Career

Hospitals and health systems are increasingly looking to physicians to provide leadership at the most senior executive level. While the chief medical officer (CMO) or similar role has given physicians a seat at the executive table at many organizations, physicians are also being sought for the CEO role at the head of that table.

A commonly referenced study from 2011 by Amanda Goodall, MD, in Social Science & Medicine concluded that, among a cohort of highly ranked hospitals, overall quality metrics were approximately 25% higher in hospitals where a physician was CEO, in comparison to hospitals with non-physician CEOs (2011 Aug;73[4]:535-9). In addition, new positions at both the hospital and health system level are coming into existence: Examples include chief (or VP) of population health, chief innovation officer, chief quality officer, chief patient experience officer, and others.

There is every reason to think that these senior executive physician roles can – and in many cases perhaps should – be filled by hospitalists. Hospital medicine is an ideal “proving ground” for future physician executives and leaders. I believe that the best practitioners of hospital medicine are also the best candidates for hospital, health care, and health system physician executive leadership, because many of the characteristics essential for success as an executive are the same characteristics that are essential for success as a hospitalist. Strong candidates should have the following characteristics:

• A patient-centered perspective. Perhaps the most important characteristic of a leader is empathy. To appreciate the complex, and often (if not usual) challenging emotional states of our patients keeps us connected at the most fundamental, human level to the work we do and to our patients and families. Empathy can – and should – extend to fellow caregivers as well, and allows us to practice and lead teams in the most human of professions. No leader – in health care, anyway – can last long without being able to demonstrate empathy, through words and behavior.
• A systems-based practice: A hospitalist must be able to have a foot in each of two canoes – to be able to see each patient and their family individually and develop preference-based plans of care, and also to be able to focus on process, structure, and outcomes for the hospital system as a whole. The former trait is imbued in us during training and is the critical foundation for the patient-physician relationship. The latter, however, is something different entirely and reflects an ability to have perspective on the entire ecosystem of care – and apply principles of process and quality improvement to achieve forward looking results. That’s leadership.
• Team leadership: Another fundamental attribute of leaders is to assemble a talented and diverse team around an objective, and then to delegate both tasks and their ownership, deferring to expertise. Hospitalists – the best ones, anyway – similarly recognize that for the vast majority of a patient’s hospital stay, the most important caregiver in a patient’s care is someone other than themselves. At any given time, it might be the nurse, aide, pharmacist, care manager, transporter, radiology tech, urologist, housekeeper, surgical resident, or anyone involved in that patient’s care. The hospitalist’s greatest value is in developing the plan of care with the patient and their family, and then communicating – and therefore delegating – that plan to individuals with the expertise to execute that plan. I believe the biggest difficulty hospitalists have in assuming leadership roles is getting out of the comfortable weeds of daily clinical operations and instead focusing on goals, strategies, and teams to accomplish them. The best hospitalists are doing this already as part of their daily care.
• The ability to manage relationships: Hospitalists manage and work among a team of diverse talents. They also often have accountability relationships to a myriad of clinical and administrative leaders in the hospital, each of whom may be in a position of authority to place demands on the hospitalists: A partial list might include the CEO, the chief medical officer, chief nurse, chief of staff, other medical staff departments, academic leaders, and of course, patients and their families. Functioning in a “matrixed” organization – in which lines of authority can go in many directions, depending on the situation – is standard fare, even at the executive level, and the key competency is open and frequent communication.
• Experience: Already, hospitalists assume leadership roles in their hospitals – leaders in quality, medical informatics, patient experience, and continuous improvement. In these roles, physicians work with senior executives and other hospital leaders to both set goals and implement strategies, providing visibility and working relationships that can be helpful to aspiring leaders.

Perhaps more so than most other specialties, then, hospitalists demonstrate foundational leadership skills in their day-to-day practice – an ideal start to a leadership path. This is not to say or suggest that a career devoted purely to clinical practice is somehow inferior – far from it. However, as health care organizations turn to the medical community to provider leadership, hospitalists are well positioned to develop and be developed as executive leaders.

How can the Society of Hospital Medicine help? While management degrees become a common pathway for many, some health systems and professional organizations support their membership with a leadership development curriculum which may be a better place to start. In my opinion, SHM provides one of the most thorough and relevant experiences available. The SHM Leadership Academy focuses on developing a broad set of additional leadership competencies across a spectrum of experience. The format varies depending on the course, but all rely heavily upon experienced hospitalist leaders – in fact, many current and former Board members and officers volunteer their time to facilitate and teach at the Academy, including at the entry level. It’s a powerful way to learn from others who have started walking the leadership path.
 

Dr. Harte is a past president of SHM and president of Cleveland Clinic Akron General and Southern Region.

Hospitals and health systems are increasingly looking to physicians to provide leadership at the most senior executive level. While the chief medical officer (CMO) or similar role has given physicians a seat at the executive table at many organizations, physicians are also being sought for the CEO role at the head of that table.

A commonly referenced study from 2011 by Amanda Goodall, MD, in Social Science & Medicine concluded that, among a cohort of highly ranked hospitals, overall quality metrics were approximately 25% higher in hospitals where a physician was CEO, in comparison to hospitals with non-physician CEOs (2011 Aug;73[4]:535-9). In addition, new positions at both the hospital and health system level are coming into existence: Examples include chief (or VP) of population health, chief innovation officer, chief quality officer, chief patient experience officer, and others.

