User login
FDA invites sample submission for FDA-ARGOS database
which seeks to support research and regulatory decisions regarding DNA testing for pathogens with quality-controlled and curated genomic sequence data. Such testing and devices could be used as medical countermeasures against biothreats such as Ebola and Zika.
Infectious disease next-generation sequencing could use DNA analysis to help identify pathogens – from viruses to parasites – faster and more efficiently by, in theory, accomplishing with one test what was only possible before with many, according to the FDA. In order to not only further development of such tests and devices but also aid regulatory and scientific review of them, the FDA has collaborated with the Department of Defense, the National Center for Biotechnology Information, and Institute for Genome Sciences at the University of Maryland, Baltimore, to create FDA-ARGOS.
However, the FDA and its collaborators need samples of pathogens to continue developing the database, so they’ve invited health care professionals to submit samples for that purpose. More information, including preferred organism list and submission guidelines, can be found on the FDA-ARGOS website.
which seeks to support research and regulatory decisions regarding DNA testing for pathogens with quality-controlled and curated genomic sequence data. Such testing and devices could be used as medical countermeasures against biothreats such as Ebola and Zika.
Infectious disease next-generation sequencing could use DNA analysis to help identify pathogens – from viruses to parasites – faster and more efficiently by, in theory, accomplishing with one test what was only possible before with many, according to the FDA. In order to not only further development of such tests and devices but also aid regulatory and scientific review of them, the FDA has collaborated with the Department of Defense, the National Center for Biotechnology Information, and Institute for Genome Sciences at the University of Maryland, Baltimore, to create FDA-ARGOS.
However, the FDA and its collaborators need samples of pathogens to continue developing the database, so they’ve invited health care professionals to submit samples for that purpose. More information, including preferred organism list and submission guidelines, can be found on the FDA-ARGOS website.
which seeks to support research and regulatory decisions regarding DNA testing for pathogens with quality-controlled and curated genomic sequence data. Such testing and devices could be used as medical countermeasures against biothreats such as Ebola and Zika.
Infectious disease next-generation sequencing could use DNA analysis to help identify pathogens – from viruses to parasites – faster and more efficiently by, in theory, accomplishing with one test what was only possible before with many, according to the FDA. In order to not only further development of such tests and devices but also aid regulatory and scientific review of them, the FDA has collaborated with the Department of Defense, the National Center for Biotechnology Information, and Institute for Genome Sciences at the University of Maryland, Baltimore, to create FDA-ARGOS.
However, the FDA and its collaborators need samples of pathogens to continue developing the database, so they’ve invited health care professionals to submit samples for that purpose. More information, including preferred organism list and submission guidelines, can be found on the FDA-ARGOS website.
Reducing adverse drug reactions
Easing the inpatient/outpatient transition
Adverse drug reactions are a problem hospitalists encounter often. An estimated 9% of hospital admissions in older adults are the result of adverse drug reactions, and up to one in five adults experience an adverse drug reaction during hospitalization.
“Many interventions have been tried to solve this problem, and certain of them have worked, but to date we don’t have any great solutions that meaningfully impact the rate of these events in a way that’s feasible in most health care environments, so any efforts to reduce the burden of these problems in older adults could be hugely beneficial,” said Michael Steinman, MD, author of an editorial highlighting a new approach.
His editorial in BMJ Quality & Safety cites research on the Pharm2Pharm program, implemented in six Hawaiian hospitals, in which hospital-based pharmacists identified inpatients at high risk of medication misadventures with criteria such as use of multiple medications, presence of high-risk medications such as warfarin or glucose-lowering drugs, and a history of previous acute care use resulting from medication-related problems. The hospital pharmacist would then meet with the patient to reconcile medications and facilitate a coordinated hand-off to a community pharmacist, who would meet with the patient after discharge.
In addition to a 36% reduction in the rate of medication-related hospitalizations, the intervention generated an estimated savings of $6.6 million per year in avoided hospitalizations.
There are two major takeaways, said Dr. Steinman, who is based in the division of geriatrics at the University of California, San Francisco: It’s critical to focus on transitions and coordination between inpatient and outpatient care to address medication-related problems, and pharmacists can be extremely helpful in that.
“Decisions about drug therapy in the hospital may seem reasonable in the short term but often won’t stick in the long term unless there is a coordinated care that can help ensure appropriate follow-through once patients return home,” Dr. Steinman said. “The study that the editorial references is a systems intervention that hospitalists can advocate for in their own institutions, but in the immediate day-to-day, trying to ensure solid coordination of medication management from the inpatient to outpatient setting is likely to be very helpful for their patients.”
The long-term outcomes of hospitalized patients are largely influenced by getting them set up with appropriate community resources and supports once they leave the hospital, he added, and the hospital can play a critical role in putting these pieces into place.
Reference
1. Steinman MA. Reducing hospital admissions for adverse drug events through coordinated pharmacist care: learning from Hawai’i without a field trip. BMJ Qual Saf. Epub 2018 Nov 24. doi: 10.1136/bmjqs-2018-008815. Accessed Dec. 11, 2018.
Easing the inpatient/outpatient transition
Easing the inpatient/outpatient transition
Adverse drug reactions are a problem hospitalists encounter often. An estimated 9% of hospital admissions in older adults are the result of adverse drug reactions, and up to one in five adults experience an adverse drug reaction during hospitalization.
“Many interventions have been tried to solve this problem, and certain of them have worked, but to date we don’t have any great solutions that meaningfully impact the rate of these events in a way that’s feasible in most health care environments, so any efforts to reduce the burden of these problems in older adults could be hugely beneficial,” said Michael Steinman, MD, author of an editorial highlighting a new approach.
His editorial in BMJ Quality & Safety cites research on the Pharm2Pharm program, implemented in six Hawaiian hospitals, in which hospital-based pharmacists identified inpatients at high risk of medication misadventures with criteria such as use of multiple medications, presence of high-risk medications such as warfarin or glucose-lowering drugs, and a history of previous acute care use resulting from medication-related problems. The hospital pharmacist would then meet with the patient to reconcile medications and facilitate a coordinated hand-off to a community pharmacist, who would meet with the patient after discharge.
In addition to a 36% reduction in the rate of medication-related hospitalizations, the intervention generated an estimated savings of $6.6 million per year in avoided hospitalizations.
There are two major takeaways, said Dr. Steinman, who is based in the division of geriatrics at the University of California, San Francisco: It’s critical to focus on transitions and coordination between inpatient and outpatient care to address medication-related problems, and pharmacists can be extremely helpful in that.
“Decisions about drug therapy in the hospital may seem reasonable in the short term but often won’t stick in the long term unless there is a coordinated care that can help ensure appropriate follow-through once patients return home,” Dr. Steinman said. “The study that the editorial references is a systems intervention that hospitalists can advocate for in their own institutions, but in the immediate day-to-day, trying to ensure solid coordination of medication management from the inpatient to outpatient setting is likely to be very helpful for their patients.”
The long-term outcomes of hospitalized patients are largely influenced by getting them set up with appropriate community resources and supports once they leave the hospital, he added, and the hospital can play a critical role in putting these pieces into place.
Reference
1. Steinman MA. Reducing hospital admissions for adverse drug events through coordinated pharmacist care: learning from Hawai’i without a field trip. BMJ Qual Saf. Epub 2018 Nov 24. doi: 10.1136/bmjqs-2018-008815. Accessed Dec. 11, 2018.
Adverse drug reactions are a problem hospitalists encounter often. An estimated 9% of hospital admissions in older adults are the result of adverse drug reactions, and up to one in five adults experience an adverse drug reaction during hospitalization.
“Many interventions have been tried to solve this problem, and certain of them have worked, but to date we don’t have any great solutions that meaningfully impact the rate of these events in a way that’s feasible in most health care environments, so any efforts to reduce the burden of these problems in older adults could be hugely beneficial,” said Michael Steinman, MD, author of an editorial highlighting a new approach.
His editorial in BMJ Quality & Safety cites research on the Pharm2Pharm program, implemented in six Hawaiian hospitals, in which hospital-based pharmacists identified inpatients at high risk of medication misadventures with criteria such as use of multiple medications, presence of high-risk medications such as warfarin or glucose-lowering drugs, and a history of previous acute care use resulting from medication-related problems. The hospital pharmacist would then meet with the patient to reconcile medications and facilitate a coordinated hand-off to a community pharmacist, who would meet with the patient after discharge.
In addition to a 36% reduction in the rate of medication-related hospitalizations, the intervention generated an estimated savings of $6.6 million per year in avoided hospitalizations.
There are two major takeaways, said Dr. Steinman, who is based in the division of geriatrics at the University of California, San Francisco: It’s critical to focus on transitions and coordination between inpatient and outpatient care to address medication-related problems, and pharmacists can be extremely helpful in that.
“Decisions about drug therapy in the hospital may seem reasonable in the short term but often won’t stick in the long term unless there is a coordinated care that can help ensure appropriate follow-through once patients return home,” Dr. Steinman said. “The study that the editorial references is a systems intervention that hospitalists can advocate for in their own institutions, but in the immediate day-to-day, trying to ensure solid coordination of medication management from the inpatient to outpatient setting is likely to be very helpful for their patients.”
The long-term outcomes of hospitalized patients are largely influenced by getting them set up with appropriate community resources and supports once they leave the hospital, he added, and the hospital can play a critical role in putting these pieces into place.
Reference
1. Steinman MA. Reducing hospital admissions for adverse drug events through coordinated pharmacist care: learning from Hawai’i without a field trip. BMJ Qual Saf. Epub 2018 Nov 24. doi: 10.1136/bmjqs-2018-008815. Accessed Dec. 11, 2018.
Reducing pediatric RSV burden is top priority
LJUBLJANA, SLOVENIA – Prevention or early effective treatment of respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) infection in infants and small children holds the promise of sharply reduced burdens of both acute otitis media (AOM) and pneumonia, Terho Heikkinen, MD, PhD, predicted in the Bill Marshall Award Lecture presented at the annual meeting of the European Society for Paediatric Infectious Diseases (ESPID).
RSV is by far the hottest virus in the world,” declared Dr. Heikkinen, professor of pediatrics at the University of Turku (Finland).
“A lot of progress is being made with respect to RSV. This increased understanding holds great promise for new interventions,” he explained. “Lots of different types of vaccines are being developed, monoclonal antibodies, antivirals. So
Today influenza is the only respiratory viral infection that’s preventable via vaccine or effectively treatable using antiviral drugs. That situation has to change, as Dr. Heikkinen demonstrated early in his career; RSV is the respiratory virus that’s most likely to invade the middle ear during AOM. It’s much more ototropic than influenza, parainfluenza, enteroviruses, or adenoviruses (N Engl J Med. 1999 Jan 28;340[4]:260-4), he noted.
The Bill Marshall Award and Lecture, ESPID’s most prestigious award, is given annually to an individual recognized as having significantly advanced the field of pediatric infectious diseases. Dr. Heikkinen was singled out for his decades of work establishing that viruses, including RSV, play a key role in AOM, which had traditionally been regarded as a bacterial infection. He and his coinvestigators demonstrated that in about two-thirds of cases, AOM is actually caused by a combination of bacteria and viruses, which explains why patients’ clinical response to antibiotic therapy for AOM often is poor. They also described the chain of events whereby viral infection of the upper airway epithelium triggers an inflammatory response in the nasopharynx, with resultant Eustachian tube dysfunction and negative middle ear pressure, which in turn encourages microbial invasion of the middle ear. Moreover, they showed that the peak incidence of AOM isn’t on day 1 after onset of upper respiratory infection symptoms, but on day 3 or 4.
