Impact of geographical cohorting, multidisciplinary rounding and incremental case management support on hospital length of stay and readmission rates: a propensity weighted analysis.

Hospital length of stay (LOS) in the USA has been increasing since the start of the COVID-19 pandemic, with numerous negative outcomes, including decreased quality of care, worsened patient satisfaction and negative financial impacts on hospitals. While many proposed factors contributing to prolonged LOS are challenging to modify, poor coordination of care and communication among clinical teams can be improved.Geographical cohorting of provider teams, patients and other clinical staff is proposed as a solution to prolonged LOS and readmissions. However, many studies on geographical cohorting alone have shown no significant impact on LOS or readmissions. Other potential benefits of geographical cohorting include improved quality of care, learning experience, communication, teamwork and efficiency.This paper presents a retrospective study at Duke University Hospital (DUH) on the General Medicine service, deploying a bundled intervention of geographical cohorting of patients and their care teams, twice daily multidisciplinary rounds and incremental case management support. The quality improvement study found that patients in the intervention arm had 16%-17% shorter LOS than those in the control arms, and there was a reduction in 30-day hospital readmissions compared with the concurrent control arm. Moreover, there was some evidence of improved accuracy of estimated discharge dates in the intervention arm.Based on these findings, the health system at DUH recognised the value of geographical cohorting and implemented additional geographically based medicine units with multidisciplinary rounds. Future studies will confirm the sustained impact of these care transformations on hospital throughput and patient outcomes, aiming to reduce LOS and enhance the quality of care provided to patients.

A Qualitative Intervention Evaluation of Neonatal Virtual Family-Centered Rounds.

OBJECTIVE: To conduct an implementation evaluation of the virtual family-centered rounds (FCR) intervention by exploring the perceptions and experiences of parents and care team providers. METHODS: We conducted a qualitative descriptive study using a thematic analysis of unobtrusive observations of rounding encounters and semi-structured interviews with the parents of discharged infants and members of the neonatal care team. Eligible participants had used virtual FCR at least once. Five research team members independently performed focused coding and memo writing of transcripts and observation fieldnotes. The team met weekly to compare and refine codes, update the interview guide, develop tentative categories, and discuss the theoretical direction. RESULTS: We conducted 406 minutes of unobtrusive observations and 21 interviews with parents, physicians, neonatal nurse practitioners, bedside nurses, dieticians, and pharmacists. Three themes and 13 subthemes emerged from the analysis: (1) virtual FCR improved perceived care delivery and clinical outcomes through increased opportunities for parent engagement, (2) the acceptance of virtual FCR by providers grew over time despite the persistent presence of technical challenges, and (3) the implementation of virtual FCR should be standardized and delivered by the care team to enhance usability, effectiveness, and sustainability. CONCLUSIONS: Virtual FCR is perceived by NICU parents and care team providers to be a valuable intervention that can enhance family centered care. The identified virtual FCR implementation strategies should be tested in further studies.

How Would You Manage HIV Pre-exposure Prophylaxis in This Patient With Medical Comorbidities? : Grand Rounds Discussion From Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center.

Despite advances in treatment, HIV infection remains an important cause of morbidity and mortality, with more than 30 000 new cases diagnosed in the United States each year. There are several interventions traditionally used to prevent HIV transmission, but these vary in effectiveness and there are challenges to their implementation. In 2014, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention published initial guidance on the use of antiretroviral pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) to prevent transmission of HIV infection in persons at risk based on multiple studies that showed it to be highly efficacious in various populations. It was updated in 2021 to reflect new drug options. The U.S. Preventive Services Task Force also recently updated its recommendations for PrEP, which strongly support its use in persons at risk. Despite its well-established effectiveness, the implementation of PrEP in clinical practice has been variable, especially among populations underserved by the medical system and marginalized by society. Fewer than one third of persons in the United States who are eligible for PrEP currently receive it. Here, 2 physicians experienced in HIV PrEP debate how best to identify patients who might benefit from PrEP, how to decide what regimen to use, and how to monitor therapy.