There is every reason to think that these senior executive physician roles can – and in many cases perhaps should – be filled by hospitalists. Hospital medicine is an ideal “proving ground” for future physician executives and leaders. I believe that the best practitioners of hospital medicine are also the best candidates for hospital, health care, and health system physician executive leadership, because many of the characteristics essential for success as an executive are the same characteristics that are essential for success as a hospitalist. Strong candidates should have the following characteristics:

• A patient-centered perspective. Perhaps the most important characteristic of a leader is empathy. To appreciate the complex, and often (if not usual) challenging emotional states of our patients keeps us connected at the most fundamental, human level to the work we do and to our patients and families. Empathy can – and should – extend to fellow caregivers as well, and allows us to practice and lead teams in the most human of professions. No leader – in health care, anyway – can last long without being able to demonstrate empathy, through words and behavior.
• A systems-based practice: A hospitalist must be able to have a foot in each of two canoes – to be able to see each patient and their family individually and develop preference-based plans of care, and also to be able to focus on process, structure, and outcomes for the hospital system as a whole. The former trait is imbued in us during training and is the critical foundation for the patient-physician relationship. The latter, however, is something different entirely and reflects an ability to have perspective on the entire ecosystem of care – and apply principles of process and quality improvement to achieve forward looking results. That’s leadership.
• Team leadership: Another fundamental attribute of leaders is to assemble a talented and diverse team around an objective, and then to delegate both tasks and their ownership, deferring to expertise. Hospitalists – the best ones, anyway – similarly recognize that for the vast majority of a patient’s hospital stay, the most important caregiver in a patient’s care is someone other than themselves. At any given time, it might be the nurse, aide, pharmacist, care manager, transporter, radiology tech, urologist, housekeeper, surgical resident, or anyone involved in that patient’s care. The hospitalist’s greatest value is in developing the plan of care with the patient and their family, and then communicating – and therefore delegating – that plan to individuals with the expertise to execute that plan. I believe the biggest difficulty hospitalists have in assuming leadership roles is getting out of the comfortable weeds of daily clinical operations and instead focusing on goals, strategies, and teams to accomplish them. The best hospitalists are doing this already as part of their daily care.
• The ability to manage relationships: Hospitalists manage and work among a team of diverse talents. They also often have accountability relationships to a myriad of clinical and administrative leaders in the hospital, each of whom may be in a position of authority to place demands on the hospitalists: A partial list might include the CEO, the chief medical officer, chief nurse, chief of staff, other medical staff departments, academic leaders, and of course, patients and their families. Functioning in a “matrixed” organization – in which lines of authority can go in many directions, depending on the situation – is standard fare, even at the executive level, and the key competency is open and frequent communication.
• Experience: Already, hospitalists assume leadership roles in their hospitals – leaders in quality, medical informatics, patient experience, and continuous improvement. In these roles, physicians work with senior executives and other hospital leaders to both set goals and implement strategies, providing visibility and working relationships that can be helpful to aspiring leaders.

Perhaps more so than most other specialties, then, hospitalists demonstrate foundational leadership skills in their day-to-day practice – an ideal start to a leadership path. This is not to say or suggest that a career devoted purely to clinical practice is somehow inferior – far from it. However, as health care organizations turn to the medical community to provider leadership, hospitalists are well positioned to develop and be developed as executive leaders.

How can the Society of Hospital Medicine help? While management degrees become a common pathway for many, some health systems and professional organizations support their membership with a leadership development curriculum which may be a better place to start. In my opinion, SHM provides one of the most thorough and relevant experiences available. The SHM Leadership Academy focuses on developing a broad set of additional leadership competencies across a spectrum of experience. The format varies depending on the course, but all rely heavily upon experienced hospitalist leaders – in fact, many current and former Board members and officers volunteer their time to facilitate and teach at the Academy, including at the entry level. It’s a powerful way to learn from others who have started walking the leadership path.
 

Dr. Harte is a past president of SHM and president of Cleveland Clinic Akron General and Southern Region.

Hospitals and health systems are increasingly looking to physicians to provide leadership at the most senior executive level. While the chief medical officer (CMO) or similar role has given physicians a seat at the executive table at many organizations, physicians are also being sought for the CEO role at the head of that table.

A commonly referenced study from 2011 by Amanda Goodall, MD, in Social Science & Medicine concluded that, among a cohort of highly ranked hospitals, overall quality metrics were approximately 25% higher in hospitals where a physician was CEO, in comparison to hospitals with non-physician CEOs (2011 Aug;73[4]:535-9). In addition, new positions at both the hospital and health system level are coming into existence: Examples include chief (or VP) of population health, chief innovation officer, chief quality officer, chief patient experience officer, and others.

There is every reason to think that these senior executive physician roles can – and in many cases perhaps should – be filled by hospitalists. Hospital medicine is an ideal “proving ground” for future physician executives and leaders. I believe that the best practitioners of hospital medicine are also the best candidates for hospital, health care, and health system physician executive leadership, because many of the characteristics essential for success as an executive are the same characteristics that are essential for success as a hospitalist. Strong candidates should have the following characteristics:

