The Power of Peer Support About Mended Hearts

The Power of Peer Support

About Mended Hearts Ø Founded 1951 Ø Dwight Harken, MD Ø 20, 000 Members Ø 300 Chapters Ø 460 Hospitals Ø 215, 000 Patients Visited Annually Ø National - Based in Dallas

What We Knew Ø Visiting helps patients AND visitors Ø HCPs can tell when a patient has been visited Ø HCPs strongly supportive Ø Visiting improves outcomes

What We Could Prove Ø Patients said they felt better Ø HCPs said they could tell a difference Ø Patients seemed to do better Ø No empirical data

Three Survey Phases Ø CMS Hospital Compare Data Ø Patient Attitudes and Awareness – Phase 1 Ø Week 1 following hospitalization Ø Patient Attitudes and Awareness – Phase 2 Ø Week 4 -6 following hospitalization

Survey Objectives Ø Compare hospitals P With and without visiting programs Ø Assess readmission rates Ø Measure patient attitudes ü ü ü Compliance Perceived wellness Self-efficacy Sense of control Satisfaction with hospital experience

Survey Logistics Ø Access Ø Survey links provided to patients Ø 294 patients completed Phase I survey Ø 94 Patients completed Phase II survey Ø 39% response rate Ø Dates Ø Phase I – February 15 – August 20, 2014 Ø Phase II – April 10 – August 20, 2014

Compare Data Ø Objectives Ø Analyze hospital records from CMS Compare Data Ø Assess impact of MHI peer-to-peer support program on patient outcomes Ø 30 -Day readmission and mortality rates Ø Heart Attack Ø Heart Failure Ø Access Ø CMS data from 4805 hospitals downloaded Ø 164 Mended Hearts hospitals comparable to 4641 other hospitals

Key CMS Finding: Mended Hearts hospitals’ readmission rates for heart failure are significantly more likely to be “better than U. S. national rate” than other U. S. hospitals

Reduced Readmissions! Ø Critical Timing Ø New Reimbursement Rules Ø Proven Model Ø Inexpensive Solution Ø Opportunity: System Approach

Phase 1: Visit Impacts Hospital Experience 90% noted favorable impact on hospital experience © More than half ‘much more favorable’

Phase 1: Visit Impacts Hospital Experience Nearly 90% felt visitor was helpful © More than two-thirds said ‘extremely helpful’

Phase I: Perceived Helpfulness Support from someone with similar experience © Helpful information on medical condition and recovery © Encouragement ©

Phase II: Top Three Conditions Hypertension © High Cholesterol Coronary Artery Disease © ©

Ø More than 1/4 = depression Ø Most took specific action

Phase II: Sense of Wellness Ø 3/4 patients felt in ‘very good/excellent health’ © More than half cited no impact on activities

Phase II Survey Results Ø ~25% experienced symptoms post-hospital Ø Ø AFib most common Less than 1/5 readmitted to hospital after earlier visit Ø Ø ~25% no additional procedures performed Almost 2/3 of readmitted patients had same procedure as previous admission

Phase II Compliance Ø Following medical regimens: ü Rate themselves extremely highly ü Diligent about medications Especially diuretics Favorable ratings: Physical activities Watching for worsening symptoms

Phase II Satisfaction Ø 30 days post-discharge, patients ‘very satisfied’ with Mended Hearts, for both: ü ü Ø Ø Encounter with visitor Materials (Heart. Pack) More than 90% recommend Mended Hearts More than half joined Mended Hearts

Survey Implications Ø New hospital system approach Ø Ø Expand visiting program Ø Ø System-wide approach Virtual and multimedia visiting Heart. Guide Discharge process Stronger connection to rehab

New Patient Support Tools Y Heart. Guide – New Patient Resource © © © Y Hard Copy Digital Online Smartphone/Tablet App Enhanced Peer Support © Scheduled Virtual Visitors © Available by phone, email, text © Irrespective of location, hospital affiliation

Opportunities Ø Consider the Power of Peer Support in your settings Ø Help start a Mended Hearts Chapter Ø Join us!

Call or visit us! www. mendedhearts. org 1 -888 -HEART-99