Author Department of general internal medicine Conference Date Title Author Department of general internal medicine Conference Date

Conflict of Interest Disclosures The authors have no conflicts of interest to disclose

Introduction (Why did you start?) Problem description Nature and significance of the problem Recently published data (2018) evaluating Medicare patients 40% of CAP patients age > 65. average LOS 5.6 days Postma et al. NEJM. (2015) 372;14 Brown et al. BMC Geriatrics (2018) 18:92

Introduction (Why did you start?) Available knowledge Rationale Recently published data (2018) evaluating Medicare patients 40% of CAP patients age > 65. average LOS 5.6 days Postma et al. NEJM. (2015) 372;14 Brown et al. BMC Geriatrics (2018) 18:92

Specific aims (purpose of the project) Xx xx

Methods (what did you do?) Context Intervention

Study of the intervention Approach chosen for assessing the impact of the intervention Approach used to establish whether the observed outcomes were do to the intervention

Measures Measures chosen for studying processes and outcomes of the intervention(s), including rationale for choosing them, their operational definitions, and their validity and reliability Description of the approach to the ongoing assessment of contextual elements that contributed to the success, failure, efficiency, and cost Methods employed for assessing completeness and accuracy of data

analysis Qualitative and quantitative methods used to draw inferences from the data Methods for understanding variation within the data, including the effects of time as a variable

Results or Results to date(What did you find?) Initial steps of the intervention(s) and their evolution over time (e.g., time-line diagram, flow chart, or table), including modifications made to the intervention during the project Details of the process measures and outcomes

Results: Demographics (example) ED CAP PATIENTS ADM TO HOSPITAL Orderset NOT Started in ED Orderset Started in ED P-value Number of Patients 198 176 -- DEMOGRAPHICS Age in Years (SD) 62.37 (16.99) 61.69 (18.22) 0.72 Gender Male,n (%M) 114 ( 57.6) 96 ( 54.5) 0.63 Charlson Co-Morbidities Index (SD) 4.91 (3.56) 4.89 (3.60) 0.95 Case Mix Index (SD) 2.08 (1.56) 2.02 (1.64) CURB-65 Score (%)   0.21 0-2 168 ( 84.8) 158 ( 89.8) 3-5 30 ( 15.2) 18 ( 10.2)

Results (EXAMPLE) NO CCP CCP NO CCP CCP

Results (EXAMPLE) Differences in hospital LOS were compared via negative binomial regression and adjusted for age, CURB65 score and Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI) NO CCP CCP

Results: (What did you find?) Contextual elements that interacted with the intervention(s) Observed associations between outcomes, interventions, and relevant contextual elements Unintended consequences such as unexpected benefits, problems, failures, or costs associated with the intervention(s). Details about missing data

Conclusions: Usefulness of the work Sustainability Potential for spread to other contexts Implications for practice and for further study in the field Suggested next steps Questions?

THANK YOU @hsc.utah.edu