Use of Rounding Checklists to Improve Communication and Collaboration in the Adult Intensive Care Unit: An Integrative Review.

BACKGROUND: Intensive care units are complex settings that require effective communication and collaboration among professionals in many disciplines. Rounding checklists are frequently used during interprofessional rounds and have been shown to positively affect patient outcomes. OBJECTIVE: To identify and summarize the evidence related to the following practice question: In an adult intensive care unit, does the use of a rounding checklist during interprofessional rounds affect the perceived level of staff collaboration or communication? METHODS: An integrative review was performed to address the practice question. No parameters were set for publication year or specific study design. Studies were included if they were set in adult intensive care units, involved the use of a structured rounding checklist, and had measured outcomes that included staff collaboration, communication, or both. RESULTS: Seven studies with various designs were included in the review. Of the 7 studies, 6 showed that use of rounding checklists improved staff collaboration, communication, or both. These results have a variety of practice implications, including the potential for better patient outcomes and staff retention. CONCLUSIONS: Given the complexity of the critical care setting, optimizing teamwork is essential. The evidence from this review indicates that the use of a relatively simple rounding checklist tool during interprofessional rounds can improve perceived collaboration and communication in adult intensive care units.

Impacto de la implementación de un método de traspaso de información estandarizada interdisciplinar en sala de partos y unidad de cuidados obstétricos intermedios / Impact of the implementation of a standardised interdisciplinary information transfer method in the Delivery room and Intermediate Obstetric Care Unit

Objetivo Este estudio tiene como objetivo describir la implementación de la metodología estandarizada en la transferencia de información en sala de partos y unidad de cuidados obstétricos intermedios en un hospital de tercer nivel de Barcelona e identificar el impacto de esta implementación en los factores que actúan como facilitadores y barreras en el procedimiento. Método Estudio cuasiexperimental tipo pretest-postest sin grupo control en la unidad de cuidados obstétricos intermedios y sala de partos del servicio de Medicina Maternofetal de un hospital de tercer nivel de Barcelona. El personal sanitario autocumplimentó un cuestionario ad hoc antes y después de implementar la metodología estandarizada IDEAS en el servicio durante 2019 y 2020. Se evaluó la autopercepción personal en el procedimiento de transferencia de información. El test de Wilcoxon por pares se utilizó para la comparación antes y después. Resultados El uso de una metodología estandarizada ha mostrado un impacto en la mejora de la transmisión de la información. Se detectaron diferencias significativas antes y después de la intervención en las siguientes dimensiones: ubicación, personas implicadas, periodo de tiempo del procedimiento, estructurada ordenada y clara y tiempo suficiente para preguntas (p<0,001); mientras que no se observaron diferencias en transmisión al profesional referente, actuaciones bien definidas y realización de un resumen. Conclusiones Existen factores, como aspectos estructurales, organizativos y falta de tiempo, que dificultan la comunicación efectiva, por tanto, actúan como barreras en la transferencia de información. La implementación de una metodología con las personas implicadas, el tiempo y el espacio adecuado permite mejorar aspectos en la comunicación en el equipo multiprofesional y, por tanto, la seguridad del paciente. (AU)