“What this tells us is that, once a child has a viral respiratory infection, there is a certain window of opportunity to try to prevent the development of the complication if we have the right tools in place,” Dr. Heikkinen said.
He and his colleagues put this lesson to good use nearly a decade ago in a randomized, double-blind trial in which they showed that giving oseltamivir (Tamiflu) within 12 hours after onset of influenza symptoms in children aged 1-3 years reduced the subsequent incidence of AOM by 85%, compared with placebo (Clin Infect Dis. 2010 Oct 15;51[8]:887-94).
These observations paved the way for the ongoing intensive research effort exploring ways of preventing AOM through interventions at two different levels: by developing viral vaccines to prevent a healthy child from contracting the viral upper respiratory infection that precedes AOM and by coming up with antiviral drugs or bacterial vaccines to prevent a upper respiratory infection from evolving into AOM.
The same applies to pneumonia. Other investigators showed years ago that both respiratory viruses and bacteria were present in two-thirds of sputum samples obtained from children with community-acquired pneumonia (Clin Microbiol Infect. 2012 Mar;18[3]:300-7).
RSV is the top cause of hospitalization for acute respiratory infection – pneumonia and bronchiolitis – in infants. Worldwide, it’s estimated that RSV accounts for more than 33 million episodes of pneumonia annually, with 3.2 million hospitalizations and 118,200 deaths.
Beyond the hospital, however, Dr. Heikkinen and colleagues conducted a prospective cohort study in Turku over the course of two consecutive respiratory infection seasons in which they captured the huge burden of RSV as an outpatient illness. It hit hardest in children younger than 3 years, in whom the average annual incidence of RSV infection was 275 cases per 1,000 children. In that youngest age population, RSV upper respiratory infection was followed by AOM 58% of the time, with antibiotics prescribed in 66% of the cases of this complication of RSV illness. The mean duration of RSV illness was greatest in this young age group, at 13 days, and it was associated with parental absenteeism from work at a rate of 136 days per 100 children with RSV illness.
Moreover, while AOM occurred less frequently in children aged 3-6 years, 46% of the cases were attributed to a preceding RSV infection, which led to antibiotic treatment nearly half of the time (J Infect Dis. 2017 Jan 1;215[1]:17-23). This documentation has spurred further efforts to develop RSV vaccines and antivirals.
He reported serving as a consultant to a half-dozen pharmaceutical companies, as well as having received research funding from Janssen, GlaxoSmithKline, and Novavax.
LJUBLJANA, SLOVENIA – Prevention or early effective treatment of respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) infection in infants and small children holds the promise of sharply reduced burdens of both acute otitis media (AOM) and pneumonia, Terho Heikkinen, MD, PhD, predicted in the Bill Marshall Award Lecture presented at the annual meeting of the European Society for Paediatric Infectious Diseases (ESPID).
RSV is by far the hottest virus in the world,” declared Dr. Heikkinen, professor of pediatrics at the University of Turku (Finland).
“A lot of progress is being made with respect to RSV. This increased understanding holds great promise for new interventions,” he explained. “Lots of different types of vaccines are being developed, monoclonal antibodies, antivirals. So
Today influenza is the only respiratory viral infection that’s preventable via vaccine or effectively treatable using antiviral drugs. That situation has to change, as Dr. Heikkinen demonstrated early in his career; RSV is the respiratory virus that’s most likely to invade the middle ear during AOM. It’s much more ototropic than influenza, parainfluenza, enteroviruses, or adenoviruses (N Engl J Med. 1999 Jan 28;340[4]:260-4), he noted.
The Bill Marshall Award and Lecture, ESPID’s most prestigious award, is given annually to an individual recognized as having significantly advanced the field of pediatric infectious diseases. Dr. Heikkinen was singled out for his decades of work establishing that viruses, including RSV, play a key role in AOM, which had traditionally been regarded as a bacterial infection. He and his coinvestigators demonstrated that in about two-thirds of cases, AOM is actually caused by a combination of bacteria and viruses, which explains why patients’ clinical response to antibiotic therapy for AOM often is poor. They also described the chain of events whereby viral infection of the upper airway epithelium triggers an inflammatory response in the nasopharynx, with resultant Eustachian tube dysfunction and negative middle ear pressure, which in turn encourages microbial invasion of the middle ear. Moreover, they showed that the peak incidence of AOM isn’t on day 1 after onset of upper respiratory infection symptoms, but on day 3 or 4.
“What this tells us is that, once a child has a viral respiratory infection, there is a certain window of opportunity to try to prevent the development of the complication if we have the right tools in place,” Dr. Heikkinen said.
He and his colleagues put this lesson to good use nearly a decade ago in a randomized, double-blind trial in which they showed that giving oseltamivir (Tamiflu) within 12 hours after onset of influenza symptoms in children aged 1-3 years reduced the subsequent incidence of AOM by 85%, compared with placebo (Clin Infect Dis. 2010 Oct 15;51[8]:887-94).
These observations paved the way for the ongoing intensive research effort exploring ways of preventing AOM through interventions at two different levels: by developing viral vaccines to prevent a healthy child from contracting the viral upper respiratory infection that precedes AOM and by coming up with antiviral drugs or bacterial vaccines to prevent a upper respiratory infection from evolving into AOM.
The same applies to pneumonia. Other investigators showed years ago that both respiratory viruses and bacteria were present in two-thirds of sputum samples obtained from children with community-acquired pneumonia (Clin Microbiol Infect. 2012 Mar;18[3]:300-7).
RSV is the top cause of hospitalization for acute respiratory infection – pneumonia and bronchiolitis – in infants. Worldwide, it’s estimated that RSV accounts for more than 33 million episodes of pneumonia annually, with 3.2 million hospitalizations and 118,200 deaths.
Beyond the hospital, however, Dr. Heikkinen and colleagues conducted a prospective cohort study in Turku over the course of two consecutive respiratory infection seasons in which they captured the huge burden of RSV as an outpatient illness. It hit hardest in children younger than 3 years, in whom the average annual incidence of RSV infection was 275 cases per 1,000 children. In that youngest age population, RSV upper respiratory infection was followed by AOM 58% of the time, with antibiotics prescribed in 66% of the cases of this complication of RSV illness. The mean duration of RSV illness was greatest in this young age group, at 13 days, and it was associated with parental absenteeism from work at a rate of 136 days per 100 children with RSV illness.
Moreover, while AOM occurred less frequently in children aged 3-6 years, 46% of the cases were attributed to a preceding RSV infection, which led to antibiotic treatment nearly half of the time (J Infect Dis. 2017 Jan 1;215[1]:17-23). This documentation has spurred further efforts to develop RSV vaccines and antivirals.
He reported serving as a consultant to a half-dozen pharmaceutical companies, as well as having received research funding from Janssen, GlaxoSmithKline, and Novavax.
LJUBLJANA, SLOVENIA – Prevention or early effective treatment of respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) infection in infants and small children holds the promise of sharply reduced burdens of both acute otitis media (AOM) and pneumonia, Terho Heikkinen, MD, PhD, predicted in the Bill Marshall Award Lecture presented at the annual meeting of the European Society for Paediatric Infectious Diseases (ESPID).
RSV is by far the hottest virus in the world,” declared Dr. Heikkinen, professor of pediatrics at the University of Turku (Finland).
“A lot of progress is being made with respect to RSV. This increased understanding holds great promise for new interventions,” he explained. “Lots of different types of vaccines are being developed, monoclonal antibodies, antivirals. So
Today influenza is the only respiratory viral infection that’s preventable via vaccine or effectively treatable using antiviral drugs. That situation has to change, as Dr. Heikkinen demonstrated early in his career; RSV is the respiratory virus that’s most likely to invade the middle ear during AOM. It’s much more ototropic than influenza, parainfluenza, enteroviruses, or adenoviruses (N Engl J Med. 1999 Jan 28;340[4]:260-4), he noted.
The Bill Marshall Award and Lecture, ESPID’s most prestigious award, is given annually to an individual recognized as having significantly advanced the field of pediatric infectious diseases. Dr. Heikkinen was singled out for his decades of work establishing that viruses, including RSV, play a key role in AOM, which had traditionally been regarded as a bacterial infection. He and his coinvestigators demonstrated that in about two-thirds of cases, AOM is actually caused by a combination of bacteria and viruses, which explains why patients’ clinical response to antibiotic therapy for AOM often is poor. They also described the chain of events whereby viral infection of the upper airway epithelium triggers an inflammatory response in the nasopharynx, with resultant Eustachian tube dysfunction and negative middle ear pressure, which in turn encourages microbial invasion of the middle ear. Moreover, they showed that the peak incidence of AOM isn’t on day 1 after onset of upper respiratory infection symptoms, but on day 3 or 4.
“What this tells us is that, once a child has a viral respiratory infection, there is a certain window of opportunity to try to prevent the development of the complication if we have the right tools in place,” Dr. Heikkinen said.
He and his colleagues put this lesson to good use nearly a decade ago in a randomized, double-blind trial in which they showed that giving oseltamivir (Tamiflu) within 12 hours after onset of influenza symptoms in children aged 1-3 years reduced the subsequent incidence of AOM by 85%, compared with placebo (Clin Infect Dis. 2010 Oct 15;51[8]:887-94).
These observations paved the way for the ongoing intensive research effort exploring ways of preventing AOM through interventions at two different levels: by developing viral vaccines to prevent a healthy child from contracting the viral upper respiratory infection that precedes AOM and by coming up with antiviral drugs or bacterial vaccines to prevent a upper respiratory infection from evolving into AOM.
The same applies to pneumonia. Other investigators showed years ago that both respiratory viruses and bacteria were present in two-thirds of sputum samples obtained from children with community-acquired pneumonia (Clin Microbiol Infect. 2012 Mar;18[3]:300-7).
RSV is the top cause of hospitalization for acute respiratory infection – pneumonia and bronchiolitis – in infants. Worldwide, it’s estimated that RSV accounts for more than 33 million episodes of pneumonia annually, with 3.2 million hospitalizations and 118,200 deaths.
Beyond the hospital, however, Dr. Heikkinen and colleagues conducted a prospective cohort study in Turku over the course of two consecutive respiratory infection seasons in which they captured the huge burden of RSV as an outpatient illness. It hit hardest in children younger than 3 years, in whom the average annual incidence of RSV infection was 275 cases per 1,000 children. In that youngest age population, RSV upper respiratory infection was followed by AOM 58% of the time, with antibiotics prescribed in 66% of the cases of this complication of RSV illness. The mean duration of RSV illness was greatest in this young age group, at 13 days, and it was associated with parental absenteeism from work at a rate of 136 days per 100 children with RSV illness.
Moreover, while AOM occurred less frequently in children aged 3-6 years, 46% of the cases were attributed to a preceding RSV infection, which led to antibiotic treatment nearly half of the time (J Infect Dis. 2017 Jan 1;215[1]:17-23). This documentation has spurred further efforts to develop RSV vaccines and antivirals.