• A patient-centered perspective. Perhaps the most important characteristic of a leader is empathy. To appreciate the complex, and often (if not usual) challenging emotional states of our patients keeps us connected at the most fundamental, human level to the work we do and to our patients and families. Empathy can – and should – extend to fellow caregivers as well, and allows us to practice and lead teams in the most human of professions. No leader – in health care, anyway – can last long without being able to demonstrate empathy, through words and behavior.
• A systems-based practice: A hospitalist must be able to have a foot in each of two canoes – to be able to see each patient and their family individually and develop preference-based plans of care, and also to be able to focus on process, structure, and outcomes for the hospital system as a whole. The former trait is imbued in us during training and is the critical foundation for the patient-physician relationship. The latter, however, is something different entirely and reflects an ability to have perspective on the entire ecosystem of care – and apply principles of process and quality improvement to achieve forward looking results. That’s leadership.
• Team leadership: Another fundamental attribute of leaders is to assemble a talented and diverse team around an objective, and then to delegate both tasks and their ownership, deferring to expertise. Hospitalists – the best ones, anyway – similarly recognize that for the vast majority of a patient’s hospital stay, the most important caregiver in a patient’s care is someone other than themselves. At any given time, it might be the nurse, aide, pharmacist, care manager, transporter, radiology tech, urologist, housekeeper, surgical resident, or anyone involved in that patient’s care. The hospitalist’s greatest value is in developing the plan of care with the patient and their family, and then communicating – and therefore delegating – that plan to individuals with the expertise to execute that plan. I believe the biggest difficulty hospitalists have in assuming leadership roles is getting out of the comfortable weeds of daily clinical operations and instead focusing on goals, strategies, and teams to accomplish them. The best hospitalists are doing this already as part of their daily care.
• The ability to manage relationships: Hospitalists manage and work among a team of diverse talents. They also often have accountability relationships to a myriad of clinical and administrative leaders in the hospital, each of whom may be in a position of authority to place demands on the hospitalists: A partial list might include the CEO, the chief medical officer, chief nurse, chief of staff, other medical staff departments, academic leaders, and of course, patients and their families. Functioning in a “matrixed” organization – in which lines of authority can go in many directions, depending on the situation – is standard fare, even at the executive level, and the key competency is open and frequent communication.
• Experience: Already, hospitalists assume leadership roles in their hospitals – leaders in quality, medical informatics, patient experience, and continuous improvement. In these roles, physicians work with senior executives and other hospital leaders to both set goals and implement strategies, providing visibility and working relationships that can be helpful to aspiring leaders.

Perhaps more so than most other specialties, then, hospitalists demonstrate foundational leadership skills in their day-to-day practice – an ideal start to a leadership path. This is not to say or suggest that a career devoted purely to clinical practice is somehow inferior – far from it. However, as health care organizations turn to the medical community to provider leadership, hospitalists are well positioned to develop and be developed as executive leaders.

How can the Society of Hospital Medicine help? While management degrees become a common pathway for many, some health systems and professional organizations support their membership with a leadership development curriculum which may be a better place to start. In my opinion, SHM provides one of the most thorough and relevant experiences available. The SHM Leadership Academy focuses on developing a broad set of additional leadership competencies across a spectrum of experience. The format varies depending on the course, but all rely heavily upon experienced hospitalist leaders – in fact, many current and former Board members and officers volunteer their time to facilitate and teach at the Academy, including at the entry level. It’s a powerful way to learn from others who have started walking the leadership path.
 

Dr. Harte is a past president of SHM and president of Cleveland Clinic Akron General and Southern Region.

Over the course of a career, it is not uncommon for people to become narrower and more focused in their work purview and interests. Competence in select procedures and practices imparts confidence and reliability in performance and results. One develops a reputation for those skills and capabilities, and others call upon them.

Rewards and incentives encourage advancement and promotion along established career paths, further accelerating specialization and concentration. At the top of your game, you advocate for and ease into your comfort zone. That zone is defined by the knowns of practice and the certainties they provide.

For those who prefer to practice in the confines of a narrow clinical sphere, that strategy could be the pathway to career success.

However, for those promoted to leadership positions, the inward and insulated focus today is counterproductive and even dangerous. Many times, physicians advance to a senior position because it is the next step in a preset career ladder, the reward for acumen in clinical skills, or simply out of boredom, with hope for a new landscape and a higher wage. But just because one has a high rank or impressive title does not mean that one is fulfilling the mandates of leadership. It takes more than that. You must be attuned to what is known and unknown in building stability and progress for those you lead.

A brief historic angle: For years, medicine occupied a sweet spot within the health care system. The profession protected its perks and privileges deriving from its untouchable status. With it came superiority, dominance, and protectionism. It was an inward, parochial focus of thinking, status, and reward. The problem was: This insulated mindset prompted a blind spot. The profession missed changes and transformation that were occurring just beyond the comfort zone. Those changes were unknowns in planning and perspective.

In the 1990s, medicine as a whole woke up to calls for change and a new order. The rise of the hospitalist was in part an outgrowth of that wake-up call. It reshaped power structures, status, and lucrative business arrangements within the profession. For many, the sweet spot soured.

The problem with collapsing into a sweet spot today is that so much is changing: all that is known and much that is unknown. Finances, technology, and demand are all in flux. The health care system finds itself in a quantity/quality/cost paradox. Volume accelerates, but at what cost to quality and morale? If someone or something can accomplish similar outcomes at less cost, why not go with the cheaper option? These questions can best be addressed by seeing them in the context of larger changes happening in the health system.

A new view for leaders

The “meta” in metaleadership hopes to provide a broader, disciplined slant on this phenomenon. That prefix – used to modify many concepts and terms – refers to a wider, more expansive view or a more comprehensive and transcendent perch on a topic. A “meta-” prefix invites a critical analysis of the original topic with the addition of new perspectives and insights, as with a meta-analysis.

Why then the need now for a “meta” view among health care leaders? It is easy in the course of career progression to lose track of the bigger picture of what you are doing and how it fits into changes occurring in society and for the profession. Even if your focus is on a particular clinical procedure, how does what you are doing fit into larger metatrends and changes? How might you tangibly contribute to the evolution of those trends? If you are in a leadership position, how do you fit your practice or department into the bigger picture? How might this enterprise perspective speak to your career trajectory?

To inform these questions, build your platform for knowns and unknowns. There are four combinations in the “known-unknown” equation. They are each important and provocative for leaders. Your awareness of them prompts curiosity about “meta” problems and problem solving.

• There are the “known-knowns”: what you know and you know you know it. The problem here is that you may assume that you know something that you don’t.
• There are the “known-unknowns”: Clear and curious about what you need to learn, you develop pathways to find out.
• There are the “unknown-knowns”: what others know and you don’t; a point of vulnerability if you are not careful to discover and figure this out.
• And finally, the “unknown-unknowns”: the mysteries of what could lie ahead that no one yet fully comprehends.

