Feasibility of a Novel Real-Time Provider Teaching Intervention in Acute Exacerbation of Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease

BACKGROUND: It is not known whether an intervention using real-time provider teaching in acute exacerbation of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (AECOPD) improves provider knowledge and/or patient outcomes. OBJECTIVE: To pilot the combination of a novel, real-time provider teaching intervention delivered by subspecialists to Internal Medicine trainees with a traditional patient education and medication reconciliation (PEMR) intervention and to assess the impact of these interventions on provider knowledge regarding COPD and patient care. METHODS: This was a single-center, nonrandomized, quality-improvement study. Patients admitted with AECOPD were prospectively identified between June 19 and November 20, 2019. Patients with asthma, lung cancer, or interstitial lung disease were excluded. The primary care team received a novel intervention featuring in-person, real-time teaching, covering Global Initiative on Chronic Obstructive Lung Disease COPD groups and management, including pulmonary rehabilitation referral. Providers completed a knowledge assessment before and after their real-time teaching session. Provider knowledge scores before and after teaching were compared using McNemar’s test. Patients received a traditional PEMR intervention from a nurse practitioner and/or clinical pharmacist. A retrospective chart review was conducted for 50 historical control patients admitted with AECOPD to obtain preintervention rates of discharge on long-acting bronchodilators and referral to pulmonary rehabilitation. The proportions of patients discharged on long-acting bronchodilators and referred to pulmonary rehabilitation in the intervention group were compared with the preintervention historical control patients using chi-square testing. RESULTS: Seventy-one providers caring for patients with AECOPD received real-time teaching. Postintervention, there was significant improvement in knowledge scores pertaining to Global Initiative on Chronic Obstructive Lung Disease groups and exacerbation risk (81% correct vs. 43% on pretest; P < 0.001) and guideline-directed treatment (83% correct vs. 28% on pretest; P < 0.001). Out of 44 eligible patients, 75% (n = 33 patients) received the PEMR intervention. Ninety percent of patients (n = 40 patients) were discharged on any long-acting inhaler, similar to the group of preintervention control subjects. Pulmonary rehabilitation referrals were made for 50% of patients (n = 22 patients) compared with 6% of preintervention control subjects (n = 3 patients; P < 0.001). CONCLUSION: In this single-center quality-improvement study, the combination of a novel, real-time provider teaching intervention and a traditional PEMR intervention improved provider knowledge and was associated with increased referrals to pulmonary rehabilitation.