He reported serving as a consultant to a half-dozen pharmaceutical companies, as well as having received research funding from Janssen, GlaxoSmithKline, and Novavax.
EXPERT ANALYSIS FROM ESPID 2019
Fewer antibiotics prescribed with PCR than conventional stool testing
SAN DIEGO – However, antibiotics were still prescribed for more than one in three patients tested by any method.
“A positive test by any modality did result in decreased utilization of endoscopy, radiology, and antibiotic prescribing, but this effect appeared to be much greater for the GI PCR assay,” said Jordan Axelrad, MD, speaking at the annual Digestive Disease Week.
“Overall, patients who received GI PCR were 12% less likely to undergo endoscopy, 7% less likely to undergo abdominal radiography, and 11% less likely to be prescribed any antibiotic,” compared with patients who were tested by conventional stool culture, said Dr. Axelrad, a gastroenterologist at New York University.
In a cross-sectional study, Dr. Axelrad and his coauthors looked at patients who underwent stool testing for the 26 months before (n = 5,986) and after (n = 9,402) March 2015, when Dr. Axelrad’s home institution switched from conventional stool culture to the GI PCR panel. For the earlier time period, the investigators included patients who received stool culture both with and without an ova and parasites exam, as well as those who underwent enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay viral testing for rotavirus and adenovirus.
Patient demographic data were included as study variables; additionally, the study tracked utilization of endoscopy, abdominal, or other radiology studies, and ED visits for 30 days after testing. They also included any antibiotic prescribing within the 14 days post testing.
Roughly one-third of patients were tested as outpatients, 1 in 10 in the ED, and the remainder as inpatients. Patient age was a mean 46.7 years for the culture group, and 45.5 years for the GI PCR group.
The multiplex PCR test used in the study tested for 12 gastrointestinal pathogenic bacteria, 4 parasites, and 5 viruses.
As expected, PCR testing yielded a higher positive test rate than conventional stool testing, even when EIA tests were included (29.2% vs. 4.1%). In the 2,746 patients with a positive GI PCR test, a total of 3,804 pathogens were identified. Adenovirus accounted for 39% of these positive results. Positive bacterial results were seen in about 65.0% of the positive subgroup, with Escherichia coli subtypes seen in 51.7% of the positive tests.
Overall, positive results for viruses, bacteria, and multiple pathogens were more likely with GI PCR testing, compared with conventional testing (P = .001 for all). Parasites accounted for only 8.2% of the positive PCR test results, but this was significantly more than the 3.7% seen with conventional testing (P = .011).
At the 14-day mark post testing, “Patients who underwent a GI panel were less likely to be prescribed any antibiotic. But overall, antibiotics were fairly common in both groups,” said Dr. Axelrad, noting that 41% of patients who underwent stool culture received an antibiotic by 14 days, compared with 36% for patients who underwent a GI PCR panel (P = .001).
By the end of 30 days, most patients in each group had not received an endoscopic procedure, with significantly more procedure-free patients in the PCR group (91.6% vs. 90.4%; P = .008).
Against a backdrop of slightly higher overall radiology utilization in the PCR group – potentially attributable to practice trends over time – abdominal radiology was less likely for these patients than for the culture group (11.4% vs. 12.8%; P = .011).
The 30-day ED visit rate was low and similar between groups (11.4% for PCR vs. 12.8% for culture; P = .116).
The much quicker turnaround for the GI PCR panel didn’t translate into a shorter length of stay, though: Inpatient length of stay was a median 5 days in both groups.
“We feel that the outcomes that we noted were likely due to the increased sensitivity and specificity” of the PCR-based testing, said Dr. Axelrad. “Obviously, if you have more pathogen-positive findings, you may be less likely to order extensive testing. And if you’ve identified something like norovirus, you may feel reassured, and not order further testing.”
Dr. Axelrad pointed out that his institution’s overall PCR positivity rates were lower than the 70% rates some other studies have reported. “We feel that, given our large sample size, our results may more accurately reflect clinical practice, and perhaps that lower positivity rate may reflect increased use of this test in an inpatient setting,” he said. “We’re looking at that.”
Study limitations included the retrospective nature of the study. “Also, as we all know, PCR testing fails to discriminate between active infection and asymptomatic colonization,” raising questions about whether a positive PCR test really indicates true infection, noted Dr. Axelrad.
“Coupled with a high-sensitivity rapid turnaround, there’s the potential to reduce costs, but the cost-effectiveness of these assays has not been fully determined. There are several studies looking at this,” with results still to come, he said.
The notable reduction in antibiotic prescribing for those patients who received PCR-based testing means that GI PCR panels could be a useful tool to promote antibiotic stewardship, though Dr. Axelrad also noted that “antibiotics were still used in about a third of all patients.”
Dr. Axelrad reported no outside sources of funding. He has performed consulting services for and received research funding from BioFire, which manufactured the GI PCR assay used in the study, but BioFire did not fund this research.
SOURCE: Axelrad J et al. DDW 2019, Presentation 978.
SAN DIEGO – However, antibiotics were still prescribed for more than one in three patients tested by any method.
“A positive test by any modality did result in decreased utilization of endoscopy, radiology, and antibiotic prescribing, but this effect appeared to be much greater for the GI PCR assay,” said Jordan Axelrad, MD, speaking at the annual Digestive Disease Week.
“Overall, patients who received GI PCR were 12% less likely to undergo endoscopy, 7% less likely to undergo abdominal radiography, and 11% less likely to be prescribed any antibiotic,” compared with patients who were tested by conventional stool culture, said Dr. Axelrad, a gastroenterologist at New York University.
In a cross-sectional study, Dr. Axelrad and his coauthors looked at patients who underwent stool testing for the 26 months before (n = 5,986) and after (n = 9,402) March 2015, when Dr. Axelrad’s home institution switched from conventional stool culture to the GI PCR panel. For the earlier time period, the investigators included patients who received stool culture both with and without an ova and parasites exam, as well as those who underwent enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay viral testing for rotavirus and adenovirus.
Patient demographic data were included as study variables; additionally, the study tracked utilization of endoscopy, abdominal, or other radiology studies, and ED visits for 30 days after testing. They also included any antibiotic prescribing within the 14 days post testing.
Roughly one-third of patients were tested as outpatients, 1 in 10 in the ED, and the remainder as inpatients. Patient age was a mean 46.7 years for the culture group, and 45.5 years for the GI PCR group.
The multiplex PCR test used in the study tested for 12 gastrointestinal pathogenic bacteria, 4 parasites, and 5 viruses.
As expected, PCR testing yielded a higher positive test rate than conventional stool testing, even when EIA tests were included (29.2% vs. 4.1%). In the 2,746 patients with a positive GI PCR test, a total of 3,804 pathogens were identified. Adenovirus accounted for 39% of these positive results. Positive bacterial results were seen in about 65.0% of the positive subgroup, with Escherichia coli subtypes seen in 51.7% of the positive tests.
Overall, positive results for viruses, bacteria, and multiple pathogens were more likely with GI PCR testing, compared with conventional testing (P = .001 for all). Parasites accounted for only 8.2% of the positive PCR test results, but this was significantly more than the 3.7% seen with conventional testing (P = .011).
At the 14-day mark post testing, “Patients who underwent a GI panel were less likely to be prescribed any antibiotic. But overall, antibiotics were fairly common in both groups,” said Dr. Axelrad, noting that 41% of patients who underwent stool culture received an antibiotic by 14 days, compared with 36% for patients who underwent a GI PCR panel (P = .001).
By the end of 30 days, most patients in each group had not received an endoscopic procedure, with significantly more procedure-free patients in the PCR group (91.6% vs. 90.4%; P = .008).
Against a backdrop of slightly higher overall radiology utilization in the PCR group – potentially attributable to practice trends over time – abdominal radiology was less likely for these patients than for the culture group (11.4% vs. 12.8%; P = .011).
The 30-day ED visit rate was low and similar between groups (11.4% for PCR vs. 12.8% for culture; P = .116).
The much quicker turnaround for the GI PCR panel didn’t translate into a shorter length of stay, though: Inpatient length of stay was a median 5 days in both groups.
“We feel that the outcomes that we noted were likely due to the increased sensitivity and specificity” of the PCR-based testing, said Dr. Axelrad. “Obviously, if you have more pathogen-positive findings, you may be less likely to order extensive testing. And if you’ve identified something like norovirus, you may feel reassured, and not order further testing.”
Dr. Axelrad pointed out that his institution’s overall PCR positivity rates were lower than the 70% rates some other studies have reported. “We feel that, given our large sample size, our results may more accurately reflect clinical practice, and perhaps that lower positivity rate may reflect increased use of this test in an inpatient setting,” he said. “We’re looking at that.”
Study limitations included the retrospective nature of the study. “Also, as we all know, PCR testing fails to discriminate between active infection and asymptomatic colonization,” raising questions about whether a positive PCR test really indicates true infection, noted Dr. Axelrad.
“Coupled with a high-sensitivity rapid turnaround, there’s the potential to reduce costs, but the cost-effectiveness of these assays has not been fully determined. There are several studies looking at this,” with results still to come, he said.
The notable reduction in antibiotic prescribing for those patients who received PCR-based testing means that GI PCR panels could be a useful tool to promote antibiotic stewardship, though Dr. Axelrad also noted that “antibiotics were still used in about a third of all patients.”
Dr. Axelrad reported no outside sources of funding. He has performed consulting services for and received research funding from BioFire, which manufactured the GI PCR assay used in the study, but BioFire did not fund this research.
SOURCE: Axelrad J et al. DDW 2019, Presentation 978.
SAN DIEGO – However, antibiotics were still prescribed for more than one in three patients tested by any method.
“A positive test by any modality did result in decreased utilization of endoscopy, radiology, and antibiotic prescribing, but this effect appeared to be much greater for the GI PCR assay,” said Jordan Axelrad, MD, speaking at the annual Digestive Disease Week.
“Overall, patients who received GI PCR were 12% less likely to undergo endoscopy, 7% less likely to undergo abdominal radiography, and 11% less likely to be prescribed any antibiotic,” compared with patients who were tested by conventional stool culture, said Dr. Axelrad, a gastroenterologist at New York University.
In a cross-sectional study, Dr. Axelrad and his coauthors looked at patients who underwent stool testing for the 26 months before (n = 5,986) and after (n = 9,402) March 2015, when Dr. Axelrad’s home institution switched from conventional stool culture to the GI PCR panel. For the earlier time period, the investigators included patients who received stool culture both with and without an ova and parasites exam, as well as those who underwent enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay viral testing for rotavirus and adenovirus.
Patient demographic data were included as study variables; additionally, the study tracked utilization of endoscopy, abdominal, or other radiology studies, and ED visits for 30 days after testing. They also included any antibiotic prescribing within the 14 days post testing.
Roughly one-third of patients were tested as outpatients, 1 in 10 in the ED, and the remainder as inpatients. Patient age was a mean 46.7 years for the culture group, and 45.5 years for the GI PCR group.
The multiplex PCR test used in the study tested for 12 gastrointestinal pathogenic bacteria, 4 parasites, and 5 viruses.
