Designing and Building a Portfolio of Individual Support Resources for Physicians.

As health care organizations in the United States move toward recovery from the COVID-19 pandemic, physicians and clinical faculty are experiencing occupational burnout and various manifestations of distress. To mitigate these challenges, health care organizations must optimize the work environment and provide support for individual clinicians using a variety of approaches, including mentoring, group-based peer support, individual peer support, coaching, and psychotherapy. While often conflated, each of these approaches offers distinct benefits. Mentoring is a longitudinal 1-on-1 relationship, typically focused on career development, usually with an experienced professional guiding a junior professional. Group-based peer support involves regular, longitudinal meetings of health professionals to discuss meaningful topics, provide mutual support to one another, and foster community. Individual peer support involves training peers to provide timely 1-on-1 support for a distressed colleague dealing with adverse clinical events or other professional challenges. Coaching involves a certified professional helping an individual identify their values and priorities and consider changes that would allow them to adhere to these more fully, and providing longitudinal support that fosters accountability for action. Individual psychotherapy is a longitudinal, short- or long-term professional relationship during which specific therapeutic interventions are delivered by a licensed mental health professional. When distress is severe, this is the best approach. Although some overlap exists, these approaches are distinct and complementary. Individuals may use different methods at different career stages and for different challenges. Organizations seeking to address a specific need should consider which approach is most suitable. Over time, a portfolio of offerings is typically needed to holistically address the diverse needs of clinicians. A stepped care model using a population health approach may be a cost-effective way to promote mental health and prevent occupational distress and general psychiatric symptoms.

Looking Under the Streetlight? A Framework for Differentiating Performance Measures by Level of Care in a Value-Based Payment Environment.

The majority of quality measures used to assess providers and hospitals are based on easily obtained data, focused on a few dimensions of quality, and developed mainly for primary/community care and population health. While this approach supports efforts focused on addressing the triple aim of health care, many current quality report cards and assessments do not reflect the breadth or complexity of many referral center practices.In this article, the authors highlight the differences between population health efforts and referral care and address issues related to value measurement and performance assessment. They discuss why measures may need to differ across the three levels of care (primary/community care, secondary care, complex care) and illustrate the need for further risk adjustment to eliminate referral bias.With continued movement toward value-based purchasing, performance measures and reimbursement schemes need to reflect the increased level of intensity required to provide complex care. The authors propose a framework to operationalize value measurement and payment for specialty care, and they make specific recommendations to improve performance measurement for complex patients. Implementing such a framework to differentiate performance measures by level of care involves coordinated efforts to change both policy and operational platforms. An essential component of this framework is a new model that defines the characteristics of patients who require complex care and standardizes metrics that incorporate those definitions.

Regional Emphysema Score Predicting Overall Survival, Quality of Life, and Pulmonary Function Recovery in Early-Stage Lung Cancer Patients.

INTRODUCTION: Pulmonary emphysema is a frequent comorbidity in lung cancer, but its role in tumor prognosis remains obscure. Our aim was to evaluate the impact of the regional emphysema score (RES) on a patient's overall survival, quality of life (QOL), and recovery of pulmonary function in stage I to II lung cancer. METHODS: Between 1997 and 2009, a total of 1073 patients were identified and divided into two surgical groups-cancer in the emphysematous (group 1 [n = 565]) and nonemphysematous (group 2 [n = 435]) regions-and one nonsurgical group (group 3 [n = 73]). RES was derived from the emphysematous region and categorized as mild (≤5%), moderate (6%-24%), or severe (25%-60%). RESULTS: In group 1, patients with a moderate or severe RES experienced slight decreases in postoperative forced expiratory volume in 1 second, but increases in the ratio of forced expiratory volume in 1 second to forced vital capacity compared with those with a mild RES (p < 0.01); however, this correlation was not observed in group 2. Posttreatment QOL was lower in patients with higher RESs in all groups, mainly owing to dyspnea (p < 0.05). Cox regression analysis revealed that patients with a higher RES had significantly poorer survival in both surgical groups, with adjusted hazard ratios of 1.41 and 1.43 for a moderate RES and 1.63 and 2.04 for a severe RES, respectively; however, this association was insignificant in the nonsurgical group (adjusted hazard ratio of 0.99 for a moderate or severe RES). CONCLUSIONS: In surgically treated patients with cancer in the emphysematous region, RES is associated with postoperative changes in lung function. RES is also predictive of posttreatment QOL related to dyspnea in early-stage lung cancer. In both surgical groups, RES is an independent predictor of survival.

