Rhode Island and the Changing Paradigm of Health Care Delivery

The author offers insights on the delivery of health care services in Rhode Island. Topics discussed include the challenges brought by the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic to the sector, factors which contribute to health care dysfunction in the region such as poor business conditions and disputes between health systems and labor unions, and the need to improve emergency department (ED) operational efficiency.

'I'll Never Be Your Beast of Burden': Physician Burnout and Moral Injury

[...]on Saturday afternoon, a troubleshooter from the help desk at Genesis Systems called me on my cell phone. Because of this error, my help desk friend was unable to complete the program, and so, after 3 days and rising tensions, it was referred to someone at the state level, who sent me an automatic reply that he was unavailable. First used to describe veterans returning from the Vietnam War, moral injury has been extended to the health care field to help further explain and refine causes of burnout.2 Burnout suggests individual deficit.

Rhode Island Healthcare: Is There Light at the End of the Tunnel?

The article presents the discussion on Rhode Island Healthcare. Topics include epidemics of crack cocaine, H1N1, and fentanyl, and exhibiting resilience despite poor-patient outcomes;and complicated and historically tumultuous relationship between the leading healthcare system and the nurses and allied professionals union.

The age-old question: Thematic analysis of focus groups on physician experiences of aging in emergency medicine.

OBJECTIVES: Emergency medicine has a demanding work environment. Characteristics influencing longevity among older physicians in emergency medicine have been the subject of ongoing discussion. The American College of Emergency Physicians (ACEP) released a policy statement in 2009 suggesting accommodating emergency physicians in preretirement years. We engaged emergency physicians to determine awareness of the ACEP policy and issues faced in preretirement years. METHODS: We conducted a series of online focus group discussions with a purposive sample of emergency physicians, age ≥ 50 years. The discussion guide was developed from the ACEP policy statement and relevant literature. Groups were audio recorded, transcribed, and analyzed with a thematic coding system developed iteratively by the 4-person team. Emerging themes were identified, organized, and presented with illustrative quotations. RESULTS: A total of 28 emergency physicians participated in 4 focus groups, with between 6 and 9 participants in each group. These physicians had between 17 and 35 years of clinical experience (median = 27), 6 were female (21%), and the majority (n = 26, 93%) worked in academic emergency medicine. Only 1 emergency physician was fully aware of the ACEP policy. Three principal content areas were identified: workload demands that change as physicians age, wellness and physician social equity, and senior emergency physician value. Interwoven across all of these was the focus on leadership and solutions to issues. Issues facing emergency physicians in their preretirement years were identified; commitment from emergency medicine site and national leadership and buy-in from junior colleagues was emphasized. Generational conflicts in recognizing the contribution and needs of preretirement emergency physicians was a major barrier to solutions. CONCLUSIONS: Workload demands, wellness and physician social equity, and concerns about value as a senior physician are major themes confronting preretirement emergency physicians. Generational divides, deficits in local and national leadership, and the health detriments of rotating schedules and night shifts are barriers to longevity in emergency medicine. Further research on the value of senior physicians and the impact of hospital and departmental financial models on adopting accommodations for senior emergency physicians is needed.

The Calm Before the Storm: Using In Situ Simulation to Evaluate for Preparedness of an Alternative Care Hospital During the COVID-19 Pandemic.

OBJECTIVES: Coronavirus disease (COVID-19) has been identified as an acute respiratory illness leading to severe acute respiratory distress syndrome. As the disease spread, demands on health care systems increased, specifically the need to expand hospital capacity. Alternative care hospitals (ACHs) have been used to mitigate these issues; however, establishing an ACH has many challenges. The goal of this session was to perform systems testing, using a simulation-based evaluation to identify areas in need of improvement. METHODS: Four simulation cases were designed to depict common and high acuity situations encountered in the ACH, using a high technology simulator and standardized patient. A multidisciplinary observer group was given debriefing forms listing the objectives, critical actions, and specific areas to focus their attention. These forms were compiled for data collection. RESULTS: Logistical, operational, and patient safety issues were identified during the simulation and compiled into a simulation event report. Proposed solutions and protocol changes were made in response to the identified issues. CONCLUSION: Simulation was successfully used for systems testing, supporting efforts to maximize patient care and provider safety in a rapidly developed ACH. The simulation event report identified operational deficiencies and safety concerns directly resulting in equipment modifications and protocol changes.

From Concerts to COVID: Transforming the RI Convention Center into an Alternate Hospital Site in under a Month

Field hospitals have long been used to extend health care capabilities in times of crisis. In response to the pandemic and an anticipated surge in patients, Rhode Island Gov. Gina Raimondo announced a plan to create three field hospitals, or "alternate hospital sites" (AHS), totaling 1,000 beds, in order to expand the state's hospital capacity. Following China's Fangcang shelter hospital model, the Lifespan AHS (LAHS) planning group attempted to identify existing public venues that could support rapid conversion to a site for large numbers of patients at a reasonable cost. After discussions with many stakeholders - pharmacy, laboratory, healthcare providers, security, emergency medical services, and infection control - design and equipment recommendations were given to the architects during daily teleconferencing and site visits. Specific patient criteria for the LAHS were established, staffing was prioritized, and clinical protocols were designed to facilitate care. Simulations using 4 different scenarios were practiced in order to assure proper patient care and flow, pharmacy utilization, and staffing.