The task for the “metaleader”? Be clear on what you know, and seek always to learn and discover those unknowns. The better you factor them into your assessments, the better you are able to shape trends and the less likely you are to be overrun by them.

Just as you become more specialized with time, as a leader, you can leverage your experience to widen your lens and see more, understand it better, and – with that knowledge – chart a pathway that corresponds with where the health system is going. With this wider mindset, you fashion a fresh and innovative perspective on what is happening with health care and the options for constructively addressing new constraints and opportunities. You think big, reach far, and with this broader understanding, foment a lively set of perspectives and options that would otherwise not be available for those you lead. And when seen as a puzzle to learn and solve, the “meta” perch provides an engaging angle on the game of health care change. You too can be a player.

Dr. Marcus is coauthor of “Renegotiating Health Care: Resolving Conflict to Build Collaboration,” 2nd ed. (San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers, 2011) and is director of the program for health care negotiation and conflict resolution at Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health, Boston. Dr. Marcus teaches regularly in the SHM Leadership Academy. He can be reached at [email protected].

Over the course of a career, it is not uncommon for people to become narrower and more focused in their work purview and interests. Competence in select procedures and practices imparts confidence and reliability in performance and results. One develops a reputation for those skills and capabilities, and others call upon them.

Rewards and incentives encourage advancement and promotion along established career paths, further accelerating specialization and concentration. At the top of your game, you advocate for and ease into your comfort zone. That zone is defined by the knowns of practice and the certainties they provide.

For those who prefer to practice in the confines of a narrow clinical sphere, that strategy could be the pathway to career success.

However, for those promoted to leadership positions, the inward and insulated focus today is counterproductive and even dangerous. Many times, physicians advance to a senior position because it is the next step in a preset career ladder, the reward for acumen in clinical skills, or simply out of boredom, with hope for a new landscape and a higher wage. But just because one has a high rank or impressive title does not mean that one is fulfilling the mandates of leadership. It takes more than that. You must be attuned to what is known and unknown in building stability and progress for those you lead.

A brief historic angle: For years, medicine occupied a sweet spot within the health care system. The profession protected its perks and privileges deriving from its untouchable status. With it came superiority, dominance, and protectionism. It was an inward, parochial focus of thinking, status, and reward. The problem was: This insulated mindset prompted a blind spot. The profession missed changes and transformation that were occurring just beyond the comfort zone. Those changes were unknowns in planning and perspective.

In the 1990s, medicine as a whole woke up to calls for change and a new order. The rise of the hospitalist was in part an outgrowth of that wake-up call. It reshaped power structures, status, and lucrative business arrangements within the profession. For many, the sweet spot soured.

The problem with collapsing into a sweet spot today is that so much is changing: all that is known and much that is unknown. Finances, technology, and demand are all in flux. The health care system finds itself in a quantity/quality/cost paradox. Volume accelerates, but at what cost to quality and morale? If someone or something can accomplish similar outcomes at less cost, why not go with the cheaper option? These questions can best be addressed by seeing them in the context of larger changes happening in the health system.

A new view for leaders

The “meta” in metaleadership hopes to provide a broader, disciplined slant on this phenomenon. That prefix – used to modify many concepts and terms – refers to a wider, more expansive view or a more comprehensive and transcendent perch on a topic. A “meta-” prefix invites a critical analysis of the original topic with the addition of new perspectives and insights, as with a meta-analysis.

Why then the need now for a “meta” view among health care leaders? It is easy in the course of career progression to lose track of the bigger picture of what you are doing and how it fits into changes occurring in society and for the profession. Even if your focus is on a particular clinical procedure, how does what you are doing fit into larger metatrends and changes? How might you tangibly contribute to the evolution of those trends? If you are in a leadership position, how do you fit your practice or department into the bigger picture? How might this enterprise perspective speak to your career trajectory?

To inform these questions, build your platform for knowns and unknowns. There are four combinations in the “known-unknown” equation. They are each important and provocative for leaders. Your awareness of them prompts curiosity about “meta” problems and problem solving.

• There are the “known-knowns”: what you know and you know you know it. The problem here is that you may assume that you know something that you don’t.
• There are the “known-unknowns”: Clear and curious about what you need to learn, you develop pathways to find out.
• There are the “unknown-knowns”: what others know and you don’t; a point of vulnerability if you are not careful to discover and figure this out.
• And finally, the “unknown-unknowns”: the mysteries of what could lie ahead that no one yet fully comprehends.

The task for the “metaleader”? Be clear on what you know, and seek always to learn and discover those unknowns. The better you factor them into your assessments, the better you are able to shape trends and the less likely you are to be overrun by them.

Just as you become more specialized with time, as a leader, you can leverage your experience to widen your lens and see more, understand it better, and – with that knowledge – chart a pathway that corresponds with where the health system is going. With this wider mindset, you fashion a fresh and innovative perspective on what is happening with health care and the options for constructively addressing new constraints and opportunities. You think big, reach far, and with this broader understanding, foment a lively set of perspectives and options that would otherwise not be available for those you lead. And when seen as a puzzle to learn and solve, the “meta” perch provides an engaging angle on the game of health care change. You too can be a player.

Dr. Marcus is coauthor of “Renegotiating Health Care: Resolving Conflict to Build Collaboration,” 2nd ed. (San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers, 2011) and is director of the program for health care negotiation and conflict resolution at Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health, Boston. Dr. Marcus teaches regularly in the SHM Leadership Academy. He can be reached at [email protected].

Over the course of a career, it is not uncommon for people to become narrower and more focused in their work purview and interests. Competence in select procedures and practices imparts confidence and reliability in performance and results. One develops a reputation for those skills and capabilities, and others call upon them.

Rewards and incentives encourage advancement and promotion along established career paths, further accelerating specialization and concentration. At the top of your game, you advocate for and ease into your comfort zone. That zone is defined by the knowns of practice and the certainties they provide.