Aim This study aims to describe the implementation of the standard methodology for information transfer in the labour ward and Intermediate Obstetric Care Unit and to identify the impact of this implementation on the factors that act as facilitators and barriers in the procedure. Method Quasi-experimental pretest-posttest study without a control group in an Intermediate Obstetric Care Unit and delivery room of the Maternal-Fetal Medicine Service of a tertiary hospital in Barcelona. Healthcare staff self-completed an ad hoc questionnaire before and after implementing the standardised IDEAS methodology in the service during 2019 and 2020. Personal self-perception in the information transfer procedure was assessed. The Wilcoxon pairwise test was used for comparison before and after. Results The use of a standardised methodology has shown an impact on improving the transmission of information. Significant differences were detected before and after the intervention in the following dimensions: location, people involved, time period of the procedure, structured, orderly and clear, and sufficient time for questions (p<0.001); while no differences were observed in: transmission to the referring professional, well-defined actions, and completion of a summary. Conclusions There are factors such as structural and organisational aspects and lack of time that hinder effective communication and therefore act as barriers to the transfer of information. The implementation of a methodology with the health professionals involved, the time and the appropriate space allows for the improvement of communication aspects in the multiprofessional team and, therefore, patient safety. (AU)

Impacto de la implementación de un método de traspaso de información estandarizada interdisciplinar en sala de partos y unidad de cuidados obstétricos intermedios / Impact of the implementation of a standardised interdisciplinary information transfer method in the Delivery room and Intermediate Obstetric Care Unit

Objetivo Este estudio tiene como objetivo describir la implementación de la metodología estandarizada en la transferencia de información en sala de partos y unidad de cuidados obstétricos intermedios en un hospital de tercer nivel de Barcelona e identificar el impacto de esta implementación en los factores que actúan como facilitadores y barreras en el procedimiento. Método Estudio cuasiexperimental tipo pretest-postest sin grupo control en la unidad de cuidados obstétricos intermedios y sala de partos del servicio de Medicina Maternofetal de un hospital de tercer nivel de Barcelona. El personal sanitario autocumplimentó un cuestionario ad hoc antes y después de implementar la metodología estandarizada IDEAS en el servicio durante 2019 y 2020. Se evaluó la autopercepción personal en el procedimiento de transferencia de información. El test de Wilcoxon por pares se utilizó para la comparación antes y después. Resultados El uso de una metodología estandarizada ha mostrado un impacto en la mejora de la transmisión de la información. Se detectaron diferencias significativas antes y después de la intervención en las siguientes dimensiones: ubicación, personas implicadas, periodo de tiempo del procedimiento, estructurada ordenada y clara y tiempo suficiente para preguntas (p<0,001); mientras que no se observaron diferencias en transmisión al profesional referente, actuaciones bien definidas y realización de un resumen. Conclusiones Existen factores, como aspectos estructurales, organizativos y falta de tiempo, que dificultan la comunicación efectiva, por tanto, actúan como barreras en la transferencia de información. La implementación de una metodología con las personas implicadas, el tiempo y el espacio adecuado permite mejorar aspectos en la comunicación en el equipo multiprofesional y, por tanto, la seguridad del paciente. (AU)

Aim This study aims to describe the implementation of the standard methodology for information transfer in the labour ward and Intermediate Obstetric Care Unit and to identify the impact of this implementation on the factors that act as facilitators and barriers in the procedure. Method Quasi-experimental pretest-posttest study without a control group in an Intermediate Obstetric Care Unit and delivery room of the Maternal-Fetal Medicine Service of a tertiary hospital in Barcelona. Healthcare staff self-completed an ad hoc questionnaire before and after implementing the standardised IDEAS methodology in the service during 2019 and 2020. Personal self-perception in the information transfer procedure was assessed. The Wilcoxon pairwise test was used for comparison before and after. Results The use of a standardised methodology has shown an impact on improving the transmission of information. Significant differences were detected before and after the intervention in the following dimensions: location, people involved, time period of the procedure, structured, orderly and clear, and sufficient time for questions (p<0.001); while no differences were observed in: transmission to the referring professional, well-defined actions, and completion of a summary. Conclusions There are factors such as structural and organisational aspects and lack of time that hinder effective communication and therefore act as barriers to the transfer of information. The implementation of a methodology with the health professionals involved, the time and the appropriate space allows for the improvement of communication aspects in the multiprofessional team and, therefore, patient safety. (AU)

Family Perceptions of Virtual Family-Centered Rounds in a Quaternary Cardiac Intensive Care Unit.