As expected, PCR testing yielded a higher positive test rate than conventional stool testing, even when EIA tests were included (29.2% vs. 4.1%). In the 2,746 patients with a positive GI PCR test, a total of 3,804 pathogens were identified. Adenovirus accounted for 39% of these positive results. Positive bacterial results were seen in about 65.0% of the positive subgroup, with Escherichia coli subtypes seen in 51.7% of the positive tests.
Overall, positive results for viruses, bacteria, and multiple pathogens were more likely with GI PCR testing, compared with conventional testing (P = .001 for all). Parasites accounted for only 8.2% of the positive PCR test results, but this was significantly more than the 3.7% seen with conventional testing (P = .011).
At the 14-day mark post testing, “Patients who underwent a GI panel were less likely to be prescribed any antibiotic. But overall, antibiotics were fairly common in both groups,” said Dr. Axelrad, noting that 41% of patients who underwent stool culture received an antibiotic by 14 days, compared with 36% for patients who underwent a GI PCR panel (P = .001).
By the end of 30 days, most patients in each group had not received an endoscopic procedure, with significantly more procedure-free patients in the PCR group (91.6% vs. 90.4%; P = .008).
Against a backdrop of slightly higher overall radiology utilization in the PCR group – potentially attributable to practice trends over time – abdominal radiology was less likely for these patients than for the culture group (11.4% vs. 12.8%; P = .011).
The 30-day ED visit rate was low and similar between groups (11.4% for PCR vs. 12.8% for culture; P = .116).
The much quicker turnaround for the GI PCR panel didn’t translate into a shorter length of stay, though: Inpatient length of stay was a median 5 days in both groups.
“We feel that the outcomes that we noted were likely due to the increased sensitivity and specificity” of the PCR-based testing, said Dr. Axelrad. “Obviously, if you have more pathogen-positive findings, you may be less likely to order extensive testing. And if you’ve identified something like norovirus, you may feel reassured, and not order further testing.”
Dr. Axelrad pointed out that his institution’s overall PCR positivity rates were lower than the 70% rates some other studies have reported. “We feel that, given our large sample size, our results may more accurately reflect clinical practice, and perhaps that lower positivity rate may reflect increased use of this test in an inpatient setting,” he said. “We’re looking at that.”
Study limitations included the retrospective nature of the study. “Also, as we all know, PCR testing fails to discriminate between active infection and asymptomatic colonization,” raising questions about whether a positive PCR test really indicates true infection, noted Dr. Axelrad.
“Coupled with a high-sensitivity rapid turnaround, there’s the potential to reduce costs, but the cost-effectiveness of these assays has not been fully determined. There are several studies looking at this,” with results still to come, he said.
The notable reduction in antibiotic prescribing for those patients who received PCR-based testing means that GI PCR panels could be a useful tool to promote antibiotic stewardship, though Dr. Axelrad also noted that “antibiotics were still used in about a third of all patients.”
Dr. Axelrad reported no outside sources of funding. He has performed consulting services for and received research funding from BioFire, which manufactured the GI PCR assay used in the study, but BioFire did not fund this research.
SOURCE: Axelrad J et al. DDW 2019, Presentation 978.
REPORTING FROM DDW 2019
Bringing QI training to an IM residency program
Consider a formal step-wise curriculum
For current and future hospitalists, there’s no doubt that knowledge of quality improvement (QI) fundamentals is an important component of a successful practice. One physician team set out to provide their trainees with that QI foundation and described the results.
“We believed that implementing a formal step-wise QI curriculum would not only meet the Accreditation Council of Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) requirements, but also increase residents’ knowledge of QI fundamentals and ultimately establish a culture of continuous improvement aiming to provide high-value care to our health care consumers,” said lead author J. Colt Cowdell, MD, MBA, of Mayo Clinic in Jacksonville, Fla.
Prior to any interventions, the team surveyed internal medicine residents regarding three unique patient scenarios and scored their answers. Residents were then assigned to one of five unique QI projects for the academic year in combination with a structured didactic QI curriculum.
After the structured progressive curriculum, in combination with team-based QI projects, residents were surveyed again. Results showed not only increased QI knowledge, but also improved patient safety and reduced waste.
“Keys to successful implementation included a thorough explanation of the need for this curriculum to the learners and ensuring that QI teams were multidisciplinary – residents, QI experts, nurses, techs, pharmacy, administrators, etc.,” said Dr. Cowdell.
For hospitalists in an academic setting, this work can provide a framework to incorporate QI into their residency programs. “I hope, if they have a passion for QI, they would seek out opportunities to mentor residents and help lead multidisciplinary team-based projects,” Dr. Cowdell said.
Reference
1. Cowdell, JC; Trautman, C; Lewis, M; Dawson, N. Integration of a Novel Quality Improvement Curriculum into an Internal Medicine Residency Program. Abstract published at Hospital Medicine 2018; April 8-11; Orlando, Fla. Abstract 54. https://www.shmabstracts.com/abstract/integration-of-a-novel-quality-improvement-curriculum-into-an-internal-medicine-residency-program/. Accessed Dec. 11, 2018.
Consider a formal step-wise curriculum
Consider a formal step-wise curriculum
For current and future hospitalists, there’s no doubt that knowledge of quality improvement (QI) fundamentals is an important component of a successful practice. One physician team set out to provide their trainees with that QI foundation and described the results.
“We believed that implementing a formal step-wise QI curriculum would not only meet the Accreditation Council of Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) requirements, but also increase residents’ knowledge of QI fundamentals and ultimately establish a culture of continuous improvement aiming to provide high-value care to our health care consumers,” said lead author J. Colt Cowdell, MD, MBA, of Mayo Clinic in Jacksonville, Fla.
Prior to any interventions, the team surveyed internal medicine residents regarding three unique patient scenarios and scored their answers. Residents were then assigned to one of five unique QI projects for the academic year in combination with a structured didactic QI curriculum.
After the structured progressive curriculum, in combination with team-based QI projects, residents were surveyed again. Results showed not only increased QI knowledge, but also improved patient safety and reduced waste.
“Keys to successful implementation included a thorough explanation of the need for this curriculum to the learners and ensuring that QI teams were multidisciplinary – residents, QI experts, nurses, techs, pharmacy, administrators, etc.,” said Dr. Cowdell.
For hospitalists in an academic setting, this work can provide a framework to incorporate QI into their residency programs. “I hope, if they have a passion for QI, they would seek out opportunities to mentor residents and help lead multidisciplinary team-based projects,” Dr. Cowdell said.
Reference
1. Cowdell, JC; Trautman, C; Lewis, M; Dawson, N. Integration of a Novel Quality Improvement Curriculum into an Internal Medicine Residency Program. Abstract published at Hospital Medicine 2018; April 8-11; Orlando, Fla. Abstract 54. https://www.shmabstracts.com/abstract/integration-of-a-novel-quality-improvement-curriculum-into-an-internal-medicine-residency-program/. Accessed Dec. 11, 2018.
For current and future hospitalists, there’s no doubt that knowledge of quality improvement (QI) fundamentals is an important component of a successful practice. One physician team set out to provide their trainees with that QI foundation and described the results.
“We believed that implementing a formal step-wise QI curriculum would not only meet the Accreditation Council of Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) requirements, but also increase residents’ knowledge of QI fundamentals and ultimately establish a culture of continuous improvement aiming to provide high-value care to our health care consumers,” said lead author J. Colt Cowdell, MD, MBA, of Mayo Clinic in Jacksonville, Fla.
Prior to any interventions, the team surveyed internal medicine residents regarding three unique patient scenarios and scored their answers. Residents were then assigned to one of five unique QI projects for the academic year in combination with a structured didactic QI curriculum.
After the structured progressive curriculum, in combination with team-based QI projects, residents were surveyed again. Results showed not only increased QI knowledge, but also improved patient safety and reduced waste.
“Keys to successful implementation included a thorough explanation of the need for this curriculum to the learners and ensuring that QI teams were multidisciplinary – residents, QI experts, nurses, techs, pharmacy, administrators, etc.,” said Dr. Cowdell.
For hospitalists in an academic setting, this work can provide a framework to incorporate QI into their residency programs. “I hope, if they have a passion for QI, they would seek out opportunities to mentor residents and help lead multidisciplinary team-based projects,” Dr. Cowdell said.
Reference
1. Cowdell, JC; Trautman, C; Lewis, M; Dawson, N. Integration of a Novel Quality Improvement Curriculum into an Internal Medicine Residency Program. Abstract published at Hospital Medicine 2018; April 8-11; Orlando, Fla. Abstract 54. https://www.shmabstracts.com/abstract/integration-of-a-novel-quality-improvement-curriculum-into-an-internal-medicine-residency-program/. Accessed Dec. 11, 2018.
Discharge before noon: An appropriate metric for efficiency?
I first heard the term “discharge before noon” (DCBN) as a third-year medical student starting my internal medicine rotation. The basic idea made sense: Get patients out of the hospital early so rooms can be cleaned more quickly and new patients wouldn’t have to wait so long in the ED.
It quickly became apparent, however, that a lot of moving parts had to align perfectly for DCBN. Even if we prioritized rounding on dischargeable patients (starting 8-9 a.m. depending on the service/day), they still needed prescriptions filled, normal clothes to wear, and a way to get home, which wasn’t easy to coordinate while we were still trying to see all the other patients.
Fast forward through 5 years of residency/fellowship experience and DCBN seems even more unrealistic in hospitalized pediatric patients. As a simple example, discharge criteria for dehydration (one of the most common reasons for pediatric hospitalization) include demonstrating the ability to drink enough liquids to stay hydrated. Who’s going to force children to stay up all night sipping fluids (plus changing all those diapers or taking them to the bathroom)? If the child stays on intravenous fluids overnight, we have to monitor at least through breakfast, likely lunch, thus making DCBN nearly impossible.
In a January 2019 article in the Journal of Hospital Medicine, Hailey James, MHA, (@Haileyjms on Twitter) and her colleagues demonstrated an association between DCBN and decreased length of stay (LOS) for medical but not surgical pediatric discharges.1 This made them question if DCBN is an appropriate metric for discharge efficiency, as well as workflow differences between services. Many hospitals, however, still try to push DCBN as a goal (see Destino et al in the same January 2019 issue of JHM2), which could potentially lead to people trying to game the system.
How does your institution try to make discharge processes more efficient? Is it actually possible to do everything more quickly without sacrificing quality or trainee education? Whether your patients are kids, adults, or both, there are likely many issues in common where we could all learn from each other.
We discussed this topic in #JHMChat on April 15 on Twitter. New to Twitter or not familiar with #JHMChat? Since October 2015, JHM has reviewed and discussed dozens of articles spanning a wide variety of topics related to caring for hospitalized patients. All are welcome to join, including medical students, residents, nurses, practicing hospitalists, and more. It’s a great opportunity to virtually meet and learn from others while earning free CME.
To participate in future chats, type #JHMChat in the search box on the top right corner of your Twitter homepage, click on the “Latest” tab at the top left to see the most recent tweets, and join the conversation (don’t forget the hashtag)!
Dr. Chen is a pediatric hospital medicine fellow at Rady Children’s Hospital, University of California, San Diego. She is one of the cofounders/moderators of #PHMFellowJC, serves as a fellow district representative for the American Academy of Pediatrics, and is an active #tweetiatrician at @DrJenChen4kids. This article appeared originally in SHM's official blog The Hospital Leader. Read more recent posts here.