For those who prefer to practice in the confines of a narrow clinical sphere, that strategy could be the pathway to career success.

However, for those promoted to leadership positions, the inward and insulated focus today is counterproductive and even dangerous. Many times, physicians advance to a senior position because it is the next step in a preset career ladder, the reward for acumen in clinical skills, or simply out of boredom, with hope for a new landscape and a higher wage. But just because one has a high rank or impressive title does not mean that one is fulfilling the mandates of leadership. It takes more than that. You must be attuned to what is known and unknown in building stability and progress for those you lead.

A brief historic angle: For years, medicine occupied a sweet spot within the health care system. The profession protected its perks and privileges deriving from its untouchable status. With it came superiority, dominance, and protectionism. It was an inward, parochial focus of thinking, status, and reward. The problem was: This insulated mindset prompted a blind spot. The profession missed changes and transformation that were occurring just beyond the comfort zone. Those changes were unknowns in planning and perspective.

In the 1990s, medicine as a whole woke up to calls for change and a new order. The rise of the hospitalist was in part an outgrowth of that wake-up call. It reshaped power structures, status, and lucrative business arrangements within the profession. For many, the sweet spot soured.

The problem with collapsing into a sweet spot today is that so much is changing: all that is known and much that is unknown. Finances, technology, and demand are all in flux. The health care system finds itself in a quantity/quality/cost paradox. Volume accelerates, but at what cost to quality and morale? If someone or something can accomplish similar outcomes at less cost, why not go with the cheaper option? These questions can best be addressed by seeing them in the context of larger changes happening in the health system.

A new view for leaders

The “meta” in metaleadership hopes to provide a broader, disciplined slant on this phenomenon. That prefix – used to modify many concepts and terms – refers to a wider, more expansive view or a more comprehensive and transcendent perch on a topic. A “meta-” prefix invites a critical analysis of the original topic with the addition of new perspectives and insights, as with a meta-analysis.

Why then the need now for a “meta” view among health care leaders? It is easy in the course of career progression to lose track of the bigger picture of what you are doing and how it fits into changes occurring in society and for the profession. Even if your focus is on a particular clinical procedure, how does what you are doing fit into larger metatrends and changes? How might you tangibly contribute to the evolution of those trends? If you are in a leadership position, how do you fit your practice or department into the bigger picture? How might this enterprise perspective speak to your career trajectory?

To inform these questions, build your platform for knowns and unknowns. There are four combinations in the “known-unknown” equation. They are each important and provocative for leaders. Your awareness of them prompts curiosity about “meta” problems and problem solving.

• There are the “known-knowns”: what you know and you know you know it. The problem here is that you may assume that you know something that you don’t.
• There are the “known-unknowns”: Clear and curious about what you need to learn, you develop pathways to find out.
• There are the “unknown-knowns”: what others know and you don’t; a point of vulnerability if you are not careful to discover and figure this out.
• And finally, the “unknown-unknowns”: the mysteries of what could lie ahead that no one yet fully comprehends.

The task for the “metaleader”? Be clear on what you know, and seek always to learn and discover those unknowns. The better you factor them into your assessments, the better you are able to shape trends and the less likely you are to be overrun by them.

Just as you become more specialized with time, as a leader, you can leverage your experience to widen your lens and see more, understand it better, and – with that knowledge – chart a pathway that corresponds with where the health system is going. With this wider mindset, you fashion a fresh and innovative perspective on what is happening with health care and the options for constructively addressing new constraints and opportunities. You think big, reach far, and with this broader understanding, foment a lively set of perspectives and options that would otherwise not be available for those you lead. And when seen as a puzzle to learn and solve, the “meta” perch provides an engaging angle on the game of health care change. You too can be a player.

Dr. Marcus is coauthor of “Renegotiating Health Care: Resolving Conflict to Build Collaboration,” 2nd ed. (San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers, 2011) and is director of the program for health care negotiation and conflict resolution at Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health, Boston. Dr. Marcus teaches regularly in the SHM Leadership Academy. He can be reached at [email protected].

Mel C. Anderson, MD, FACP, section chief of hospital medicine for the Veterans Administration of Eastern Colorado, and his hospitalist colleagues share a mission to care for the men and women who served their country in the armed forces and are now being served by the VA.

“That mission binds us together in a deep and impactful way,” he said. “One of the greatest joys of my life has been to dedicate, with the teams I lead, our hearts and minds to serving this population of veterans.”

Approximately 400 hospitalists work nationwide in the VA, the country’s largest integrated health system, typically in groups of about a dozen. Not every VA medical center employs hospitalists; this depends on local tradition and size of the facility. Dr. Anderson was for several years the lone hospitalist at the VA Medical Center in Denver, starting in 2005, and now he heads a group of 17. The Denver facility employs five inpatient teams plus nocturnists, supported by residents, interns, and medical students in training from the University of Colorado at Denver, Aurora, to deliver all of its inpatient medical care.

“We also have an open ICU here. Hospitalists are able to follow their patients across the hospital, and we can make the decision to move them to the ICU,” Dr. Anderson said. The Denver group also established a hospitalist-staffed postdischarge clinic, where patients can reconnect with their hospital team. “It’s not to supplant primary care but to help promote safe transit as the patient moves back to the community,” he said. “We’ve also developed a surgery consult service for orthopedics and other surgical subspecialties.”

The VA’s integrated electronic medical record facilitates communication between hospitalists and primary care physicians, with instant messaging for updating the PCPs on the patient’s hospital stay.

The Denver VA hospitalists value their collegial culture, Dr. Anderson said. “We are invested in our group and in one another and in life-long learning. I often ask my group for their feedback. It’s one of the singular joys of my career to lead such a wonderful group, which has been built up person by person. I hired every single member. As much as their clinical skills and the achievements on their curriculum vitae were important, I also paid attention to their interpersonal communication skills.”