Longitudinal Study Evaluating the Association Between Physician Burnout and Changes in Professional Work Effort.

OBJECTIVE: To longitudinally evaluate the relationship between burnout and professional satisfaction with changes in physicians' professional effort. PARTICIPANTS AND METHODS: Administrative/payroll records were used to longitudinally evaluate the professional work effort of faculty physicians working for Mayo Clinic from October 1, 2008, to October 1, 2014. Professional effort was measured in full-time equivalent (FTE) units. Physicians were longitudinally surveyed in October 2011 and October 2013 with standardized tools to assess burnout and satisfaction. RESULTS: Between 2008 and 2014, the proportion of physicians working less than full-time at our organization increased from 13.5% to 16.0% (P=.05). Of the 2663 physicians surveyed in 2011 and 2776 physicians surveyed in 2013, 1856 (69.7%) and 2132 (76.9%), respectively, returned surveys. Burnout and satisfaction scores in 2011 correlated with actual reductions in FTE over the following 24 months as independently measured by administrative/payroll records. After controlling for age, sex, site, and specialty, each 1-point increase in the 7-point emotional exhaustion scale was associated with a greater likelihood of reducing FTE (odds ratio [OR], 1.43; 95% CI, 1.23-1.67; P<.001) over the following 24 months, and each 1-point decrease in the 5-point satisfaction score was associated with greater likelihood of reducing FTE (OR, 1.34; 95% CI, 1.03-1.74; P=.03). On longitudinal analysis at the individual physician level, each 1-point increase in emotional exhaustion (OR, 1.28; 95% CI, 1.05-1.55; P=.01) or 1-point decrease in satisfaction (OR, 1.67; 95% CI, 1.19-2.35; P=.003) between 2011 and 2013 was associated with a greater likelihood of reducing FTE over the following 12 months. CONCLUSION: Among physicians in a large health care organization, burnout and declining satisfaction were strongly associated with actual reductions in professional work effort over the following 24 months.

Impact of organizational leadership on physician burnout and satisfaction.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the impact of organizational leadership on the professional satisfaction and burnout of individual physicians working for a large health care organization. PARTICIPANTS AND METHODS: We surveyed physicians and scientists working for a large health care organization in October 2013. Validated tools were used to assess burnout. Physicians also rated the leadership qualities of their immediate supervisor in 12 specific dimensions on a 5-point Likert scale. All supervisors were themselves physicians/scientists. A composite leadership score was calculated by summing scores for the 12 individual items (range, 12-60; higher scores indicate more effective leadership). RESULTS: Of the 3896 physicians surveyed, 2813 (72.2%) responded. Supervisor scores in each of the 12 leadership dimensions and composite leadership score strongly correlated with the burnout and satisfaction scores of individual physicians (all P<.001). On multivariate analysis adjusting for age, sex, duration of employment at Mayo Clinic, and specialty, each 1-point increase in composite leadership score was associated with a 3.3% decrease in the likelihood of burnout (P<.001) and a 9.0% increase in the likelihood of satisfaction (P<.001) of the physicians supervised. The mean composite leadership rating of each division/department chair (n=128) also correlated with the prevalence of burnout (correlation=-0.330; r(2)=0.11; P<.001) and satisfaction (correlation=0.684; r(2)=0.47; P<.001) at the division/department level. CONCLUSION: The leadership qualities of physician supervisors appear to impact the well-being and satisfaction of individual physicians working in health care organizations. These findings have important implications for the selection and training of physician leaders and provide new insights into organizational factors that affect physician well-being.

Trends in computed tomography utilization rates: a longitudinal practice-based study.