References
1. James HJ et al. The Association of Discharge Before Noon and Length of Stay in Hospitalized Pediatric Patients. J Hosp Med. 2019;14(1):28-32. doi: 10.12788/jhm.3111.
2. Destino L et al. Improving Patient Flow: Analysis of an Initiative to Improve Early Discharge. J Hosp Med. 2019;14(1):22-7. doi: 10.12788/jhm.3133.
I first heard the term “discharge before noon” (DCBN) as a third-year medical student starting my internal medicine rotation. The basic idea made sense: Get patients out of the hospital early so rooms can be cleaned more quickly and new patients wouldn’t have to wait so long in the ED.
It quickly became apparent, however, that a lot of moving parts had to align perfectly for DCBN. Even if we prioritized rounding on dischargeable patients (starting 8-9 a.m. depending on the service/day), they still needed prescriptions filled, normal clothes to wear, and a way to get home, which wasn’t easy to coordinate while we were still trying to see all the other patients.
Fast forward through 5 years of residency/fellowship experience and DCBN seems even more unrealistic in hospitalized pediatric patients. As a simple example, discharge criteria for dehydration (one of the most common reasons for pediatric hospitalization) include demonstrating the ability to drink enough liquids to stay hydrated. Who’s going to force children to stay up all night sipping fluids (plus changing all those diapers or taking them to the bathroom)? If the child stays on intravenous fluids overnight, we have to monitor at least through breakfast, likely lunch, thus making DCBN nearly impossible.
In a January 2019 article in the Journal of Hospital Medicine, Hailey James, MHA, (@Haileyjms on Twitter) and her colleagues demonstrated an association between DCBN and decreased length of stay (LOS) for medical but not surgical pediatric discharges.1 This made them question if DCBN is an appropriate metric for discharge efficiency, as well as workflow differences between services. Many hospitals, however, still try to push DCBN as a goal (see Destino et al in the same January 2019 issue of JHM2), which could potentially lead to people trying to game the system.
How does your institution try to make discharge processes more efficient? Is it actually possible to do everything more quickly without sacrificing quality or trainee education? Whether your patients are kids, adults, or both, there are likely many issues in common where we could all learn from each other.
We discussed this topic in #JHMChat on April 15 on Twitter. New to Twitter or not familiar with #JHMChat? Since October 2015, JHM has reviewed and discussed dozens of articles spanning a wide variety of topics related to caring for hospitalized patients. All are welcome to join, including medical students, residents, nurses, practicing hospitalists, and more. It’s a great opportunity to virtually meet and learn from others while earning free CME.
To participate in future chats, type #JHMChat in the search box on the top right corner of your Twitter homepage, click on the “Latest” tab at the top left to see the most recent tweets, and join the conversation (don’t forget the hashtag)!
Dr. Chen is a pediatric hospital medicine fellow at Rady Children’s Hospital, University of California, San Diego. She is one of the cofounders/moderators of #PHMFellowJC, serves as a fellow district representative for the American Academy of Pediatrics, and is an active #tweetiatrician at @DrJenChen4kids. This article appeared originally in SHM's official blog The Hospital Leader. Read more recent posts here.
References
1. James HJ et al. The Association of Discharge Before Noon and Length of Stay in Hospitalized Pediatric Patients. J Hosp Med. 2019;14(1):28-32. doi: 10.12788/jhm.3111.
2. Destino L et al. Improving Patient Flow: Analysis of an Initiative to Improve Early Discharge. J Hosp Med. 2019;14(1):22-7. doi: 10.12788/jhm.3133.
I first heard the term “discharge before noon” (DCBN) as a third-year medical student starting my internal medicine rotation. The basic idea made sense: Get patients out of the hospital early so rooms can be cleaned more quickly and new patients wouldn’t have to wait so long in the ED.
It quickly became apparent, however, that a lot of moving parts had to align perfectly for DCBN. Even if we prioritized rounding on dischargeable patients (starting 8-9 a.m. depending on the service/day), they still needed prescriptions filled, normal clothes to wear, and a way to get home, which wasn’t easy to coordinate while we were still trying to see all the other patients.
Fast forward through 5 years of residency/fellowship experience and DCBN seems even more unrealistic in hospitalized pediatric patients. As a simple example, discharge criteria for dehydration (one of the most common reasons for pediatric hospitalization) include demonstrating the ability to drink enough liquids to stay hydrated. Who’s going to force children to stay up all night sipping fluids (plus changing all those diapers or taking them to the bathroom)? If the child stays on intravenous fluids overnight, we have to monitor at least through breakfast, likely lunch, thus making DCBN nearly impossible.
In a January 2019 article in the Journal of Hospital Medicine, Hailey James, MHA, (@Haileyjms on Twitter) and her colleagues demonstrated an association between DCBN and decreased length of stay (LOS) for medical but not surgical pediatric discharges.1 This made them question if DCBN is an appropriate metric for discharge efficiency, as well as workflow differences between services. Many hospitals, however, still try to push DCBN as a goal (see Destino et al in the same January 2019 issue of JHM2), which could potentially lead to people trying to game the system.
How does your institution try to make discharge processes more efficient? Is it actually possible to do everything more quickly without sacrificing quality or trainee education? Whether your patients are kids, adults, or both, there are likely many issues in common where we could all learn from each other.
We discussed this topic in #JHMChat on April 15 on Twitter. New to Twitter or not familiar with #JHMChat? Since October 2015, JHM has reviewed and discussed dozens of articles spanning a wide variety of topics related to caring for hospitalized patients. All are welcome to join, including medical students, residents, nurses, practicing hospitalists, and more. It’s a great opportunity to virtually meet and learn from others while earning free CME.
To participate in future chats, type #JHMChat in the search box on the top right corner of your Twitter homepage, click on the “Latest” tab at the top left to see the most recent tweets, and join the conversation (don’t forget the hashtag)!
Dr. Chen is a pediatric hospital medicine fellow at Rady Children’s Hospital, University of California, San Diego. She is one of the cofounders/moderators of #PHMFellowJC, serves as a fellow district representative for the American Academy of Pediatrics, and is an active #tweetiatrician at @DrJenChen4kids. This article appeared originally in SHM's official blog The Hospital Leader. Read more recent posts here.
References
1. James HJ et al. The Association of Discharge Before Noon and Length of Stay in Hospitalized Pediatric Patients. J Hosp Med. 2019;14(1):28-32. doi: 10.12788/jhm.3111.
2. Destino L et al. Improving Patient Flow: Analysis of an Initiative to Improve Early Discharge. J Hosp Med. 2019;14(1):22-7. doi: 10.12788/jhm.3133.
Opioid prescriptions declined 33% over 5 years
Fewer opioid retail prescriptions are being filled, according to a new report issued by the American Medical Association Opioid Task Force.
Opioid prescribing declined by 33% over a 5-year period based on the total number of opioid retail prescriptions filled. Total prescriptions declined from 251.8 million in 2013 to 168.8 million in 2018, according to the report.
The numbers come as the most recent data from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention show a leveling of deaths involving prescription opioids. The CDC data were most recently updated in January 2019 and cover the period 1999-2017.
A closer look shows that deaths involving prescription opioids, but not other synthetic narcotics, peaked in 2011 and have generally declined since then. Deaths involving other synthetic narcotics, however, have been rising, offsetting the reduction and keeping the total number of deaths involving opioids relatively stable between 2016 and 2017.
Other data released by the AMA Opioid Task Force show that physicians are increasing their use of state-level prescription drug monitoring programs (PDMPs).
In 2017, there were 1.5 million physicians registered to use state PDMPs. That number rose to 1.97 million in 2019. And the physicians are using PDMPs. In 2018, physicians made 460 million PDMP queries, up 56% from 2017 and up 651% from 2014.
More education about opioid prescribing is being sought, with 700,000 physicians completing CME training and accessing other training related to opioid prescribing, pain management, screening for substance use disorders, and other related topics.
While the report does show positive trends, the task force is calling for more action, including more access to naloxone and better access to mental health treatment.
The report notes that more than 66,000 physicians and other health professionals have a federal waiver to prescribe buprenorphine, up more than 28,000 since 2016.
A number of policy recommendations are made in the report, including removing inappropriate administrative burdens or barriers that delay access to medications used in medication-assisted treatment (MAT); removing barriers to comprehensive pain care and rehabilitation programs, and reforming the civil and criminal justice system to help ensure access to high-quality, evidence-based care for opioid use disorder.
“We are at a crossroads in our nation’s efforts to end the opioid epidemic,” AMA Opioid Task Force Chair Patrice A. Harris, MD, stated in the report. “It is time to end delays and barriers to medication-assisted treatment – evidence based care proven to save lives; time for payers, [pharmacy benefit managers] and pharmacy chains to reevaluate and revise policies that restrict opioid therapy to patients based on arbitrary thresholds; and time to commit to helping all patients access evidence-based care for pain and substance use disorders.”
Dr. Harris continued: “Physicians must continue to demonstrate leadership, but unless these actions occur, the progress we are making will not stop patients from dying.”
Fewer opioid retail prescriptions are being filled, according to a new report issued by the American Medical Association Opioid Task Force.
Opioid prescribing declined by 33% over a 5-year period based on the total number of opioid retail prescriptions filled. Total prescriptions declined from 251.8 million in 2013 to 168.8 million in 2018, according to the report.
The numbers come as the most recent data from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention show a leveling of deaths involving prescription opioids. The CDC data were most recently updated in January 2019 and cover the period 1999-2017.
A closer look shows that deaths involving prescription opioids, but not other synthetic narcotics, peaked in 2011 and have generally declined since then. Deaths involving other synthetic narcotics, however, have been rising, offsetting the reduction and keeping the total number of deaths involving opioids relatively stable between 2016 and 2017.
Other data released by the AMA Opioid Task Force show that physicians are increasing their use of state-level prescription drug monitoring programs (PDMPs).
In 2017, there were 1.5 million physicians registered to use state PDMPs. That number rose to 1.97 million in 2019. And the physicians are using PDMPs. In 2018, physicians made 460 million PDMP queries, up 56% from 2017 and up 651% from 2014.
More education about opioid prescribing is being sought, with 700,000 physicians completing CME training and accessing other training related to opioid prescribing, pain management, screening for substance use disorders, and other related topics.
While the report does show positive trends, the task force is calling for more action, including more access to naloxone and better access to mental health treatment.
The report notes that more than 66,000 physicians and other health professionals have a federal waiver to prescribe buprenorphine, up more than 28,000 since 2016.
A number of policy recommendations are made in the report, including removing inappropriate administrative burdens or barriers that delay access to medications used in medication-assisted treatment (MAT); removing barriers to comprehensive pain care and rehabilitation programs, and reforming the civil and criminal justice system to help ensure access to high-quality, evidence-based care for opioid use disorder.
“We are at a crossroads in our nation’s efforts to end the opioid epidemic,” AMA Opioid Task Force Chair Patrice A. Harris, MD, stated in the report. “It is time to end delays and barriers to medication-assisted treatment – evidence based care proven to save lives; time for payers, [pharmacy benefit managers] and pharmacy chains to reevaluate and revise policies that restrict opioid therapy to patients based on arbitrary thresholds; and time to commit to helping all patients access evidence-based care for pain and substance use disorders.”
