Caring Wisely FY26 Project Contest

Expanding the Accelerated Discharge Program: An Interprofessional Effort to Use Early Identification and Coordination of Next Day Discharges to Improve Rate of On-Time Discharges and Reduce Length of Stay

Proposal Status: 

PROJECT LEAD(S):

  • Monisha Bhatia, MD – Assistant Professor, Division of Hospital Medicine
  • David Arboleda, MD – Assistant Professor, Division of Hospital Medicine
  • Guinn Dunn, MD – Assistant Professor, Division of Hospital Medicine
  • Prashant Patel, DO – Assistant Professor, Division of Hospital Medicine

 EXECUTIVE SPONSOR(S):

  • Bradley Monash, MD – Vice Chief of Clinical Affairs, Hospital Medicine
  • Michelle Mourad, MD - Vice Chair of the Department of Medicine

ABSTRACT:

Securing on-time discharges improves hospital throughput and optimizes patient flow and capacity. This is especially important during times of high census and ED boarding, which have significant patient experience and safety implications. The Hospital Medicine Service (HMS) cares for the largest volume of patients at UCSF Health, but often faces challenges in securing on-time discharges. Estimated discharge date accuracy for the service was as low as 62% in 2023, while length of stay averaged 8.1 days. Discharge delay can result from (1) variability in discharge planning practice patterns among hospitalists, (2) inadequate alignment among interprofessional team members on which patients are expected to discharge, (3) insufficient communication of discharge barriers, and (4) lack of coordination on which team member will complete discharge tasks. Since October 2023, the HMS has piloted the interprofessional “Accelerated Discharge Program,” (“ADP”), designed to enhance communication of anticipated discharge and streamline coordination on discharge tasks for patients most likely to discharge the following day. The ADP team systemically collected data on common discharge barriers, developed expertise in addressing common discharge barriers and inefficiencies, improved identification of patients likely to discharge and assisted with completing discharge tasks. Length of stay improved from 8.1 to 7.4 days in the intervention group.

Through the Caring Wisely program, our interprofessional team seeks to develop a platform to communicate discharge barriers with other disciplines at the unit and the health system level through Informatics and APeX build support. We ultimately aim to increase the number of on-time discharges, reduce length of stay, and support UCSF’s global capacity optimization efforts.

TEAM:

  • Brandon Scott, MD – Director of Value Improvement, Division of Hospital Medicine (DHM), Primary Project Mentor
  • Rachel White, MHSA – Quality Improvement Program Manager, DHM, Program Manager
  • Connie Li – Clinical Assistant, Goldman Medical Service (DHM), Team Member
  • Sarah Apgar, MD – Director, Goldman Medical Service (DHM), Core Advisor
  • Ethel Wu, MD – Assistant Director, Goldman Medical Service (DHM), Core Advisor
  • Ongoing discussions with Medicine Case Management Leadership, Nursing Leadership and Patient Capacity Management Center Leadership on partnership and integration
  • Bradley Monash, MD – Vice Chief of Clinical Affairs, DHM, Executive Sponsor

PROBLEM:

The UCSF Parnassus campus frequently experiences challenges with high capacity, necessitating focused efforts to optimize on-time discharges within inpatient care teams.  The quality, safety, and financial consequences of a lower than predicted number of on-time discharges include but are not limited to:

  • Suboptimal patient satisfaction due to prolonged ED and post-anesthesia care unit (PACU) boarding
  • Suboptimal care quality and risk of patient safety events, as the number of admitted patients “boarding” in the ED PACU increases 
  • Significant provider burnout and moral distress due to caring for patients in the “wrong care location”
  • Limitations in outside hospital transfers, interservice transfers within UCSF, and direct admissions of patients who require UCSF quaternary care
  • Prolonged length of stay for admitted patients (e.g. discharge barriers not addressed earlier in the admission, adding subsequent day(s) to the patient’s hospitalization for ongoing care coordination)

For patients on the HMS, UCSF’s largest service by volume with over 7,000 Parnassus Campus discharges in 2023, many delays in on-time discharges stem from deficiencies in the care team coordination and communication processes. For example:

  • HMS multidisciplinary discharge rounds (MDR) are intended to raise awareness of anticipated discharge and discharge coordination tasks but lack a structured communication method to alert other members of the interdisciplinary team and health system leaders of these tasks.
  • The current workflow relies on accurate EDD to alert and prioritize core services (Case Management (“CM”), Medical Social Work, Nursing, Pharmacy, Radiology, Rehabilitation Services) when there are pending tasks for a patient expected to discharge. Inaccurate EDD misdirects resources and risks further delays to other patients more likely to discharge.
  • Similarly, as the patient’s clinical condition and discharge needs evolve, we rely on CM to update EDD but there is variability in practice pattern on the frequency and detail of communication between clinicians and CM, without structured communication or feedback pertaining to changes that extended the EDD.

