Exploring the Impact of COVID-19 on Women Hospitalists: A Mixed-Gender Qualitative Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Women physicians have faced persistent challenges, including gender bias, salary inequities, a disproportionate share of caregiving and domestic responsibilities, and limited representation in leadership. Data indicate the COVID-19 pandemic further highlighted and exacerbated these inequities. OBJECTIVE: To understand the pandemic's impact on women physicians and to brainstorm solutions to better support women physicians. DESIGN: Mixed-gender semi-structured focus groups. PARTICIPANTS: Hospitalists in the Hospital Medicine Reengineering Network (HOMERuN). APPROACH: Six semi-structured virtual focus groups were held with 22 individuals from 13 institutions comprised primarily of academic hospitalist physicians. Rapid qualitative methods including templated summaries and matrix analysis were applied to identify major themes and subthemes. KEY RESULTS: Four key themes emerged: (1) the pandemic exacerbated perceived gender inequities, (2) women's academic productivity and career development were negatively impacted, (3) women held disproportionate roles as caregivers and household managers, and (4) institutional pandemic responses were often misaligned with workforce needs, especially those of women hospitalists. Multiple interventions were proposed including: creating targeted workforce solutions and benefits to address the disproportionate caregiving burden placed on women, addressing hospitalist scheduling and leave practices, ensuring promotion pathways value clinical and COVID-19 contributions, creating transparency around salary and non-clinical time allocation, and ensuring women are better represented in leadership roles. CONCLUSIONS: Hospitalists perceived and experienced that women physicians faced negative impacts from the pandemic in multiple domains including leadership opportunities and scholarship, while also shouldering larger caregiving duties than men. There are many opportunities to improve workplace conditions for women; however, current institutional efforts were perceived as misaligned to actual needs. Thus, policy and programmatic changes, such as those proposed by this cohort of hospitalists, are needed to advance equity in the workplace.

Beneath, Beyond Burnout: Solving for Causes.

This article offers a different perspective of the current crisis in health care-burnout that is causing medical errors, disengagement, and economic chaos and forcing talented, experienced health care professionals to leave their institutions or their chosen professions altogether. The lack of meaningful impact lies in the focus on treating problems observed rather than on system issues underlying the more overt symptoms of burnout and attrition. The system within which health care workers perform impacts their capacity to consistently deliver high-quality care. Existing systems and structures often yield undesirable results, and harm individual workers. The authors explore strategies that focus on understanding and responding to the causes impacting staff and organizational performance. Lack of application of continually evolving evidence from numerous intersecting fields of neuroscience leads to the design of work systems that cause trauma and moral injury or that exacerbate original early life trauma, reducing the capability to operate successfully in the complex environments in which we work and live. It also leads to incomplete, insufficient, and, at times, outmoded systems of support for the well-being of all within the system. Too often, burnout results. In contrast to problem-solving, cause-solving requires holistic approaches to understanding interactions of system components. The authors will put forth a road map for creating components of a healing ecosystem that support trauma-informed and system-wide transformation. Recognition leads to commitment to systemic transformation toward a more healing system for all. Long-term, system performance cannot be sustained, nor organizational needs met, when people in the system are distressed.

The Institute for Health care Quality, Safety, and Efficiency: A Comprehensive Approach to Improving Organization-Level Quality Performance.

Despite decades of effort to drive quality improvement, many health care organizations still struggle to optimize their performance on quality metrics. The advent of publicly reported quality rankings and ratings allows for greater visibility of overall organizational performance, but has not provided a roadmap for sustained improvement in these assessments. Most quality training programs have focused on developing knowledge and skills in pursuit of individual and project-level improvements. To date, no training program has been associated with improvements in overall organization-level, publicly reported measures. In 2012, the Institute for Health care Quality, Safety, and Efficiency was launched, which is an integrated set of quality and safety training programs, with a focus on leadership development and support of performance improvement through data analytics and intensive coaching. This effort has trained nearly 2000 individuals and has been associated with significant improvement in organization-level quality rankings and ratings, offering a framework for organizations seeking systematic, long-term improvement.

The Case for Virtual Sepsis Surveillance and Intervention.

Study Objective:To determine whether deployment of an integrated virtual sepsis surveillance program could improve time to antibiotics and mortality in a longitudinal cohort of non-present on admission (NPOA) sepsis cases.Methods:We used an uncontrolled pre- and poststudy design to compare time to antibiotics and mortality between a time-based cohort of NPOA sepsis cases separated by the deployment of a virtual sepsis surveillance program.Results:A total of 566 NPOA sepsis cases were included in this study. Three hundred and thirty-five cases compromised the preintervention arm, whereas the postintervention cohort included 231 cases. After deployment of the virtual sepsis surveillance program, median time to antibiotics improved from 92 to 59 min (p < 0.001). Mortality was reduced from 30% to 21% (p = 0.015).Conclusion:Deployment of a virtual sepsis surveillance program resulted in a decreased time to antibiotics and an overall reduction in NPOA sepsis mortality.