Dr. Harris continued: “Physicians must continue to demonstrate leadership, but unless these actions occur, the progress we are making will not stop patients from dying.”
Fewer opioid retail prescriptions are being filled, according to a new report issued by the American Medical Association Opioid Task Force.
Opioid prescribing declined by 33% over a 5-year period based on the total number of opioid retail prescriptions filled. Total prescriptions declined from 251.8 million in 2013 to 168.8 million in 2018, according to the report.
The numbers come as the most recent data from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention show a leveling of deaths involving prescription opioids. The CDC data were most recently updated in January 2019 and cover the period 1999-2017.
A closer look shows that deaths involving prescription opioids, but not other synthetic narcotics, peaked in 2011 and have generally declined since then. Deaths involving other synthetic narcotics, however, have been rising, offsetting the reduction and keeping the total number of deaths involving opioids relatively stable between 2016 and 2017.
Other data released by the AMA Opioid Task Force show that physicians are increasing their use of state-level prescription drug monitoring programs (PDMPs).
In 2017, there were 1.5 million physicians registered to use state PDMPs. That number rose to 1.97 million in 2019. And the physicians are using PDMPs. In 2018, physicians made 460 million PDMP queries, up 56% from 2017 and up 651% from 2014.
More education about opioid prescribing is being sought, with 700,000 physicians completing CME training and accessing other training related to opioid prescribing, pain management, screening for substance use disorders, and other related topics.
While the report does show positive trends, the task force is calling for more action, including more access to naloxone and better access to mental health treatment.
The report notes that more than 66,000 physicians and other health professionals have a federal waiver to prescribe buprenorphine, up more than 28,000 since 2016.
A number of policy recommendations are made in the report, including removing inappropriate administrative burdens or barriers that delay access to medications used in medication-assisted treatment (MAT); removing barriers to comprehensive pain care and rehabilitation programs, and reforming the civil and criminal justice system to help ensure access to high-quality, evidence-based care for opioid use disorder.
“We are at a crossroads in our nation’s efforts to end the opioid epidemic,” AMA Opioid Task Force Chair Patrice A. Harris, MD, stated in the report. “It is time to end delays and barriers to medication-assisted treatment – evidence based care proven to save lives; time for payers, [pharmacy benefit managers] and pharmacy chains to reevaluate and revise policies that restrict opioid therapy to patients based on arbitrary thresholds; and time to commit to helping all patients access evidence-based care for pain and substance use disorders.”
Dr. Harris continued: “Physicians must continue to demonstrate leadership, but unless these actions occur, the progress we are making will not stop patients from dying.”
New help for peanut allergies
Breakthrough therapy holds potential
When it comes to anaphylaxis episodes leading to pediatric intensive care–unit stays, peanuts are the most common culprit. Now the results of a recent clinical trial may lead to approval of the first oral medication to ameliorate reactions in children with severe peanut allergies.
After 6 months of treatment and 6 months of maintenance therapy, two-thirds of the 372 children who received this treatment could ingest the equivalent of two peanuts without allergic symptoms. Just 4% of the 124 children given a placebo powder were able to consume that amount of peanut without reacting. The treatment was not effective for the small number of adults in the study.
This trial of the drug, called AR101 and developed by Aimmune Therapeutics, was published in Nov. 2018 in the New England Journal of Medicine. The company has submitted a biologics license application to the U.S. Food and Drug Administration, and because the drug has been designated a breakthrough therapy, it will go through an accelerated approval process. It could be on the market by the end of 2019.
Reference
1. Rabin RC. New Peanut Allergy Drug Shows ‘Lifesaving’ Potential. New York Times. Nov. 18, 2018. https://www.nytimes.com/2018/11/18/well/live/new-peanut-allergy-drug-shows-lifesaving-potential.html. Accessed Nov. 26, 2018.
Breakthrough therapy holds potential
Breakthrough therapy holds potential
When it comes to anaphylaxis episodes leading to pediatric intensive care–unit stays, peanuts are the most common culprit. Now the results of a recent clinical trial may lead to approval of the first oral medication to ameliorate reactions in children with severe peanut allergies.
After 6 months of treatment and 6 months of maintenance therapy, two-thirds of the 372 children who received this treatment could ingest the equivalent of two peanuts without allergic symptoms. Just 4% of the 124 children given a placebo powder were able to consume that amount of peanut without reacting. The treatment was not effective for the small number of adults in the study.
This trial of the drug, called AR101 and developed by Aimmune Therapeutics, was published in Nov. 2018 in the New England Journal of Medicine. The company has submitted a biologics license application to the U.S. Food and Drug Administration, and because the drug has been designated a breakthrough therapy, it will go through an accelerated approval process. It could be on the market by the end of 2019.
Reference
1. Rabin RC. New Peanut Allergy Drug Shows ‘Lifesaving’ Potential. New York Times. Nov. 18, 2018. https://www.nytimes.com/2018/11/18/well/live/new-peanut-allergy-drug-shows-lifesaving-potential.html. Accessed Nov. 26, 2018.
When it comes to anaphylaxis episodes leading to pediatric intensive care–unit stays, peanuts are the most common culprit. Now the results of a recent clinical trial may lead to approval of the first oral medication to ameliorate reactions in children with severe peanut allergies.
After 6 months of treatment and 6 months of maintenance therapy, two-thirds of the 372 children who received this treatment could ingest the equivalent of two peanuts without allergic symptoms. Just 4% of the 124 children given a placebo powder were able to consume that amount of peanut without reacting. The treatment was not effective for the small number of adults in the study.
This trial of the drug, called AR101 and developed by Aimmune Therapeutics, was published in Nov. 2018 in the New England Journal of Medicine. The company has submitted a biologics license application to the U.S. Food and Drug Administration, and because the drug has been designated a breakthrough therapy, it will go through an accelerated approval process. It could be on the market by the end of 2019.
Reference
1. Rabin RC. New Peanut Allergy Drug Shows ‘Lifesaving’ Potential. New York Times. Nov. 18, 2018. https://www.nytimes.com/2018/11/18/well/live/new-peanut-allergy-drug-shows-lifesaving-potential.html. Accessed Nov. 26, 2018.
The impact of HM19 on my practice
As an academic nurse practitioner hospitalist with faculty and leadership roles, I found that HM19 had many important and helpful topics that apply directly to my practice.
The “Onboarding Best Practices” session provided specific examples and tips for clinical ramp up, enculturation, and orienting staff to an academic career. As a result of this talk, I began the process of establishing a formal enculturation activity for new hires that includes a panel of senior advanced practice provider (APP) hospitalists to give career path advice.
The “Adaptive Leadership for Hospitalists” workshop provided the opportunity to practice emotional intelligence and effective communication in managing routine and difficult leadership interactions. The “Practice Models/Models of Care for Optimal Integration of NPs and PAs” presentation provided insight into variable team structures at other institutions that could be considered for improved efficiency in my group. The “Academic NP/PA” session provided ideas for how to apply for faculty positions in academic institutions. It also gave APPs who have faculty appointment specific illustrations of using current educational, quality improvement, and research projects to promote. I particularly found the “What Mentorship Has Meant to Me” talk significant. It gave practical essential advice on making sure there is chemistry and trust when seeking a mentor and staying engaged to be a successful mentee.
APPs, whether practicing in academic, private, or community settings, should attend the SHM Annual Conference. SHM is very inclusive and proud of APPs as colleagues and leaders. There are topics that directly apply to the needs of APP hospitalists – including career advancement – and that create excitement for APP practice in hospital medicine.
The Annual Conference also provides the very unique opportunity to meet and establish relationships with APP and physician colleagues and leaders nationwide. These relationships lend to career advancing opportunities for collaboration in clinical excellence, education, quality improvement, research, and leadership.
Dr. Apodaca is assistant professor and nurse practitioner hospitalist at the University of New Mexico. She is one of the first APPNP/PAs to receive faculty appointment at UNM. She serves as codirector of the UNM APP Hospital Medicine Fellowship and director of the APP Hospital Medicine Team. She is also the president of the New Mexico Chapter of SHM and is the first APP at her institution to achieve designation as a Fellow in Hospital Medicine.
As an academic nurse practitioner hospitalist with faculty and leadership roles, I found that HM19 had many important and helpful topics that apply directly to my practice.
The “Onboarding Best Practices” session provided specific examples and tips for clinical ramp up, enculturation, and orienting staff to an academic career. As a result of this talk, I began the process of establishing a formal enculturation activity for new hires that includes a panel of senior advanced practice provider (APP) hospitalists to give career path advice.
The “Adaptive Leadership for Hospitalists” workshop provided the opportunity to practice emotional intelligence and effective communication in managing routine and difficult leadership interactions. The “Practice Models/Models of Care for Optimal Integration of NPs and PAs” presentation provided insight into variable team structures at other institutions that could be considered for improved efficiency in my group. The “Academic NP/PA” session provided ideas for how to apply for faculty positions in academic institutions. It also gave APPs who have faculty appointment specific illustrations of using current educational, quality improvement, and research projects to promote. I particularly found the “What Mentorship Has Meant to Me” talk significant. It gave practical essential advice on making sure there is chemistry and trust when seeking a mentor and staying engaged to be a successful mentee.
APPs, whether practicing in academic, private, or community settings, should attend the SHM Annual Conference. SHM is very inclusive and proud of APPs as colleagues and leaders. There are topics that directly apply to the needs of APP hospitalists – including career advancement – and that create excitement for APP practice in hospital medicine.
The Annual Conference also provides the very unique opportunity to meet and establish relationships with APP and physician colleagues and leaders nationwide. These relationships lend to career advancing opportunities for collaboration in clinical excellence, education, quality improvement, research, and leadership.
Dr. Apodaca is assistant professor and nurse practitioner hospitalist at the University of New Mexico. She is one of the first APPNP/PAs to receive faculty appointment at UNM. She serves as codirector of the UNM APP Hospital Medicine Fellowship and director of the APP Hospital Medicine Team. She is also the president of the New Mexico Chapter of SHM and is the first APP at her institution to achieve designation as a Fellow in Hospital Medicine.
As an academic nurse practitioner hospitalist with faculty and leadership roles, I found that HM19 had many important and helpful topics that apply directly to my practice.
The “Onboarding Best Practices” session provided specific examples and tips for clinical ramp up, enculturation, and orienting staff to an academic career. As a result of this talk, I began the process of establishing a formal enculturation activity for new hires that includes a panel of senior advanced practice provider (APP) hospitalists to give career path advice.
The “Adaptive Leadership for Hospitalists” workshop provided the opportunity to practice emotional intelligence and effective communication in managing routine and difficult leadership interactions. The “Practice Models/Models of Care for Optimal Integration of NPs and PAs” presentation provided insight into variable team structures at other institutions that could be considered for improved efficiency in my group. The “Academic NP/PA” session provided ideas for how to apply for faculty positions in academic institutions. It also gave APPs who have faculty appointment specific illustrations of using current educational, quality improvement, and research projects to promote. I particularly found the “What Mentorship Has Meant to Me” talk significant. It gave practical essential advice on making sure there is chemistry and trust when seeking a mentor and staying engaged to be a successful mentee.