TARGET:

  • We seek to increase the number of on-time discharges of HMS patients by improving communication of identified discharge barriers. Specific targets include:
    • Develop a method for centralized, structured communication of identified discharge barriers which is visible to multidisciplinary team members at the unit and health system level and integrates with frontline multidisciplinary team workflows
    • Leverage current Patient Capacity Management Center (“PCMC”) workflows and integrate with upcoming changes in throughput optimization efforts (via Deloitte redesign for Proactive, Timely Discharge Planning) to more proactively address discharge barriers on up to 2 days prior to EDD.
    • Through these interventions we hope to achieve further reduction in Length of Stay (LOS): We anticipate expedited discharge barrier resolution resulting in earlier discharges that will lead in an average length of stay reduction of 0.3 days.

GAPS

System issues and technological gaps include:

  • Lack of centralized, structured communication of discharge barriers that can be easily updated directly by the physician caring for and ultimately discharging the patient. Care team members use different EHR-based tools to track discharge barriers (such as Discharge Milestones, Discharge Comments, the MDR Discharge Planning Tool, and structured and unstructured text in clinical notes and patient list columns), leading to compartmentalization and redundancy of information in discordant areas in the electronic health record (EHR), inaccurate EDD, and misdirection of resources.
  • Inconsistent documentation of the discharge plan in primary team clinician notes or in other locations like sticky notes, discharge navigators. There is variability in documentation of the discharge plan, which we are attempting to address with standardized note templates. However, even when these fields are completed, the information is not readily available to other members of the interprofessional team and health system leadership who are attempting to expedite discharges.
  • No shared understanding of the global discharge plan between disciplines despite implementation of the discharge milestones tools. Each member of the interprofessional team has access to important information that may alter the discharge plan but this information is not quickly accessible to the care team and currently requires duplication of work and additional person-to-person communication, increasing the burden of communication.

 Educational gaps include:

  • Suboptimal interprofessional awareness of existing systems that can be proactively mobilized to support accelerated discharges.

INTERVENTION:

In October 2023 we initiated our Accelerated Discharge Program (ADP) pilot on the HMS’s direct care teams, which involved streamlining outreach to identify likely next day discharges, discharge barriers, and delegate specific tasks to our Clinical Assistant. ADP has developed standard work for interprofessional team members to take on discharge tasks and, through a Division of Hospital Medicine internal grant, plans to develop a novel discharge prediction model, structured tools for asynchronous communication and handoff between clinicians and interprofessional team members, and will pilot a delegated discharge model to offload the discharge of clinically stable patients from the primary clinician.

Moving forward, we seek increased support through Caring Wisely to develop a platform to communicate discharge barriers with interprofessional team members and the health system with the goal of reducing length of stay by a further 0.3 days. Our proposal expands the ADP which has already demonstrated LOS reduction and cost savings, with the hope to yield sustained improvement. Specifically:

  • Feasible EHR enhancements to existing discharge-focused EHR tools. We have laid the groundwork for interprofessional communication using an order set and discharge checklist to identify discharge tasks and seek to work with Informatics and APeX build support to communicate this at the unit and health system level in a structured and centralized manner. We recognize this will need to synergize with the existing Case Management MDR tool launched 3/12/2025, but hope to use human-centered design principles to optimize how primary hospitalists making the decision to discharge can best interface with the tool in real time, as discharge plans vary throughout the day.
  • Improve case management, clinician, and nursing education about discharge-focused tools which can be leveraged in real-time to confirm, document, and overcome discharge barriers.  
  • Continue to develop, expand and integrate current ADP deliverables (discharge prediction model, ADP order set, discharge checklist) into a centralized, structured area in the EHR which can be accessed at the unit and health system level and be used by PCMC or individual nursing units to direct resources to ensure timely mobilization after the patient is determined to be medically ready for discharge and discharge orders are placed.

PROPOSED EHR MODIFICATIONS:

We will explore the following modifications which may reduce LOS.

