACKGROUND: Type II diabetes continues to be a major health problem in USA, particularly in minority populations. The Diabetes Equity Project (DEP), a clinic-based diabetes self-management and education program led by community health workers (CHWs), was designed to reduce observed disparities in diabetes care and outcomes in medically underserved, predominantly Hispanic communities. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the impact of the DEP on patients’ clinical outcomes, diabetes knowledge, self-management skills, and quality of life. METHODS: The DEP was implemented in five community clinics from 2009 to 2013 and 885 patients completed at least two visits with the CHW. Student’s paired t-tests were used to compare baseline clinical indicators with indicators obtained from patients’ last recorded visit with the CHW and to assess differences in diabetes knowledge, perceived competence in managing diabetes, and quality of life. A mixed-effects model for repeated measures was used to examine the effect of DEP visits on blood glucose (HbA1c), controlling for patient demographics, clinic and enrolment date. RESULTS: DEP patients experienced significant (P < 0.0001) improvements in HbA1c control, blood pressure, diabetes knowledge, perceived competence in managing diabetes, and quality of life. Mean HbA1c for all DEP patients decreased from 8.3% to 7.4%. CONCLUSION: Given the increasing prevalence of diabetes in USA and documented disparities in diabetes care and outcomes for minorities, particularly Hispanic patients, new models of care such as the DEP are needed to expand access to and improve the delivery of diabetes care and help patients achieve improved outcomes.