APPs, whether practicing in academic, private, or community settings, should attend the SHM Annual Conference. SHM is very inclusive and proud of APPs as colleagues and leaders. There are topics that directly apply to the needs of APP hospitalists – including career advancement – and that create excitement for APP practice in hospital medicine.
The Annual Conference also provides the very unique opportunity to meet and establish relationships with APP and physician colleagues and leaders nationwide. These relationships lend to career advancing opportunities for collaboration in clinical excellence, education, quality improvement, research, and leadership.
Dr. Apodaca is assistant professor and nurse practitioner hospitalist at the University of New Mexico. She is one of the first APPNP/PAs to receive faculty appointment at UNM. She serves as codirector of the UNM APP Hospital Medicine Fellowship and director of the APP Hospital Medicine Team. She is also the president of the New Mexico Chapter of SHM and is the first APP at her institution to achieve designation as a Fellow in Hospital Medicine.
Following the path of leadership
VA Hospitalist Dr. Matthew Tuck
For Matthew Tuck, MD, MEd, FACP, associate section chief for hospital medicine at the Veterans Affairs Medical Center (VAMC) in Washington, leadership is something that hospitalists can and should be learning at every opportunity.
Some of the best insights about effective leadership, teamwork, and process improvement come from the business world and have been slower to infiltrate into hospital settings and hospitalist groups, he says. But Dr. Tuck has tried to take advantage of numerous opportunities for leadership development in his own career.
He has been a hospitalist since 2010 and is part of a group of 13 physicians, all of whom carry clinical, teaching, and research responsibilities while pursuing a variety of education, quality improvement, and performance improvement topics.
“My chair has been generous about giving me time to do teaching and research and to pursue opportunities for career development,” he said. The Washington VAMC works with four affiliate medical schools in the area, and its six daily hospital medicine services are all 100% teaching services with assigned residents and interns.
Dr. Tuck divides his professional time roughly one-third each between clinical – seeing patients 5 months a year on a consultative or inpatient basis with resident teams; administrative in a variety of roles; and research. He has academic appointments at the George Washington University (GWU) School of Medicine and at the Uniformed Services University of Health Sciences in Bethesda, Md. He developed the coursework for teaching evidence-based medicine to first- and second-year medical students at GWU.
He is also part of a large research consortium with five sites and $7.5 million in funding over 5 years from NIH’s National Institute on Minority Health and Health Disparities to study how genetic information from African American patients can predict their response to cardiovascular medications. He serves as the study’s site Principal Investigator at the VAMC.
Opportunities to advance his leadership skills have included the VA’s Aspiring Leaders Program and Leadership Development Mentoring Program, which teach leadership skills on topical subjects such as teaching, communications skills, and finance. The Master Teacher Leadership Development Program for medical faculty at GWU, where he attended medical school and did his internship and residency, offers six intensive, classroom-based 8-week courses over a 1-year period. They cover various topical subjects with faculty from the business world teaching principles of leadership. The program includes a mentoring action plan for participants and leads to a graduate certificate in leadership development from GWU’s Graduate School of Education and Human Development at the end of the year’s studies.
Dr. Tuck credits completing this kind of coursework for his current position of leadership in the VA and he tries to share what he has learned with the medical students he teaches.
“When I was starting out as a physician, I never received training in how to lead a team. I found myself trying to get everything done for my patients while teaching my learners, and I really struggled for the first couple of years to manage these competing demands on my time,” he said.
Now, on the first day of a new clinical rotation, he meets one-on-one with his residents to set out goals and expectations. “I say: ‘This is how I want rounds to be run. What are your expectations?’ That way we make sure we’re collaborating as a team. I don’t know that medical school prepares you for this kind of teamwork. Unless you bring a background in business, you can really struggle.”
Interest in hospital medicine
“Throughout our medical training we do a variety of rotations and clerkships. I found myself falling in love with all of them – surgery, psychiatry, obstetrics, and gynecology,” Dr. Tuck explained, as he reflected on how he ended up in hospital medicine. “As someone who was interested in all of these different fields of medicine, I considered myself a true medical generalist. And in hospitalized patients, who struggle with all of the different issues that bring them to the hospital, I saw a compilation of all my experiences in residency training combined in one setting.”
Hospital medicine was a relatively young field at that time, with few academic hospitalists, he said. “But I had good mentors who encouraged me to pursue my educational, research, and administrative interests. My affinity for the VA was also largely due to my training. We worked in multiple settings – academic, community-based, National Institutes of Health, and at the VA.”
Dr. Tuck said that, of all the settings in which he practiced, he felt the VA truly trained him best to be a doctor. “The experience made me feel like a holistic practitioner,” he said. “The system allowed me to take the best care of my patients, since I didn’t have to worry about whether I could make needed referrals to specialists. Very early in my internship year we were seeing very sick patients with multiple comorbidities, but it was easy to get a social worker or case manager involved, compared to other settings, which can be more difficult to navigate.”
While the VA is a “great health system,” Dr. Tuck said, the challenge is learning how to work with its bureaucracy. “If you don’t know how the system works, it can seem to get in your way.” But overall, he said, the VA functions well and compares favorably with private sector hospitals and health systems. That was also the conclusion of a recent study in the Journal of General Internal Medicine, which compared the quality of outpatient and inpatient care in VA and non-VA settings using recent performance measure data.1 The authors concluded that the VA system performed similarly or better than non-VA health care on most nationally recognized measures of inpatient and outpatient care quality, although there is wide variation between VA facilities.
Working with the team
Another major interest for Dr. Tuck is team-based learning, which also grew out of his GWU leadership certificate course work on teaching teams and team development. He is working on a draft paper for publication with coauthor Patrick Rendon, MD, associate program director for the University of New Mexico’s internal medicine residency program, building on the group development stage theory – “Forming/Storming/Norming/Performing” – developed by Tuckman and Jenson.2
The theory offers 12 tips for optimizing inpatient ward team performance, such as getting the learners to buy in at an early stage of a project. “Everyone I talk to about our research is eager to learn how to apply these principles. I don’t think we’re unique at this center. We’re constantly rotating learners through the program. If you apply these principles, you can get learners to be more efficient starting from the first day,” he said.
The current inpatient team model at the Washington VAMC involves a broadly representative team from nursing, case management, social work, the business office, medical coding, utilization management, and administration that convenes every morning to discuss patient navigation and difficult discharges. “Everyone sits around a big table, and the six hospital medicine teams rotate through every fifteen minutes to review their patients’ admitting diagnoses, barriers to discharge and plans of care.”
At the patient’s bedside, a Focused Interdisciplinary Team (FIT) model, which Dr. Tuck helped to implement, incorporates a four-step process with clearly defined roles for the attending, nurse, pharmacist, and case manager or social worker. “Since implementation, our data show overall reductions in lengths of stay,” he said.
Dr. Tuck urges other hospitalists to pursue opportunities available to them to develop their leadership skills. “Look to your professional societies such as the Society of General Internal Medicine (SGIM) or SHM.” For example, SGIM’s Academic Hospitalist Commission, which he cochairs, provides a voice on the national stage for academic hospitalists and cosponsors with SHM an annual Academic Hospitalist Academy to support career development for junior academic hospitalists as educational leaders. Since 2016, its Distinguished Professor of Hospital Medicine recognizes a professor of hospital medicine to give a plenary address at the SGIM national meeting.
SGIM’s SCHOLAR Project, a subgroup of its Academic Hospitalist Commission, has worked to identify features of successful academic hospitalist programs, with the results published in the Journal of Hospital Medicine.3
“We learned that what sets successful programs apart is their leadership – as well as protected time for scholarly pursuits,” he said. “We’re all leaders in this field, whether we view ourselves that way or not.”
References
1. Price RA et al. Comparing quality of care in Veterans Affairs and Non–Veterans Affairs settings. J Gen Intern Med. 2018 Oct;33(10):1631-38.
2. Tuckman B, Jensen M. Stages of small group development revisited. Group and Organizational Studies. 1977;2:419-427.
3. Seymann GB et al. Features of successful academic hospitalist programs: Insights from the SCHOLAR (Successful hospitalists in academics and research) project. J Hosp Med. 2016 Oct;11(10):708-13.
VA Hospitalist Dr. Matthew Tuck
VA Hospitalist Dr. Matthew Tuck
For Matthew Tuck, MD, MEd, FACP, associate section chief for hospital medicine at the Veterans Affairs Medical Center (VAMC) in Washington, leadership is something that hospitalists can and should be learning at every opportunity.
Some of the best insights about effective leadership, teamwork, and process improvement come from the business world and have been slower to infiltrate into hospital settings and hospitalist groups, he says. But Dr. Tuck has tried to take advantage of numerous opportunities for leadership development in his own career.
He has been a hospitalist since 2010 and is part of a group of 13 physicians, all of whom carry clinical, teaching, and research responsibilities while pursuing a variety of education, quality improvement, and performance improvement topics.
“My chair has been generous about giving me time to do teaching and research and to pursue opportunities for career development,” he said. The Washington VAMC works with four affiliate medical schools in the area, and its six daily hospital medicine services are all 100% teaching services with assigned residents and interns.
Dr. Tuck divides his professional time roughly one-third each between clinical – seeing patients 5 months a year on a consultative or inpatient basis with resident teams; administrative in a variety of roles; and research. He has academic appointments at the George Washington University (GWU) School of Medicine and at the Uniformed Services University of Health Sciences in Bethesda, Md. He developed the coursework for teaching evidence-based medicine to first- and second-year medical students at GWU.
He is also part of a large research consortium with five sites and $7.5 million in funding over 5 years from NIH’s National Institute on Minority Health and Health Disparities to study how genetic information from African American patients can predict their response to cardiovascular medications. He serves as the study’s site Principal Investigator at the VAMC.
Opportunities to advance his leadership skills have included the VA’s Aspiring Leaders Program and Leadership Development Mentoring Program, which teach leadership skills on topical subjects such as teaching, communications skills, and finance. The Master Teacher Leadership Development Program for medical faculty at GWU, where he attended medical school and did his internship and residency, offers six intensive, classroom-based 8-week courses over a 1-year period. They cover various topical subjects with faculty from the business world teaching principles of leadership. The program includes a mentoring action plan for participants and leads to a graduate certificate in leadership development from GWU’s Graduate School of Education and Human Development at the end of the year’s studies.
Dr. Tuck credits completing this kind of coursework for his current position of leadership in the VA and he tries to share what he has learned with the medical students he teaches.
“When I was starting out as a physician, I never received training in how to lead a team. I found myself trying to get everything done for my patients while teaching my learners, and I really struggled for the first couple of years to manage these competing demands on my time,” he said.
Now, on the first day of a new clinical rotation, he meets one-on-one with his residents to set out goals and expectations. “I say: ‘This is how I want rounds to be run. What are your expectations?’ That way we make sure we’re collaborating as a team. I don’t know that medical school prepares you for this kind of teamwork. Unless you bring a background in business, you can really struggle.”
Interest in hospital medicine
“Throughout our medical training we do a variety of rotations and clerkships. I found myself falling in love with all of them – surgery, psychiatry, obstetrics, and gynecology,” Dr. Tuck explained, as he reflected on how he ended up in hospital medicine. “As someone who was interested in all of these different fields of medicine, I considered myself a true medical generalist. And in hospitalized patients, who struggle with all of the different issues that bring them to the hospital, I saw a compilation of all my experiences in residency training combined in one setting.”