Results from the National Taskforce for Humanity in Healthcare's Integrated, Organizational Pilot Program to Improve Well-Being.

BACKGROUND: In health care, burnout remains a persistent and significant problem. Evidence now exists that organizational initiatives are vital to address health care worker (HCW) well-being in a sustainable way, though system-level interventions are pursued infrequently. METHODS: Between November 2018 and May 2020, researchers engaged five health system and physician practice sites to participate in an organizational pilot intervention that integrated evidence-based approaches to well-being, including a comprehensive culture assessment, leadership and team development, and redesign of daily workflow with an emphasis on cultivating positive emotions. RESULTS: All primary and secondary outcome measures demonstrated directionally concordant improvement, with the primary outcome of emotional exhaustion (0-100 scale, lower better; 43.12 to 36.42, p = 0.037) and secondary outcome of likelihood to recommend the participating department's workplace as a good place to work (1-10 scale, higher better; 7.66 to 8.20, p = 0.037) being statistically significant. Secondary outcomes of emotional recovery (0-100 scale, higher better; 76.60 to 79.53, p = 0.20) and emotional thriving (0-100 scale, higher better; 76.70 to 79.23, p = 0.27) improved but were not statistically significant. CONCLUSION: An integrated, skills-based approach, focusing on team culture and interactions, leadership, and workflow redesign that cultivates positive emotions was associated with improvements in HCW well-being. This study suggests that simultaneously addressing multiple drivers of well-being can have significant impacts on burnout and workplace environment.

Acute Myocardial Infarction Cohorts Defined by International Classification of Diseases, Tenth Revision Versus Diagnosis-Related Groups: Analysis of Diagnostic Agreement and Quality Measures in an Integrated Health System.

BACKGROUND: Among Medicare value-based payment programs for acute myocardial infarction (AMI), the Hospital Readmissions Reduction Program uses International Classification of Diseases, Tenth Revision (ICD-10) codes to identify the program denominator, while the Bundled Payments for Care Improvement Advanced program uses diagnosis-related groups (DRGs). The extent to which these programs target similar patients, whether they target the intended population (type 1 myocardial infarction), and whether outcomes are comparable between cohorts is not known. METHODS: In a retrospective study of 2176 patients hospitalized in an integrated health system, a cohort of patients assigned a principal ICD-10 diagnosis of AMI and a cohort of patients assigned an AMI DRG were compared according to patient-level agreement and outcomes such as mortality and readmission. RESULTS: One thousand nine hundred thirty-five patients were included in the ICD-10 cohort compared with 662 patients in the DRG cohort. Only 421 patients were included in both AMI cohorts (19.3% agreement). DRG cohort patients were older (70 versus 65 years, P<0.001), more often female (48% versus 30%, P<0.001), and had higher rates of heart failure (52% versus 33%, P<0.001) and kidney disease (42% versus 25%, P<0.001). Comparing outcomes, the DRG cohort had significantly higher unadjusted rates of 30-day mortality (6.6% versus 2.5%, P<0.001), 1-year mortality (21% versus 8%, P<0.001), and 90-day readmission (26% versus 19%, P=0.006) than the ICD-10 cohort. Two observations help explain these differences: 61% of ICD-10 cohort patients were assigned procedural DRGs for revascularization instead of an AMI DRG, and type 1 myocardial infarction patients made up a smaller proportion of the DRG cohort (34%) than the ICD-10 cohort (78%). CONCLUSIONS: The method used to identify denominators for value-based payment programs has important implications for the patient characteristics and outcomes of the populations. As national and local quality initiatives mature, an emphasis on ICD-10 codes to define AMI cohorts would better represent type 1 myocardial infarction patients.

Teaching Students to Transform: The Health Innovations Scholars Program 6 Years Later.

Training in leadership and health system transformation is increasingly important in undergraduate medical education in order to develop a pipeline of engaged physicians dedicated to transforming health care. Despite this growing need, it is unclear whether current leadership training methods have long-term impact on students' career trajectory. The authors analyzed career outcomes from 6 years of the Health Innovations Scholars Program (HISP) to better understand how the program affected the 46 graduates' future involvement in health system transformation and leadership. Eighty-eight percent of the graduates remained involved in quality improvement, 70% held leadership positions, 31% participated in health innovation, and 15% participated in patient safety initiatives. Project involvement of the graduates represented both primary and secondary catalysts for health system change, leading to 28 unique catalyst events. HISP is a model for directing trainees' career trajectory toward engagement in health system leadership and redesign.

Expanding Training in Quality Improvement and Patient Safety Through a Multispecialty Graduate Medical Education Curriculum Designed for Fellows.

