The transition tightrope: Optimizing post-discharge care for acute leukemia patients.

Abstract

323 Background: Patients with acute leukemia who are discharged after a hospitalization are at high risk of complications and increased risk of readmissions. We reviewed discharge plans at an academic cancer center and found a gap of inconsistently scheduled follow-up appointments after discharge, and we sought to improve the transition of care for this population. Methods: Utilizing A3 methodology, we focused on ensuring acute leukemia patients had a follow-up visit in the clinic or infusion treatment area within 5 days of discharge, which was the timeline supported by literature review. Our improvement team performed a Gemba walk in November 2021 to observe discharge planning and outpatient follow-up appointment scheduling processes, and we mapped root causes of poor care transitions on a fishbone diagram. Many of the coordinated steps required for a seamless discharge and acceptance into outpatient care were not consistently performed. We utilized a pareto chart to stratify root causes and narrowed in on 3 key drivers: 1) standard process for discharge communication between in- & out-patient teams; 2) access to schedulers to secure appointments; and 3) escalation pathways when no appointment slots were available. We introduced 3 interventions: a direct phone line for the inpatient team to contact the infusion area schedulers for post-discharge appointments, an escalation pathway when schedules appeared fully booked, and a discharge navigator flowsheet in our electronic medical record (EMR) to anticipate discharge needs and facilitate standardized, efficient communication. Results: As a result of our interventions, the percentage of patients with an outpatient follow-up visit within 5 days increased from 61% to 94% between January and May 2022. Streamlining communication pathways (e.g., an automated EMR message to schedulers and a direct phone line for urgent escalation) led to initial improvements in timely follow-up visits. The EMR discharge navigator facilitated upstream identification of post-discharge needs and directed communication to the appropriate infusion area and clinic pools to schedule appointments. The discharge navigator continues to be used in the hematology service; one year after its launch, the EMR tool is utilized in 38% of all hematology discharges. Conclusions: Timely outpatient follow-up to address acute symptoms is a key method to decrease readmission risk, but inconsistent scheduling practices presented barriers at our cancer center. Instituting standardized scheduling protocols in the EMR and escalation pathways enabled nearly all our patients with acute leukemia to secure outpatient visits within 5 days of discharge. We are building on these initial efforts to disseminate and sustain utilization of the tool for all hematology and oncology patients in our center.