Hospital medicine was a relatively young field at that time, with few academic hospitalists, he said. “But I had good mentors who encouraged me to pursue my educational, research, and administrative interests. My affinity for the VA was also largely due to my training. We worked in multiple settings – academic, community-based, National Institutes of Health, and at the VA.”
Dr. Tuck said that, of all the settings in which he practiced, he felt the VA truly trained him best to be a doctor. “The experience made me feel like a holistic practitioner,” he said. “The system allowed me to take the best care of my patients, since I didn’t have to worry about whether I could make needed referrals to specialists. Very early in my internship year we were seeing very sick patients with multiple comorbidities, but it was easy to get a social worker or case manager involved, compared to other settings, which can be more difficult to navigate.”
While the VA is a “great health system,” Dr. Tuck said, the challenge is learning how to work with its bureaucracy. “If you don’t know how the system works, it can seem to get in your way.” But overall, he said, the VA functions well and compares favorably with private sector hospitals and health systems. That was also the conclusion of a recent study in the Journal of General Internal Medicine, which compared the quality of outpatient and inpatient care in VA and non-VA settings using recent performance measure data.1 The authors concluded that the VA system performed similarly or better than non-VA health care on most nationally recognized measures of inpatient and outpatient care quality, although there is wide variation between VA facilities.
Working with the team
Another major interest for Dr. Tuck is team-based learning, which also grew out of his GWU leadership certificate course work on teaching teams and team development. He is working on a draft paper for publication with coauthor Patrick Rendon, MD, associate program director for the University of New Mexico’s internal medicine residency program, building on the group development stage theory – “Forming/Storming/Norming/Performing” – developed by Tuckman and Jenson.2
The theory offers 12 tips for optimizing inpatient ward team performance, such as getting the learners to buy in at an early stage of a project. “Everyone I talk to about our research is eager to learn how to apply these principles. I don’t think we’re unique at this center. We’re constantly rotating learners through the program. If you apply these principles, you can get learners to be more efficient starting from the first day,” he said.
The current inpatient team model at the Washington VAMC involves a broadly representative team from nursing, case management, social work, the business office, medical coding, utilization management, and administration that convenes every morning to discuss patient navigation and difficult discharges. “Everyone sits around a big table, and the six hospital medicine teams rotate through every fifteen minutes to review their patients’ admitting diagnoses, barriers to discharge and plans of care.”
At the patient’s bedside, a Focused Interdisciplinary Team (FIT) model, which Dr. Tuck helped to implement, incorporates a four-step process with clearly defined roles for the attending, nurse, pharmacist, and case manager or social worker. “Since implementation, our data show overall reductions in lengths of stay,” he said.
Dr. Tuck urges other hospitalists to pursue opportunities available to them to develop their leadership skills. “Look to your professional societies such as the Society of General Internal Medicine (SGIM) or SHM.” For example, SGIM’s Academic Hospitalist Commission, which he cochairs, provides a voice on the national stage for academic hospitalists and cosponsors with SHM an annual Academic Hospitalist Academy to support career development for junior academic hospitalists as educational leaders. Since 2016, its Distinguished Professor of Hospital Medicine recognizes a professor of hospital medicine to give a plenary address at the SGIM national meeting.
SGIM’s SCHOLAR Project, a subgroup of its Academic Hospitalist Commission, has worked to identify features of successful academic hospitalist programs, with the results published in the Journal of Hospital Medicine.3
“We learned that what sets successful programs apart is their leadership – as well as protected time for scholarly pursuits,” he said. “We’re all leaders in this field, whether we view ourselves that way or not.”
References
1. Price RA et al. Comparing quality of care in Veterans Affairs and Non–Veterans Affairs settings. J Gen Intern Med. 2018 Oct;33(10):1631-38.
2. Tuckman B, Jensen M. Stages of small group development revisited. Group and Organizational Studies. 1977;2:419-427.
3. Seymann GB et al. Features of successful academic hospitalist programs: Insights from the SCHOLAR (Successful hospitalists in academics and research) project. J Hosp Med. 2016 Oct;11(10):708-13.
For Matthew Tuck, MD, MEd, FACP, associate section chief for hospital medicine at the Veterans Affairs Medical Center (VAMC) in Washington, leadership is something that hospitalists can and should be learning at every opportunity.
Some of the best insights about effective leadership, teamwork, and process improvement come from the business world and have been slower to infiltrate into hospital settings and hospitalist groups, he says. But Dr. Tuck has tried to take advantage of numerous opportunities for leadership development in his own career.
He has been a hospitalist since 2010 and is part of a group of 13 physicians, all of whom carry clinical, teaching, and research responsibilities while pursuing a variety of education, quality improvement, and performance improvement topics.
“My chair has been generous about giving me time to do teaching and research and to pursue opportunities for career development,” he said. The Washington VAMC works with four affiliate medical schools in the area, and its six daily hospital medicine services are all 100% teaching services with assigned residents and interns.
Dr. Tuck divides his professional time roughly one-third each between clinical – seeing patients 5 months a year on a consultative or inpatient basis with resident teams; administrative in a variety of roles; and research. He has academic appointments at the George Washington University (GWU) School of Medicine and at the Uniformed Services University of Health Sciences in Bethesda, Md. He developed the coursework for teaching evidence-based medicine to first- and second-year medical students at GWU.
He is also part of a large research consortium with five sites and $7.5 million in funding over 5 years from NIH’s National Institute on Minority Health and Health Disparities to study how genetic information from African American patients can predict their response to cardiovascular medications. He serves as the study’s site Principal Investigator at the VAMC.
Opportunities to advance his leadership skills have included the VA’s Aspiring Leaders Program and Leadership Development Mentoring Program, which teach leadership skills on topical subjects such as teaching, communications skills, and finance. The Master Teacher Leadership Development Program for medical faculty at GWU, where he attended medical school and did his internship and residency, offers six intensive, classroom-based 8-week courses over a 1-year period. They cover various topical subjects with faculty from the business world teaching principles of leadership. The program includes a mentoring action plan for participants and leads to a graduate certificate in leadership development from GWU’s Graduate School of Education and Human Development at the end of the year’s studies.
Dr. Tuck credits completing this kind of coursework for his current position of leadership in the VA and he tries to share what he has learned with the medical students he teaches.
“When I was starting out as a physician, I never received training in how to lead a team. I found myself trying to get everything done for my patients while teaching my learners, and I really struggled for the first couple of years to manage these competing demands on my time,” he said.
Now, on the first day of a new clinical rotation, he meets one-on-one with his residents to set out goals and expectations. “I say: ‘This is how I want rounds to be run. What are your expectations?’ That way we make sure we’re collaborating as a team. I don’t know that medical school prepares you for this kind of teamwork. Unless you bring a background in business, you can really struggle.”
Interest in hospital medicine
“Throughout our medical training we do a variety of rotations and clerkships. I found myself falling in love with all of them – surgery, psychiatry, obstetrics, and gynecology,” Dr. Tuck explained, as he reflected on how he ended up in hospital medicine. “As someone who was interested in all of these different fields of medicine, I considered myself a true medical generalist. And in hospitalized patients, who struggle with all of the different issues that bring them to the hospital, I saw a compilation of all my experiences in residency training combined in one setting.”
Hospital medicine was a relatively young field at that time, with few academic hospitalists, he said. “But I had good mentors who encouraged me to pursue my educational, research, and administrative interests. My affinity for the VA was also largely due to my training. We worked in multiple settings – academic, community-based, National Institutes of Health, and at the VA.”
Dr. Tuck said that, of all the settings in which he practiced, he felt the VA truly trained him best to be a doctor. “The experience made me feel like a holistic practitioner,” he said. “The system allowed me to take the best care of my patients, since I didn’t have to worry about whether I could make needed referrals to specialists. Very early in my internship year we were seeing very sick patients with multiple comorbidities, but it was easy to get a social worker or case manager involved, compared to other settings, which can be more difficult to navigate.”
While the VA is a “great health system,” Dr. Tuck said, the challenge is learning how to work with its bureaucracy. “If you don’t know how the system works, it can seem to get in your way.” But overall, he said, the VA functions well and compares favorably with private sector hospitals and health systems. That was also the conclusion of a recent study in the Journal of General Internal Medicine, which compared the quality of outpatient and inpatient care in VA and non-VA settings using recent performance measure data.1 The authors concluded that the VA system performed similarly or better than non-VA health care on most nationally recognized measures of inpatient and outpatient care quality, although there is wide variation between VA facilities.
Working with the team
Another major interest for Dr. Tuck is team-based learning, which also grew out of his GWU leadership certificate course work on teaching teams and team development. He is working on a draft paper for publication with coauthor Patrick Rendon, MD, associate program director for the University of New Mexico’s internal medicine residency program, building on the group development stage theory – “Forming/Storming/Norming/Performing” – developed by Tuckman and Jenson.2
The theory offers 12 tips for optimizing inpatient ward team performance, such as getting the learners to buy in at an early stage of a project. “Everyone I talk to about our research is eager to learn how to apply these principles. I don’t think we’re unique at this center. We’re constantly rotating learners through the program. If you apply these principles, you can get learners to be more efficient starting from the first day,” he said.
The current inpatient team model at the Washington VAMC involves a broadly representative team from nursing, case management, social work, the business office, medical coding, utilization management, and administration that convenes every morning to discuss patient navigation and difficult discharges. “Everyone sits around a big table, and the six hospital medicine teams rotate through every fifteen minutes to review their patients’ admitting diagnoses, barriers to discharge and plans of care.”
At the patient’s bedside, a Focused Interdisciplinary Team (FIT) model, which Dr. Tuck helped to implement, incorporates a four-step process with clearly defined roles for the attending, nurse, pharmacist, and case manager or social worker. “Since implementation, our data show overall reductions in lengths of stay,” he said.
Dr. Tuck urges other hospitalists to pursue opportunities available to them to develop their leadership skills. “Look to your professional societies such as the Society of General Internal Medicine (SGIM) or SHM.” For example, SGIM’s Academic Hospitalist Commission, which he cochairs, provides a voice on the national stage for academic hospitalists and cosponsors with SHM an annual Academic Hospitalist Academy to support career development for junior academic hospitalists as educational leaders. Since 2016, its Distinguished Professor of Hospital Medicine recognizes a professor of hospital medicine to give a plenary address at the SGIM national meeting.
SGIM’s SCHOLAR Project, a subgroup of its Academic Hospitalist Commission, has worked to identify features of successful academic hospitalist programs, with the results published in the Journal of Hospital Medicine.3
“We learned that what sets successful programs apart is their leadership – as well as protected time for scholarly pursuits,” he said. “We’re all leaders in this field, whether we view ourselves that way or not.”
References
1. Price RA et al. Comparing quality of care in Veterans Affairs and Non–Veterans Affairs settings. J Gen Intern Med. 2018 Oct;33(10):1631-38.
2. Tuckman B, Jensen M. Stages of small group development revisited. Group and Organizational Studies. 1977;2:419-427.
3. Seymann GB et al. Features of successful academic hospitalist programs: Insights from the SCHOLAR (Successful hospitalists in academics and research) project. J Hosp Med. 2016 Oct;11(10):708-13.