Introduction: Although the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education requires quality improvement and patient safety (QIPS) training for fellow-level trainees, this experience is often insufficient due to lack of faculty time and expertise within fellowship training programs. We developed a centralized GME curriculum targeted to an integrated, multispecialty audience of fellow-level trainees with the goal of promoting leadership and scholarship in QIPS. Methods: The University of Colorado implemented the Fellows' Quality and Safety Academy, a three-seminar curriculum in patient safety and health systems improvement. As most participants had prior training in QIPS during medical school or residency, educational strategies emphasized application of QIPS concepts through focused didactic content review paired with small-group case-based exercises and coaching of experiential project work to promote content mastery as well as practice of leadership and scholarship strategies. Results: Since the curriculum's inception in 2017, there have been 106 participants in the Foundations in Patient Safety seminar, 49 participants in the Adverse Events Into Quality Improvement seminar, and 48 participants in the Quality in Academics seminar. These participants represented 44 separate fellowship disciplines from both adult and pediatric subspecialties. Learners reported improved attitudes and confidence and demonstrated objective knowledge acquisition across QIPS content domains. Discussion: Our pedagogical approach of centralizing QIPS training and harnessing faculty expertise to teach fellow-level trainees across specialties through interdisciplinary collaboration and interactive project-based work is an effective strategy to promote development of QIPS competencies during fellowship training.

Clinical Guideline Highlights for the Hospitalist: The Use of Intravenous Fluids in the Hospitalized Adult.

GUIDELINE TITLE: Intravenous Fluid Therapy in Adults in Hospital RELEASE DATE: December, 2013 PRIOR VERSION: Not Applicable DEVELOPER: Multidisciplinary Guideline Development Group within the United Kingdom's National Clinical Guideline Centre FUNDING SOURCE: National Institute for Health and Care Excellence TARGET POPULATION: Hospitalized adult patients.

Improving Early Discharge Using a Team-Based Structure for Discharge Multidisciplinary Rounds.

PURPOSE OF STUDY: Miscommunications during the complex process of discharging patients from acute care facilities can lead to adverse events, patient dissatisfaction, and delays in discharge. Brief multidisciplinary discharge rounds (MDRs) can increase communication between stakeholders and shorten a patient's length of stay (LOS). At our tertiary academic medical center, case managers (CMs) have historically been assigned patients by physical unit location rather than by provider teams caring for patients. As a result, medicine teams often interact with several unit-based CMs due to lack of geographically cohorted patients, leading to inefficiency and fragmentation in discharge planning communication. Our aim was to implement and evaluate the impact of multidisciplinary, team-based discharge planning rounds (MDR) for general medicine patients. PRIMARY PRACTICE SETTING: A tertiary academic medical center. METHODOLOGY AND SAMPLE: Using the model for continuous improvement, we implemented and optimized MDR on 2 of 4 internal medicine resident ward teams that care for general internal medicine patients, including creation of a multidisciplinary team, improving physician continuity. RESULTS: During the pilot, 1,584 patients were discharged from all medicine teams-825 from pilot teams and 759 from control teams. The proportion of patients with discharge before noon (DBN) orders was 41.2% on pilot versus 29.6% on control teams. Length of stay was 92.2 hr versus 97.2 hr, and 30-day readmission rate was 16.0% versus 18.3% for the pilot versus control teams, respectively. After the pilot concluded, we continued to have resident continuity on pilot teams but returned to the unit-based CM model. During this time, the proportion of DBN orders and LOS were similar between the pilot and control teams (29.0% vs. 24.3% and 95.8 hr vs. 96.6 hr, respectively). The 30-day readmission rate was 12.6% compared with 18.9% for the pilot versus control teams. IMPLICATIONS FOR CASE MANAGEMENT PRACTICE: Our team-based MDR pilot improved interdisciplinary relationships and communication and resulted in shorter LOS, earlier discharge times, and lower 30-day readmissions.

Leadership Observation and Feedback Tool: A Novel Instrument for Assessment of Clinical Leadership Skills.

BACKGROUND: While leadership training is increasingly incorporated into residency education, existing assessment tools to provide feedback on leadership skills are only applicable in limited contexts. OBJECTIVE: We developed an instrument, the Leadership Observation and Feedback Tool (LOFT), for assessing clinical leadership. METHODS: We used an iterative process to develop the tool, beginning with adapting the Leadership Practices Inventory to create an open-ended survey for identification of clinical leadership behaviors. We presented these to leadership experts who defined essential behaviors through a modified Delphi approach. In May 2014 we tested the resulting 29-item tool among residents in the internal medicine and pediatrics departments at 2 academic medical centers. We analyzed instrument performance using Cronbach's alpha, interrater reliability using intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs), and item performance using linear-by-linear test comparisons of responses by postgraduate year, site, and specialty. RESULTS: A total of 377 (of 526, 72%) team members completed the LOFT for 95 (of 519, 18%) residents. Overall ratings were high-only 14% scored at the novice level. Cronbach's alpha was 0.79, and the ICC ranged from 0.20 to 0.79. Linear-by-linear test comparisons revealed significant differences between postgraduate year groups for some items, but no significant differences by site or specialty. Acceptability and usefulness ratings by respondents were high. CONCLUSIONS: Despite a rigorous approach to instrument design, we were unable to collect convincing validity evidence for our instrument. The tool may still have some usefulness for providing formative feedback to residents on their clinical leadership skills.