Dissemination of an innovative mastery learning curriculum grounded in implementation science principles: a case study.

Dissemination of a medical education innovation, such as mastery learning, from a setting where it has been used successfully to a new and different medical education environment is not easy. This article describes the uneven yet successful dissemination of a simulation-based mastery learning (SBML) curriculum on central venous catheter (CVC) insertion for internal medicine and emergency medicine residents across medical education settings. The dissemination program was grounded in implementation science principles. The article begins by describing implementation science which addresses the mechanisms of medical education and health care delivery. The authors then present a mastery learning case study in two phases: (1) the development, implementation, and evaluation of the SBML CVC curriculum at a tertiary care academic medical center; and (2) the dissemination of the SBML CVC curriculum to an academic community hospital setting. Contextual information about the drivers and barriers that affected the SBML CVC curriculum dissemination is presented. This work demonstrates that dissemination of mastery learning curricula, like all other medical education innovations, will fail without active educational leadership, personal contacts, dedication, hard work, rigorous measurement, and attention to implementation science principles. The article concludes by presenting a set of lessons learned about disseminating an SBML CVC curriculum across different medical education settings.

Hospitalist-orthopedic co-management of high-risk patients undergoing lower extremity reconstruction surgery.

The introduction of the hospitalist co-management model represents an opportunity to improve care by changing the system as it applies to a small group of patients. Eighty-six consecutive patients with multiple comorbidities were selectively enrolled in an academic medical center hospitalist-orthopedic surgery co-management patient care program. Patients were stratified by all patient refined diagnosis-related groups, severity of illness, and risk of mortality. Hospital length of stay, cost of care, in-hospital mortality, complications, and intensive care unit admissions were compared with a retrospectively constructed control group of 54 patients undergoing similar surgery during the period immediately preceding initiation of the program. The University Health System Consortium observed-to-expected ratio for hospital length of stay was 0.693 compared to 0.862 for the control group. The severity of illness and risk of mortality scores represented a relatively higher risk stratification in the study group. While the overall observed-to-expected cost of care remained virtually unchanged, the positive impact of the study model revealed an increased positive effect on the more severely affected severity of illness and risk of mortality patients. The results of this study suggest that a proactive, cooperative, co-management model for the perioperative management of high-risk patients undergoing complex surgery can improve the quality and efficiency metrics associated with the delivery of service to patients.