Background: Family-centered rounds (FCR) reduce the risk of psychological comorbidities of family members and improve the quality of communication between providers and families. Materials and methods: We conducted a pilot quality improvement study analyzing family perceptions of virtual FCR. Family members of previously admitted cardiac ICU patients who participated in at least one session of virtual FCR between April 2020 and June 2021 at Massachusetts General Hospital were surveyed post-ICU discharge. Results: During the study, 82 family members enrolled and participated in virtual FCR with 29 completing the post-admission telephone survey. Many cardiac ICU patients were male (n = 53), and a majority were discharged home (43%) with the patient's wives being the most common respondents to the questionnaire (n = 18). Across all questions in the survey, more than 75% of the respondents perceived the highest level of care in trust, communication, relationship, and compassion with their provider. Participants perceived the highest level of care in trust (96%), explanation (88%), as well as care and understanding (89%). Conclusions: Family members of cardiac ICU patients positively rated the quality of communication and perceived a high level of trust and communication between their providers on the virtual format.

Exploring formal and informal learning opportunities during morning report: a qualitative study.

BACKGROUND: Morning reports are an essential component of physicians' daily work. Attending morning reports is prioritized by junior doctors as it provides them with an opportunity to learn diagnostic reasoning through discussion of cases. While teaching formats during morning reports have previously been reported, an in-depth analysis of what learning opportunities exist, e.g., how teaching is enacted during morning reports, is lacking. This qualitative study explores learning opportunities during morning reports. METHODS: We used an explorative design based on video-recordings of 23 morning reports from two surgical departments, an internal medicine department and an emergency department. We used thematic analysis combined with and inspired by Eraut's theoretical framework of workplace learning. RESULTS: Both formal and informal learning opportunities were identified. Formal learning opportunities had the character of planned teaching activities, and we identified four themes: (1) modes of teaching, (2) structure, (3) presenter role, and (4) participant involvement. Informal learning, on the other hand, was often implicit and reactive, while deliberate learning opportunities were rare. The data showed many missed opportunities for learning. CONCLUSION: Both formal and informal learning opportunities are present during morning reports. However, a prevalent focus on medical topics exists, leaving other important aspects of the medical role under-discussed. Pedagogical methods could be employed more optimally, and harnessing the potential of missed opportunities should be encouraged.

How Would You Prevent Subsequent Strokes in This Patient? Grand Rounds Discussion From Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center.

Stroke is a major cause of morbidity, mortality, and disability. The American Heart Association/American Stroke Association recently published updated guidelines on secondary stroke prevention. In these rounds, 2 vascular neurologists use the case of Mr. S, a 75-year-old man with a history of 2 strokes, to discuss and debate questions in the guideline concerning intensity of atrial fibrillation monitoring in embolic stroke of undetermined source, diagnosis and management of moderate symptomatic carotid stenosis, and therapeutic strategies for recurrent embolic stroke of undetermined source in the setting of guideline-concordant therapy.

Gamification in medical education: identifying and prioritizing key elements through Delphi method.

BACKGROUND: Gamification has gained popularity in medical education, but key elements have not been formally identified. This study aimed to generate and prioritize a list of key elements of gamification in medical education. METHODS: This study utilized a two-stage approach, including the Delphi method and qualitative interview. Nineteen medical educators with expertise in gamification participated in the Delphi method stage. Experts who had more than three years of experience with gamification in medical education constituted the expert panel. The experts were then asked to rate the gamification elements using the Likert five-point scale through at least two consensus-seeking rounds. Consensus for key elements was predefined as ≥ 51% of respondents rating an element as 'important' or"very important." In the qualitative interview stage, 10 experts provided feedback on the application of these key gamification elements. RESULTS: Eighteen participants (11 males and 7 females) completed the entire Delphi process for this study. After two rounds of surveys, the consensus was reached on all elements. Thirteen elements scored more than 4 points (37%) and reached the criteria of key elements of gamification in medical education. The top five key elements were integration with instruction objectives, game rules, rapid feedback, fairness, and points/scoring. The thirteen key elements for successful gamification in medical education were further organized into two main categories: (1) gamification design principles and (2) game mechanisms. CONCLUSIONS: Integration with educational objectives, gamification in curriculum design and teaching methods, and balancing between the mechanisms and principles were the three key components for successful gamification. This study explored the gamification key elements, providing practical tips for medical educators in their efforts to gamify medical education. Future studies involving learners could be performed to examine the efficacy of these key elements in gamification.