Members of the Denver hospitalist group also share an academic focus and commitment to scholarship and research. Dr. Anderson’s academic emphasis is on how to promote teaching and faculty development through organized bedside rounding and how to orient students to teaching as a potential career path. He is associate program director for medicine residencies at the University of Colorado and leads its Clinician/Educator Pathway.

The VA hospital’s interdisciplinary bedside rounding initiative involves the medicine team – students, residents, attending – and pharmacist, plus the patient’s bedside nurse and nurse care coordinator. “We have worked on fostering an interdisciplinary culture, and we’re very proud of the rounding model we developed here. We all round together at the bedside, and typically that might include 7 or 8 people,” Dr. Anderson explained.

“In planning this program, we used a Rapid Performance Improvement Project team with a nurse, pharmacist, and physical therapist helping us envision how to redesign rounds to overcome the time constraints,” he said. “We altered nurses’ work flow to permit them to join the rounding for their patients, and we moved morning medication administration to 7 a.m., so it wouldn’t get in the way of the rounding. We now audit rates of physician-to-nurse communication on rounds and how often we successfully achieve the nurse’s participation.”¹ This approach has also cut rates of phone pages from nurses to house staff, and substantially increased job satisfaction.
 

What’s different in the VA?

The work of hospitalists in the VA is mostly similar to other hospital settings, but perhaps with more intensity, Dr. Anderson said. There are comorbidities such as higher rates of PTSD, alcohol use disorder, substance abuse, and mental health issues – all of which have an effect over time on patients. But veterans also have different attitudes about, for example, pain.

“When patients are asked to rate their pain on a scale of 0 to 10, for a veteran of a foreign war, 2 out of 10 is not the same as someone else’s 2 out of 10. How do we compensate for that difference?” he said. “And while awareness of PTSD and efforts to mitigate its impact have made incredible gains over the past 15 years, we still see a lot of these issues and their manifestations in social challenges such as homelessness. We are fortunate to have VA outpatient services and homeless veteran programs to help with these issues.”

There is a different paradigm for care at the VA, Dr. Anderson said. “We are a not-for-profit institution with the welfare of veterans as our primary aim. Beyond their health and wellness, that means supporting them in other ways and reaching out into the community. As doctors and nurses we feel a kinship around that mission, although we also have to be stewards of taxpayer dollars. We recognize that the VA is a large and complicated, somewhat inertia-laden organization in which making changes can be very challenging. But there are also opportunities as a national organization to effect changes on a national scale.”

Dr. Anderson chairs the VA’s Hospitalist Field Advisory Committee (HFAC), a group of about eight hospitalists empaneled to advise the system’s Office of Specialty Care Services on clinical policy and program development. They serve 3-year terms and meet monthly by phone and annually in Washington. The HFAC’s last annual meeting occurred in mid-September 2018 in Washington with a focus on developing a hospital medicine annual survey and needs assessment, revisiting strategic goals, and convening multilateral meetings with the chiefs of medicine and emergency medicine FACs.

“Our biggest emphasis is clinical – this includes clinical pathways, best practices for managing PTSD or acute coronary syndrome, and the like. We also share management issues, such as how to configure medical records or arrange night coverage. This is a national conversation to share what some sites have already experienced and learned,” Dr. Anderson said.

“We also have a VA Academic Hospitalist Subcommittee, working together on multisite research studies and on resident education protocols. Because we’re a large system, we’re able to connect with one another and leverage what we’ve learned. I get emails almost every day about research topics from colleagues across the country,” he said. A collaborative website and email distribution list allows doctors to post questions to their peers nationwide.
 

A calling for hospital medicine

Before moving to Denver, Dr. Anderson served as a major in the Air Force Medical Corps and was based at the David Grant US Air Force Medical Center on Travis Air Force Base in California – which is where he did his residency. In the course of a “traditionalist” internal medical training, including 4-month stints on hospital wards in addition to outpatient services, he realized he had a calling for hospital medicine.

In a job at the Providence (R.I.) VA Medical Center, he exclusively practiced outpatient care, but he found that he missed key aspects of inpatient work, such as the intensity of the clinical issues and teaching encounters. “I cold-called the hospital’s chief of medicine and volunteered to start mentoring inpatient residents,” Dr. Anderson said. “That was 17 years ago.”

Another abiding interest derived from Dr. Anderson’s military service is travel medicine. While a physician in the Air Force, he was deployed to Haiti in 1995 and to Nicaragua in 2000, where he treated thousands of patients – both U.S. service personnel and local populations.

“In Haiti, our primary mission was for U.S. troops who were still based there following the 1994 Operation Uphold Democracy intervention, but there were a lot fewer of them, so we mostly kept busy providing care to Haitian nationals,” he said. “That work was eye opening, to say the least,” and led to a professional interest in tropical illnesses. “Since then, I’ve been a visiting professor for the University of Colorado posted to the University of Zimbabwe in Harare in 2012 and 2016.”

What gives Dr. Anderson such joy and enthusiasm for his VA work? “I am a curious lifelong learner. Every day, there are 10 new things I need to learn, whether clinically or operationally in a big hospital system or just the day-to-day realities of leading a group of physicians. I never feel like I’m treading water,” he said. He is also energized by teaching – seeing “the light bulb go on” for the students he is instructing – and by serving as a role model for doctors in training.

“As I contemplate all the simultaneous balls I have in the air, including our recent move into a new hospital building, sometimes I think it is kind of crazy to be doing as much as I do,” he said. “But I also take time away, balancing work versus nonwork.” He spends quality time with his wife of 21 years, 17-year-old daughter, other relatives, and friends, as well as on physical activity, reading books about philosophy, and his hobby of rebuilding motorcycles, which he says offers a kind of meditative calm.