  • Expansion and development of current “Discharge Delay” function to identify/flag discharge barriers which already integrates with PCMC workflow
  • Continued modification and integration of the standardized inpatient hospital medicine progress note (which now includes listed discharge barriers) and connect this information to the developed centralized EHR enhancements for visibility at the unit and health system level, to escalate and execute discharge tasks.
  • Explore similar modification and integration of current Care Management notes as above.
  • Reduce redundant areas of interprofessional discharge communication (e.g. Discharge Comments, Case Management Discharge Sticky Note, Patient List columns), instead focusing on the centralized and visible EHR enhancements. 

RETURN ON INVESTMENT:

We anticipate the ADP to produce cost savings through reduction of length of stay in HMS patients. In the latest analyzed data from our current pilot, we found that from October 2023-June 2024, the average length of stay was 7.4 days. This was a 0.7 reduction from the average length of stay of all patients treated by the HMS direct care hospitalists prior to the intervention July 2022-September2023 (8.1 days). We identify a 0.3 day reduction in LOS as a conservative estimate of length of stay reduction by improving interprofessional communication with future support from Caring Wisely. This target is scalable and realistic, even for services with shorter baseline LOS. We identify a 0.7 day reduction in LOS as an optimistic estimate given the data collected.

Collectively, we anticipate direct cost savings to the health system attributed to reduction in HMS length of stay. This will lead to decreased direct variable costs from bed days saved over one year’s time to range from $1,315,242 (0.3 reduction in length of stay for GMS service) to $3,068,898 (0.7 reduction in length of stay for GMS service) as outlined in the attached document. The true financial impact is expected to exceed these figures, as  we expect additional savings from cost of care delivery beyond direct variable bed-day cost   and increase in revenue /contribution margin from backfill of the UCSF Health Parnassus. We have aimed for a smaller impact in part because of anticipated increases in complex patients admitted to Parnassus campus as a result of health system efforts to transfer lower acuity patients to other sites (St. Mary’s Hospital, Mt. Zion Hospital), changes in scheduling practices within HMS, and other system-wide changes which may make it challenging to analyze the individual impact of our project. We believe our project is even more vital in this environment, as the forward flow of patients from all sites will remain a system priority that will be even more challenging for individual clinicians to navigate without care coordination support. To address the challenge of controlling for other concurrent health system efforts, we will continuously adapt our approach and iterate our processes with the guidance of our interprofessional stakeholders, advisors and executive sponsors.

SUSTAINABILITY:

  • We aim to intentionally implement interventions that integrate into existing resources/processes and care team members (e.g. Case Management MDR and tee time (afternoon discharge planning), Flow Control Team, HMS direct care clinical assistant, EDD and Discharge Report APeX tools, CARTBoard and enterprise throughput dashboards) to ensure long-term sustainability. The Caring Wisely funding year will be utilized to establish a successful centralized and structured communication enhancement within APeX that can be feasibly adopted by current process owners for hospital discharges and throughput. Once adopted, our intervention will not require ongoing support for maintenance. We anticipate success in this project to lead to adoption of ADP core features and structured communication to scale to other service lines, including our partner sites (St. Mary’s Hospital, Mt. Zion Hospital) which will allow information sharing to enhance discharge workflows across the entire health system.
  • We believe our interventions will achieve sustained cost-savings without the need to hire additional care team members. Our goal is to better leverage, connect, and streamline our existing processes to produce faster, safer, and higher quality discharges for patients and care providers alike through improving communication practices, establishing norms, and enhancing APeX as described above.

BUDGET:

  • $35,000 – effort for project lead(s)
  • $15,000 – reserved for as-needed clinical informatics support (e.g. data analysis, EHR modifications)

 

Supporting Documents: 

Comments

Thank you for submitting this great program to Caring Wisely. There are a few questions/areas you can address to help strengthen your proposal.

1. You cite a LOS reduction of 0.7 days due to the the ADP on the Goldman service vs. 0.1 days on the Teaching service. How can you be certain to attribute these changes to ADP vs. other activities/efforts (e.g. Flow Physician; enhanced Psychiatry services). Also, are the patients on Goldman similar to those on Teaching services? 

2. How did you arrive at 0.3 days as your improvement target?  How will you account for the contributions of other efforts to reduce LOS during the project period (Caring Wisely) in order to calculate ROI due to ADP?

3. Which  elements of the ADP expansion depend on Caring Wisely support, and which ones are being supported health system departments/functions?

