Follow-up calls after emergency department and in-patient encounters: Are we making a difference?

40 Background: The ASCO standard for tracking Emergency Department & In-patient (ED/IP) encounters was created to support process improvement, patient education, and timely follow-up after ED/IP encounters. Gaining access to ED/IP data from hospital systems to track and conduct follow-up calls is time consuming, operationally challenging, and expensive for practices engaged in advanced payment model programs. We reviewed data from our patient population to determine whether the Nurse Navigator ED/IP follow-up calls were helpful in the patient’s disease trajectory. Methods: A retrospective review was conducted from July to December 2024. Active patients, defined as having a cancer diagnosis and treatment within 90 days were uploaded into Virginia’s Care Coordination Health Information Exchange (HIE), which auto-generates reports for real-time ED/IP data. We reviewed all Nurse Navigator ED/IP follow-up calls. These calls were conducted within three business days of learning about the ED/IP discharge using a consistent script designed to address patients’ needs efficiently. Results: 1005 ED/IP encounters in July-Dec 2024. 53% Nurse Navigator connected with patient to conduct a follow-up call (n = 531): 22% (N = 116) of patient connections with a nurse navigator resulted in intervention, 21% Clinical intervention (n = 24), 31% Care coordination with surgery/other specialty intervention (n = 36), 48% Scheduling intervention (n = 56). Only 1% of patients that had a NN connection had an ED visit within one week. 24% Nurse Navigator left voicemail (n = 240). 23% No call: Patient died (n = 8); Office visit (n = 148); DC to hospice/SNF/Rehab (n = 10); Other (n = 68). Conclusions: In our patient population, 22% of patient connections with a nurse navigator resulted in intervention by the care team that supported positive patient outcomes. While not statistically significant due to low volumes, patients that had nurse navigator connections were ultimately less likely to have an ED/IP admission. We believe this evaluation showcases the real-world impact and importance of the ASCO standard for timely follow-up after hospitalizations and ED visits by nurse navigators.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
JCO Oncology Practice
Published
2025-10-01
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1200/op.2025.21.10_suppl.40
Primary Topic
Emergency and Acute Care Studies
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Follow-up calls after emergency department and in-patient encounters: Are we making a difference?

Ann T. Sweeney, I.F.K. Muir, Lisa E. Harris, Jeong-Won Choi et al.
JCO Oncology Practice
Emergency and Acute Care Studies
article

Follow-up calls after emergency department and in-patient encounters: Are we making a difference?

Ann T. Sweeney, I.F.K. Muir, Lisa E. Harris, Jeong-Won Choi, Giovanni Elia, David Ogburn
article en

Abstract

40 Background: The ASCO standard for tracking Emergency Department & In-patient (ED/IP) encounters was created to support process improvement, patient education, and timely follow-up after ED/IP encounters. Gaining access to ED/IP data from hospital systems to track and conduct follow-up calls is time consuming, operationally challenging, and expensive for practices engaged in advanced payment model programs. We reviewed data from our patient population to determine whether the Nurse Navigator ED/IP follow-up calls were helpful in the patient’s disease trajectory. Methods: A retrospective review was conducted from July to December 2024. Active patients, defined as having a cancer diagnosis and treatment within 90 days were uploaded into Virginia’s Care Coordination Health Information Exchange (HIE), which auto-generates reports for real-time ED/IP data. We reviewed all Nurse Navigator ED/IP follow-up calls. These calls were conducted within three business days of learning about the ED/IP discharge using a consistent script designed to address patients’ needs efficiently. Results: 1005 ED/IP encounters in July-Dec 2024. 53% Nurse Navigator connected with patient to conduct a follow-up call (n = 531): 22% (N = 116) of patient connections with a nurse navigator resulted in intervention, 21% Clinical intervention (n = 24), 31% Care coordination with surgery/other specialty intervention (n = 36), 48% Scheduling intervention (n = 56). Only 1% of patients that had a NN connection had an ED visit within one week. 24% Nurse Navigator left voicemail (n = 240). 23% No call: Patient died (n = 8); Office visit (n = 148); DC to hospice/SNF/Rehab (n = 10); Other (n = 68). Conclusions: In our patient population, 22% of patient connections with a nurse navigator resulted in intervention by the care team that supported positive patient outcomes. While not statistically significant due to low volumes, patients that had nurse navigator connections were ultimately less likely to have an ED/IP admission. We believe this evaluation showcases the real-world impact and importance of the ASCO standard for timely follow-up after hospitalizations and ED visits by nurse navigators.

JCO Oncology PracticeVol. 21(10_suppl)
Mountain Blue Cancer Care Center (US)
Openalex Percentile: Top 59%
Emergency and Acute Care Studies
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.