“I also feel a deep sense of service – to patients, colleagues, students, and to the mission of the VA,” Dr. Anderson said. “There is truly something special about caring for the veteran. It’s hard to articulate, but it really keeps us coming back for more. I’ve had vets sing to me, tell jokes, do magic tricks, share their war stories. I’ve had patients open up to me in ways that were both profound and humbling.”
 

References

1. Young E et al. Impact of altered medication administration time on interdisciplinary bedside rounds on academic medical ward. J Nurs Care Qual. 2017 Jul/Sep;32(3):218-225.

Mel C. Anderson, MD, FACP, section chief of hospital medicine for the Veterans Administration of Eastern Colorado, and his hospitalist colleagues share a mission to care for the men and women who served their country in the armed forces and are now being served by the VA.

“That mission binds us together in a deep and impactful way,” he said. “One of the greatest joys of my life has been to dedicate, with the teams I lead, our hearts and minds to serving this population of veterans.”

Approximately 400 hospitalists work nationwide in the VA, the country’s largest integrated health system, typically in groups of about a dozen. Not every VA medical center employs hospitalists; this depends on local tradition and size of the facility. Dr. Anderson was for several years the lone hospitalist at the VA Medical Center in Denver, starting in 2005, and now he heads a group of 17. The Denver facility employs five inpatient teams plus nocturnists, supported by residents, interns, and medical students in training from the University of Colorado at Denver, Aurora, to deliver all of its inpatient medical care.

“We also have an open ICU here. Hospitalists are able to follow their patients across the hospital, and we can make the decision to move them to the ICU,” Dr. Anderson said. The Denver group also established a hospitalist-staffed postdischarge clinic, where patients can reconnect with their hospital team. “It’s not to supplant primary care but to help promote safe transit as the patient moves back to the community,” he said. “We’ve also developed a surgery consult service for orthopedics and other surgical subspecialties.”

The VA’s integrated electronic medical record facilitates communication between hospitalists and primary care physicians, with instant messaging for updating the PCPs on the patient’s hospital stay.

The Denver VA hospitalists value their collegial culture, Dr. Anderson said. “We are invested in our group and in one another and in life-long learning. I often ask my group for their feedback. It’s one of the singular joys of my career to lead such a wonderful group, which has been built up person by person. I hired every single member. As much as their clinical skills and the achievements on their curriculum vitae were important, I also paid attention to their interpersonal communication skills.”

Members of the Denver hospitalist group also share an academic focus and commitment to scholarship and research. Dr. Anderson’s academic emphasis is on how to promote teaching and faculty development through organized bedside rounding and how to orient students to teaching as a potential career path. He is associate program director for medicine residencies at the University of Colorado and leads its Clinician/Educator Pathway.

The VA hospital’s interdisciplinary bedside rounding initiative involves the medicine team – students, residents, attending – and pharmacist, plus the patient’s bedside nurse and nurse care coordinator. “We have worked on fostering an interdisciplinary culture, and we’re very proud of the rounding model we developed here. We all round together at the bedside, and typically that might include 7 or 8 people,” Dr. Anderson explained.

“In planning this program, we used a Rapid Performance Improvement Project team with a nurse, pharmacist, and physical therapist helping us envision how to redesign rounds to overcome the time constraints,” he said. “We altered nurses’ work flow to permit them to join the rounding for their patients, and we moved morning medication administration to 7 a.m., so it wouldn’t get in the way of the rounding. We now audit rates of physician-to-nurse communication on rounds and how often we successfully achieve the nurse’s participation.”¹ This approach has also cut rates of phone pages from nurses to house staff, and substantially increased job satisfaction.
 

What’s different in the VA?

The work of hospitalists in the VA is mostly similar to other hospital settings, but perhaps with more intensity, Dr. Anderson said. There are comorbidities such as higher rates of PTSD, alcohol use disorder, substance abuse, and mental health issues – all of which have an effect over time on patients. But veterans also have different attitudes about, for example, pain.

“When patients are asked to rate their pain on a scale of 0 to 10, for a veteran of a foreign war, 2 out of 10 is not the same as someone else’s 2 out of 10. How do we compensate for that difference?” he said. “And while awareness of PTSD and efforts to mitigate its impact have made incredible gains over the past 15 years, we still see a lot of these issues and their manifestations in social challenges such as homelessness. We are fortunate to have VA outpatient services and homeless veteran programs to help with these issues.”

There is a different paradigm for care at the VA, Dr. Anderson said. “We are a not-for-profit institution with the welfare of veterans as our primary aim. Beyond their health and wellness, that means supporting them in other ways and reaching out into the community. As doctors and nurses we feel a kinship around that mission, although we also have to be stewards of taxpayer dollars. We recognize that the VA is a large and complicated, somewhat inertia-laden organization in which making changes can be very challenging. But there are also opportunities as a national organization to effect changes on a national scale.”

Dr. Anderson chairs the VA’s Hospitalist Field Advisory Committee (HFAC), a group of about eight hospitalists empaneled to advise the system’s Office of Specialty Care Services on clinical policy and program development. They serve 3-year terms and meet monthly by phone and annually in Washington. The HFAC’s last annual meeting occurred in mid-September 2018 in Washington with a focus on developing a hospital medicine annual survey and needs assessment, revisiting strategic goals, and convening multilateral meetings with the chiefs of medicine and emergency medicine FACs.

“Our biggest emphasis is clinical – this includes clinical pathways, best practices for managing PTSD or acute coronary syndrome, and the like. We also share management issues, such as how to configure medical records or arrange night coverage. This is a national conversation to share what some sites have already experienced and learned,” Dr. Anderson said.

“We also have a VA Academic Hospitalist Subcommittee, working together on multisite research studies and on resident education protocols. Because we’re a large system, we’re able to connect with one another and leverage what we’ve learned. I get emails almost every day about research topics from colleagues across the country,” he said. A collaborative website and email distribution list allows doctors to post questions to their peers nationwide.
 