Thank you for these excellent questions - we include our responses below: 

1. While there are certainly many factors that affect LOS, the Goldman and Teaching services have equivalent access to system-wide throughput efforts, such as the Flow physician, consultants, case management, etc. The Goldman and Teaching services take the same patients, they are not distributed by diagnosis or illness severity. Therefore, patients are randomly distributed across direct care and teaching teams. Only Goldman team patients experienced a reduction in length of stay compared to baseline. There are no other discharge-related interventions that we are aware of that apply exclusively to Goldman patients. We are currently running a pilot workflow with clinical assistants assigned to a subset of both Wards and Goldman patients, and would consider this approach to strengthen comparisons in the future.

2. We elected to choose 0.3 days as a conservative target, as this constitutes less than half the LOS reduction we saw with the initial ADP intervention. This also seems to be a scalable improvement to other services, some of which already have shorter length of stay at baseline. Controlling for other health system efforts has remained a challenge throughout our initial data collection; our team of advisors and supporters have been instrumental in adapting to newly deployed tools or resources.

3.  The ADP EHR expansion depends almost exclusively on Caring Wisely funding. Namely, we want to develop and enhance currently available (and unused) discharge-focused EHR tools for adoption by all services. The ADP received an Internal Grant from the Division of Hospital Medicine this year, which will fund a “Discharge Team” pilot program, where complex discharge tasks will be delegated, analogous to an admitting roles frequently utilized in hospital medicine to streamline patient input to the hospitalThe Discharge Team model represents a possible solution to hospital outputAlthough a valuable pilot for studying how to practically overcome discharge barriers, the internal grant will not fund the broader EHR expansion we are hoping to achieve through Caring Wisely.

We thank you again for this comment and appreciate your interest in our application! Please let us know if we can clarify anything further. 

Thank you for submission of your proposal! A few comments and questions to strengthen your proposal before the final review: 

1) Can you confirm key stakeholder engagement and support from Case Management and PCMC? Right now, the team lists "ongoing discussions" with these important stakeholders.

2) How will the proposed discharge barriers documentation and flagging be different than or similar to (or the same as) the new Case Management workflow that started on 3/12 where discharge barriers are documented by case management during multi-disciplinary rounds? Will this information then flow to the FPOD or PCMC? 

3) There is some concern amongst hospitalists that our LOS will increase as the lower acuity patients get laterally transferred to St. Mary's Hospital. Is the LOS reduction of 0.3 days still achieveable given the health system plans to further decant medicine patients from the Parnassus campus? If not, how would your propose revising your target and ROI?

4) Similar to Ralph's question above, it will be important to understand what components of this proposal Caring Wisely will specifically help accelerate or focus on, and how it will be different than current health system and Division of Hospital Medicine supported functions and positions.

Thank you very much for your comments.

1) I've elaborated stakeholder engagement with PCMC in the comment below. With respect to Care Management, there has always been information sharing and coordination for operational execution (eg Deloitte work, throughput coordination committee) and we are actively engaging with Case Managers with the blessing of Care management leadership with a clinical assistant discharge pilot through ADP. We value their partnership and hope to expand through executive sponsorship and coordination of efforts during the EHR build.

2) CM's MDR roll out is focused on documentation and organizing discharge planning whereas our planned EHR tools are more geared toward escalation and execution of discharge tasks outside of CM’s scope via clinical assistant and coordination with Flow MDs and PCMC.

3+4) Please see Dr. Bhatia's response with respect to our LOS target, ROI and how the the Caring Wisely grant and DHM support differ.

Thanks again and please feel free to ask for additional information or questions

 

RE differentiating CM’s MDR roll out, I agree with Monisha’s assessment that their work at this instance is focused on documenting and organizing discharge planning. But the escalation pathway and execution of discharge tasks outside of CM’s scope is not part of their flow and this can be something that can be highlighted as a gap.

Thank you for this thoughtful comment. We hope to expand more on our responses in our revision, but will summarize here: 

1) We are engaging with leadership from these groups and hope to gain their partnership on our work, which would be important for succesful implementation. 

2) The new Case Management workflow might be most successful where Case Management staffing is kept consistent, enabling the sort of consistent documentation that the MDR tool ultimately seeks to gather in one place. However, it is unclear how documentation in the MDR facilitates completion of each task. Ultimately, task completion could be facilitated through FPOD, PCMC, or a Clinical Assistant familiar with the worklows of the service line. In our experience, the Clinical Assistant is often well positioned to understand the clinical context of the patient due to their continuity with other aspects of the patient's care, and is likely an expedient strategy.  

3) We aimed for a smaller anticipated impact in part because we have several upcoming changes not just to the patient population admitted to Parnassus campus, but also how hospitalists are scheduled into blocks, staff turnover and learning curves for all service lines with new procedures, and numerous other variables that might make it challenging to maximize impact during a time of heavy system flux. We do plan to focus on Parnassus Moffitt-Long discharges, but have made it a point to remain aligned and aware of discharge workflows currently utilized at SMMC in part to help harmonize expectations for hospitalists who work at both sites. 