OBJECTIVES: Computed tomography (CT) use has increased dramatically over the past 2 decades, leading to increased radiation exposure at the population level. We assessed trends in CT use in a primary care (PC) population from 2000 to 2010. METHODS: Trends in CT use from 2000 to 2010 were assessed in an integrated, multi-specialty group practice. Administrative data were used to identify patients associated with a specific primary care provider and all CT imaging procedures. Utilization rates per 1000 patients and CT rates by type and medical specialty were calculated. RESULTS: Of 179,032 PC patients, 55,683 (31%) underwent CT. Mean age (SD) was 31.0 (23.6) years; 53% were female patients. In 2000, 178.5 CT scans per 1000 PC patients were performed, increasing to 195.9 in 2010 (10% absolute increase, P = 0.01). Although utilization rates across the 10-year period remained stable, emergency department (ED) CT examinations rose from 41.1 per 1000 in 2000 to 74.4 per 1000 in 2010 (81% absolute increase, P < 0.01). CT abdomen accounted for more than 50% of all CTs performed, followed by CT other (19%; included scans of the spine, extremities, neck and sinuses), CT chest (16%), and CT head (14%). Top diagnostic CT categories among those undergoing CT were abdominal pain, lower respiratory disease, and headache. CONCLUSIONS: Although utilization rates across the 10-year period remained stable, CT use in the ED substantially increased. CT abdomen and CT chest were the two most common studies performed and are potential targets for interventions to improve the appropriateness of CT use.

The business case for health-care quality improvement.

The business case for health-care quality improvement is presented. We contend that investment in process improvement is aligned with patients' interests, the organization's reputation, and the engagement of their workforce. Four groups benefit directly from quality improvement: patients, providers, insurers, and employers. There is ample opportunity, even in today's predominantly pay-for-volume (that is, evolving toward value-based purchasing) insurance system, for providers to deliver care that is in the best interest of the patient while improving their financial performance.

Improving hypertension control in diabetes: a multisite quality improvement project that applies a 3-step care bundle to a chronic disease care model for diabetes with hypertension.

Hypertension in diabetes patients leads to significant morbidity and mortality. Nonetheless blood pressure (BP) control in patients with diabetes remains disappointing. The authors applied a care bundle to decrease the proportion of patients with BP exceeding 130/80. Teams from 4 sites in 3 states (Minnesota, Florida, and Arizona) developed a bundle consisting of a standardized BP process, an order set, and a patient goal. Baseline data were collected in the first 12 weeks, followed by 6 weeks of implementing changes. The final 16 weeks represented the intervention. There was a statistically significant decrease in the proportion of patients with uncontrolled BP in 3 of 4 sites (P < .0001 in all 3 sites demonstrating improvement). There was a statistically significant improvement in the satisfaction survey (P = .0011). Implementing an evidence-based care bundle for hypertension in diabetes mellitus can improve BP outcomes.

More quality measures versus measuring what matters: a call for balance and parsimony.

External groups requiring measures now include public and private payers, regulators, accreditors and others that certify performance levels for consumers, patients and payers. Although benefits have accrued from the growth in quality measurement, the recent explosion in the number of measures threatens to shift resources from improving quality to cover a plethora of quality-performance metrics that may have a limited impact on the things that patients and payers want and need (ie, better outcomes, better care, and lower per capita costs). Here we propose a policy that quality measurement should be: balanced to meet the need of end users to judge quality and cost performance and the need of providers to continuously improve the quality, outcomes and costs of their services; and parsimonious to measure quality, outcomes and costs with appropriate metrics that are selected based on end-user needs.

Quality improvement in interventional radiology: an opportunity to demonstrate value and improve patient-centered care.

The changing healthcare environment offers an opportunity for interventional radiology (IR) to showcase its value-specifically, to demonstrate that IR often offers the better, safer, faster, and less expensive treatment option for various clinical scenarios. The best way to demonstrate the value of IR now and to maintain this value in the future is through implementation of patient-centered care built on standardized care delivery, continuous quality improvement, and effective team dynamics.