"We're all truly pulling in the exact same direction": A qualitative study of attending and resident physician impressions of structured bedside interdisciplinary rounds.

BACKGROUND: Physicians often hold leadership roles in implementing interdisciplinary rounds (IDR) in clinical settings, thus understanding physician perspectives of bedside IDR is crucial. OBJECTIVE: To understand physicians' perspectives of structured bedside IDR. DESIGN: Qualitative descriptive study. SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: Medical and transitional year resident and hospitalist physicians participating in structured bedside IDR in a community teaching hospital affiliated with a large academic center. METHODS: We conducted semi-structured interviews and focus groups with study participants about their experiences with participating in structured bedside IDR between July 2017 and April 2018. All interviews were recorded and professionally transcribed. We used thematic analysis to identify key themes. RESULTS: We interviewed 41 resident physicians and 10 hospitalist physicians and discovered five key themes that highlight physician impressions of bedside IDR. Bedside IDR decreased unnecessary care, screened for risks/errors, created a shared mental model of care, and increased physician empathy for the patient and the interprofessional care team. Physicians felt patients valued the streamlined communication they experienced but questioned the intrusiveness of large healthcare teams. Challenges to bedside IDR included the meaningful engagement of key stakeholders and, particularly for resident physicians, the difficultly of managing unstandardized communication in a standardized time-sensitive setting. CONCLUSIONS: Structured bedside IDR have the capacity to improve patient care, interprofessional teamwork, and physician empathy for patients and the interprofessional team. However, sustained leadership support and clearly defined rounds goals and objectives are necessary ingredients to maximize the benefits and address the challenges of bedside IDR.

Implementing a Family-Centered Rounds Intervention Using Novel Mentor-Trios.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Patient and Family Centered I-PASS (PFC I-PASS) emphasizes family and nurse engagement, health literacy, and structured communication on family-centered rounds organized around the I-PASS framework (Illness severity-Patient summary-Action items-Situational awareness-Synthesis by receiver). We assessed adherence, safety, and experience after implementing PFC I-PASS using a novel "Mentor-Trio" implementation approach with multidisciplinary parent-nurse-physician teams coaching sites. METHODS: Hybrid Type II effectiveness-implementation study from 2/29/19-3/13/22 with ≥3 months of baseline and 12 months of postimplementation data collection/site across 21 US community and tertiary pediatric teaching hospitals. We conducted rounds observations and surveyed nurses, physicians, and Arabic/Chinese/English/Spanish-speaking patients/parents. RESULTS: We conducted 4557 rounds observations and received 2285 patient/family, 1240 resident, 819 nurse, and 378 attending surveys. Adherence to all I-PASS components, bedside rounding, written rounds summaries, family and nurse engagement, and plain language improved post-implementation (13.0%-60.8% absolute increase by item), all P < .05. Except for written summary, improvements sustained 12 months post-implementation. Resident-reported harms/1000-resident-days were unchanged overall but decreased in larger hospitals (116.9 to 86.3 to 72.3 pre versus early- versus late-implementation, P = .006), hospitals with greater nurse engagement on rounds (110.6 to 73.3 to 65.3, P < .001), and greater adherence to I-PASS structure (95.3 to 73.6 to 72.3, P < .05). Twelve of 12 measures of staff safety climate improved (eg, "excellent"/"very good" safety grade improved from 80.4% to 86.3% to 88.0%), all P < .05. Patient/family experience and teaching were unchanged. CONCLUSIONS: Hospitals successfully used Mentor-Trios to implement PFC I-PASS. Family/nurse engagement, safety climate, and harms improved in larger hospitals and hospitals with better nurse engagement and intervention adherence. Patient/family experience and teaching were not affected.

Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic on Medical Grand Rounds Attendance: Comparison of In-Person and Remote Conferences.

BACKGROUND: Many academic medical centers transitioned from in-person to remote conferences due to the COVID-19 pandemic, but the impact on faculty attendance is unknown. OBJECTIVE: This study aims to evaluate changes in attendance at medical grand rounds (MGR) following the transition from an in-person to remote format and as a function of the COVID-19 census at Vanderbilt Medical Center. METHODS: We obtained the faculty attendee characteristics from Department of Medicine records. Attendance was recorded using a SMS text message-based system. The daily COVID-19 census was recorded independently by hospital administration. The main attendance metric was the proportion of eligible faculty that attended each MGR. Comparisons were made for the entire cohort and for individual faculty. RESULTS: The observation period was from March 2019 to June 2021 and included 101 MGR conferences with more than 600 eligible faculty. Overall attendance was unchanged during the in-person and remote formats (12,536/25,808, 48.6% vs 16,727/32,680, 51.2%; P=.44) and did not change significantly during a surge in the COVID-19 census. Individual faculty members attendance rates varied widely. Absolute differences between formats were less than -20% or greater than 20% for one-third (160/476, 33.6%) of faculty. Pulmonary or critical care faculty attendance increased during the remote format compared to in person (1450/2616, 55.4% vs 1004/2045, 49.1%; P<.001). A cloud-based digital archive of MGR lectures was accessed by <1% of faculty per conference. CONCLUSIONS: Overall faculty attendance at MGR did not change following the transition to a remote format, regardless of the COVID-19 census, but individual attendance habits fluctuated in a bidirectional manner. Incentivizing the use of a digital archive may represent an opportunity to increase faculty consumption of MGR.

Engaging resident physicians in the design, implementation, and assessment of bedside interdisciplinary rounds.

Bedside interdisciplinary rounds (IDR) improve teamwork, communication, and collaborative culture in inpatient settings. Implementation of bedside IDR in academic settings depends on engagement from resident physicians; however, little is known about their knowledge and preferences related to bedside IDR. The goal of this program was to identify medical resident perceptions about bedside IDR and to engage resident physicians in the design, implementation, and assessment of bedside IDR in an academic setting. This is a pre-post mixed methods survey assessing resident physicians' perceptions surrounding a stakeholder-informed bedside IDR quality improvement project. Resident physicians in the University of Colorado Internal Medicine Residency Program (n = 77 pre-implementation survey responses from 179 eligible participants - response rate 43%) were recruited via e-mail to participate in surveys assessing perceptions surrounding the inclusion of interprofessional team members, timing, and preferred structure of bedside IDR. A bedside IDR structure was created based on input from resident and attending physicians, patients, nurses, care coordinators, pharmacists, social workers, and rehabilitation specialists. This rounding structure was implemented on acute care wards in June 2019 at a large academic regional VA hospital in Aurora, CO. Resident physicians were surveyed post implementation (n = 58 post-implementation responses from 141 eligible participants - response rate 41%) about interprofessional input, timing, and satisfaction with bedside IDR. The pre-implementation survey revealed several important resident needs during bedside IDR. Post-implementation survey results revealed high overall satisfaction with bedside IDR among residents, improved perceived efficiency of rounds, preserved quality of education, and value added by interprofessional input. Results also suggested areas for future improvement including timeliness of rounds and enhanced systems-based teaching. This project successfully engaged residents as stakeholders in system-level interprofessional change by incorporating their values and preferences into a bedside IDR framework.