4) Specifically, we are focused on generating an EHR tool that can link to our Clinical Assistant workflow, establishing how documented barriers will be addressed, and importantly, communicated to the physician making to the decision to discharge. Effective and timely documentation is a first step, but an MDR tool may only capture information as it is known at MDR, and may or may not easily link to next steps to take action on discharge criteria. Our focus is on optimizing this interaction for Hospital Medicine, with a hope to share lessons that can be utilized by other service lines looking to optimize discharge workflows. 

Thank you again and we welcome further questions.

Thank you for your submission and your work on this. Echoing what Ralph and Cat have already asked, I would also like to ask if you can you elaborate more on what you mean by "ongoing discussions" with PCMC and Case Management and how does this align with the recent redesign of Case Management? There are workgroups that consist or PCMC and CM stakehodlers and overlap with your proposal, how to plan to engage with these stakeholders and workflows?  

 

Thank you very much for your input. We are engaging with PCMC by using tools that are already designed to trigger alerts in the PCMC dashboards to signal need for additional intervention to prevent discharge delay. We are also working to obtain co-executive sponsorship from the VP of Clinical Services who oversees the PCMC in order to integrate workflows effectively and from the VP/CMO of Adult services in order to identify opportunities to best align this intervention with ongoing throughput interventions prioritized by UCSF Health such as the Lean Daily Management and the Care Management MDR rounding tool with the goal of sharing best practice for throughput optimization with other adult services. 

Great propsosal team - this is very timely and addresses a very high priority issue. What efforts will you take to integrate into the ongoing health system throughput efforts to avoid redundancies (eg, the CMO's Throughput Coordination Committee, 5 Why's, Leader Gemba Rounds)?

Thank you for this comment Saj. We are hopeful that 1) involvement in the Caring Wisely program would provide access to regular coaching and check-in opportunities with individuals who have awareness of ongoing Health System discharge improvement efforts (we have reconsidered some and ideas via these comments, for instance) and 2) that endorsement of our work as a Caring Wisely would further boost the visibility of our team so that we would be part of these ongoing conversations about discharge improvement through referrals and suggestions from project coaches. While we consider many on our team to be very well positioned to hear about ongoing system efforts to improve discharge, certainly even establishing our "Current State" aspect of the A3 has been very challenging due to the churn of initatives to address this urgent need to address throughput and the volume of groups focused on this issue.

Currently, due to our position as resources for discharge improvement efforts, people do regularly contact us about ideas to make discharges better, allowing us to function as a mini-coordinating center due to the trust we have built within hospital medicine. Our frontline clinician-first perspective might be a valuable addition to the initiatives you mention above in the system's efforts. We have been inspired by last year's Caring Wisely project on Lab Stewardship to make a point of active information sharing across multiple stakeholder groups. Our goal is to augment these efforts you mentioned and help achieve on-the-ground success with hospital medicine discharges as a first step towards scalable solutions.

·       The Accelerated Discharge Program has historically been intentional about showcasing its learnings and best practices with health system stakeholders, both for the purpose of sharing best practices with other services, but also for aligning efforts where possible. As examples, the team has presented a few iterations of its intervention in several Utilization Management committee meetings, has used the CARTBoard length of stay dashboard since its inception to maintain consistency with LOS data sources that align with UCSF Health

·       At the onset and beginning of the project the project leads and mentors met with leaders of all Medicine disciplines and Case Management to find areas of shared interest, build the initial structure, better understand health system direction and where the ADP can fit in

·       One of the executive sponsors (Brad Monash) and Primary Mentor (Brandon Scott) are members of the throughput coordination committee and serve as a direct line of communication between the ADP and broader health system priorities to reduce duplicative work

·       Gemba rounds have a more narrow scope of work focusing on early discharge specifically on the day of discharge while the ADP’s scope is broader to look at expediting discharge and blocking delays to care throughout a visit, including beyond just day of discharge. This work is meant to complement the existing health system work which at this juncture.

As a practicing hospitalist, I would definitely find a unified platform to improve discharge communication among interdisciplinary teams extremely helpful to better focus care team efforts with optimizing on-time discharges and escalating discharge related barriers. Currently, we experience a lot of frustrations with inefficiency, redundancy in communication, and missed opportunities for proactively addressing discharge barriers and I am excited about the impact this proposed project will have!