Hospital and SNF Staff Interviews
Design and Sample
This inductive qualitative content analysis was conducted in two phases. First, case studies included 138 interviews with staff of 16 hospitals and 25 SNFs in eight markets across the country. These markets varied based on region of the country, county size, Medicare Advantage penetration rates, and the absence or presence of functioning accountable care organizations.
Procedures
Two hospitals in each of the eight markets were selected based on their readmission rates (one with a low readmission rate, one with a higher rate). We then chose three SNFs to which the two hospitals discharged patients. It is important to note that the two hospitals in each market may discharge to the same SNFs. Of the 138 semi-structured staff interviews, 64 were conducted with hospital staff (21 hospitalists, 23 vice presidents of strategy or chief medical officers, and 20 discharge planners), and 74 were conducted with SNF staff (24 administrators, 24 directors of nursing, and 26 admissions coordinators). For a visual representation of the split of participants by market, hospital, and SNF, see Table 1.
Table 1 Number of Participants by Market, Hospital, and SNF
Interview protocols were designed to examine relationships between hospitals and SNFs. Participants were asked about the information that is communicated during the hospital discharge, the roles of different staff, the existence of programs to improve hospital-SNF transitions, the perceived efficacy of these programs, and participants’ understanding of patients’ experiences. Relevant questions from these protocols are included in Appendix A (online). Interviews took place in participants’ offices and lasted approximately 40 min each.
Analysis
Interviews were qualitatively analyzed to identify overarching concepts and themes.18,19,20,21 We created a preliminary coding scheme based on the questions asked in our interview protocols, then adjusted the schemes iteratively; codes were added or modified when new material emerged from interviews.
Initially, all research team members read the interviews from the first two markets and individually coded each transcript. In subsequent team meetings, team members discussed and refined the coding scheme and associated code definitions according to how well the codes fit the transcript data, discussed perceptions of preliminary patterns or potential themes in the data, and reconciled interpretations of the first coded transcripts. The final coding scheme for staff interviews is included in Appendix C (online). Following completion of transcripts in the first two markets, to streamline the process, the team was divided into two sub-teams of two members each, with each team member coding the transcripts individually, then meeting to reconcile the codes and discuss potential themes. Membership in these sub-teams rotated to ensure that analytic decisions were developed independently of the other team; the full team met biweekly to discuss emerging themes.
Patient/Family Member Interviews
Design and Sample
Following completion of staff interviews, we selected five of the previous eight markets that best represented the variation of the selection criteria to revisit, and within each market, we re-recruited three SNFs (two in the smallest market), within which to interview SNF patients and/or their informal family caregivers. A total of 98 interviews were conducted with SNF patients and/or their family members.
Procedures
We recruited patients who had lived in the community prior to their hospitalization and were newly admitted to SNF from the hospital. Through pilot testing, we determined that an appropriate number of patient interviews per SNF would be 7 or 8 because these interviews could be conducted over the course of 1 day and would likely reach saturation. In order to recruit participants, the interviewer first consulted with SNF admissions coordinators to schedule a 1-day site visit. The admissions coordinator then generated a list of potential participants, with the goal of 7 or 8 patients per facility. On the day of the visit, the admissions coordinator provided the interviewer with the list of potential participants, all of whom were deemed by SNF staff to be capable of providing informed consent and who were informed about the study by SNF staff. Selection criteria included the ability to provide informed consent, presence in the SNF for PAC following a recent hospitalization, and having previously lived in the community. The interviewer then individually visited and recruited each participant. On those occasions when the patient was being visited by family members, they were also asked to participate in the interview. The interviewer described the study and its goals, and participants signed a consent form that was approved by our university’s Institutional Review Board.
Interviews were designed to characterize patients’ and their families’ experiences during the discharge planning and SNF placement process. Participants were asked to describe their role in SNF selection and if and how they were presented with alternative choices as well as whether anyone else was involved in the decision. They were also asked about the involvement of the hospital discharge planner, including the type of information that individual provided. Sample questions from this interview protocol are included in Appendix B (online). Interviews took place in patients’ rooms, lasting about 30 min, and participants were compensated $25 for their time. All interviews were audio recorded and transcribed for data analysis.
Analysis
For interviews with patients, two members of the research team each read all transcripts from the first market and individually coded each transcript. In subsequent meetings, the team discussed and refined the coding scheme and coding definitions, discussed perceptions of preliminary patterns or themes in the data, and reconciled the first coded transcripts. The final coding scheme for patient interviews is included in Appendix D (online). Following coding of the first market, the two coders each coded the same three interviews in order to determine inter-rater reliability. Once inter-rater reliability was ensured (greater than 90% agreement), the two coders each coded half the remaining interviews individually, again meeting weekly.
Overall Analysis and Research Team
During analysis of both staff and patient interviews, comprehensive audit trails were retained recording team decisions, including code selection and definition and discussion of emerging themes.19,22,23,24,25 For additional information on how themes were yielded from the interview protocol and coding scheme, see Appendix E (online), which presents the themes addressed in the “Results” section, as well as example interview questions and coding scheme categories that were associated with these themes. Coded data were entered into the qualitative software package NVivo.
Reflexivity is an important part of qualitative research and requires that investigators continuously reflect on the research and their roles in conducting and reporting it. Our research team was interdisciplinary and included health services researchers from a variety of backgrounds. It included five PhDs and one MD, and included a geriatrician, cultural anthropologist, a political scientist, and a gerontologist, with levels of experience ranging from new junior faculty to highly senior investigators. All members of the research team participated in most aspects of the research, including analysis of the data.