A calling for hospital medicine

Before moving to Denver, Dr. Anderson served as a major in the Air Force Medical Corps and was based at the David Grant US Air Force Medical Center on Travis Air Force Base in California – which is where he did his residency. In the course of a “traditionalist” internal medical training, including 4-month stints on hospital wards in addition to outpatient services, he realized he had a calling for hospital medicine.

In a job at the Providence (R.I.) VA Medical Center, he exclusively practiced outpatient care, but he found that he missed key aspects of inpatient work, such as the intensity of the clinical issues and teaching encounters. “I cold-called the hospital’s chief of medicine and volunteered to start mentoring inpatient residents,” Dr. Anderson said. “That was 17 years ago.”

Another abiding interest derived from Dr. Anderson’s military service is travel medicine. While a physician in the Air Force, he was deployed to Haiti in 1995 and to Nicaragua in 2000, where he treated thousands of patients – both U.S. service personnel and local populations.

“In Haiti, our primary mission was for U.S. troops who were still based there following the 1994 Operation Uphold Democracy intervention, but there were a lot fewer of them, so we mostly kept busy providing care to Haitian nationals,” he said. “That work was eye opening, to say the least,” and led to a professional interest in tropical illnesses. “Since then, I’ve been a visiting professor for the University of Colorado posted to the University of Zimbabwe in Harare in 2012 and 2016.”

What gives Dr. Anderson such joy and enthusiasm for his VA work? “I am a curious lifelong learner. Every day, there are 10 new things I need to learn, whether clinically or operationally in a big hospital system or just the day-to-day realities of leading a group of physicians. I never feel like I’m treading water,” he said. He is also energized by teaching – seeing “the light bulb go on” for the students he is instructing – and by serving as a role model for doctors in training.

“As I contemplate all the simultaneous balls I have in the air, including our recent move into a new hospital building, sometimes I think it is kind of crazy to be doing as much as I do,” he said. “But I also take time away, balancing work versus nonwork.” He spends quality time with his wife of 21 years, 17-year-old daughter, other relatives, and friends, as well as on physical activity, reading books about philosophy, and his hobby of rebuilding motorcycles, which he says offers a kind of meditative calm.

“I also feel a deep sense of service – to patients, colleagues, students, and to the mission of the VA,” Dr. Anderson said. “There is truly something special about caring for the veteran. It’s hard to articulate, but it really keeps us coming back for more. I’ve had vets sing to me, tell jokes, do magic tricks, share their war stories. I’ve had patients open up to me in ways that were both profound and humbling.”
 

References

1. Young E et al. Impact of altered medication administration time on interdisciplinary bedside rounds on academic medical ward. J Nurs Care Qual. 2017 Jul/Sep;32(3):218-225.

Mel C. Anderson, MD, FACP, section chief of hospital medicine for the Veterans Administration of Eastern Colorado, and his hospitalist colleagues share a mission to care for the men and women who served their country in the armed forces and are now being served by the VA.

“That mission binds us together in a deep and impactful way,” he said. “One of the greatest joys of my life has been to dedicate, with the teams I lead, our hearts and minds to serving this population of veterans.”

Approximately 400 hospitalists work nationwide in the VA, the country’s largest integrated health system, typically in groups of about a dozen. Not every VA medical center employs hospitalists; this depends on local tradition and size of the facility. Dr. Anderson was for several years the lone hospitalist at the VA Medical Center in Denver, starting in 2005, and now he heads a group of 17. The Denver facility employs five inpatient teams plus nocturnists, supported by residents, interns, and medical students in training from the University of Colorado at Denver, Aurora, to deliver all of its inpatient medical care.

“We also have an open ICU here. Hospitalists are able to follow their patients across the hospital, and we can make the decision to move them to the ICU,” Dr. Anderson said. The Denver group also established a hospitalist-staffed postdischarge clinic, where patients can reconnect with their hospital team. “It’s not to supplant primary care but to help promote safe transit as the patient moves back to the community,” he said. “We’ve also developed a surgery consult service for orthopedics and other surgical subspecialties.”

The VA’s integrated electronic medical record facilitates communication between hospitalists and primary care physicians, with instant messaging for updating the PCPs on the patient’s hospital stay.

The Denver VA hospitalists value their collegial culture, Dr. Anderson said. “We are invested in our group and in one another and in life-long learning. I often ask my group for their feedback. It’s one of the singular joys of my career to lead such a wonderful group, which has been built up person by person. I hired every single member. As much as their clinical skills and the achievements on their curriculum vitae were important, I also paid attention to their interpersonal communication skills.”

Members of the Denver hospitalist group also share an academic focus and commitment to scholarship and research. Dr. Anderson’s academic emphasis is on how to promote teaching and faculty development through organized bedside rounding and how to orient students to teaching as a potential career path. He is associate program director for medicine residencies at the University of Colorado and leads its Clinician/Educator Pathway.

The VA hospital’s interdisciplinary bedside rounding initiative involves the medicine team – students, residents, attending – and pharmacist, plus the patient’s bedside nurse and nurse care coordinator. “We have worked on fostering an interdisciplinary culture, and we’re very proud of the rounding model we developed here. We all round together at the bedside, and typically that might include 7 or 8 people,” Dr. Anderson explained.

“In planning this program, we used a Rapid Performance Improvement Project team with a nurse, pharmacist, and physical therapist helping us envision how to redesign rounds to overcome the time constraints,” he said. “We altered nurses’ work flow to permit them to join the rounding for their patients, and we moved morning medication administration to 7 a.m., so it wouldn’t get in the way of the rounding. We now audit rates of physician-to-nurse communication on rounds and how often we successfully achieve the nurse’s participation.”¹ This approach has also cut rates of phone pages from nurses to house staff, and substantially increased job satisfaction.
 

What’s different in the VA?

The work of hospitalists in the VA is mostly similar to other hospital settings, but perhaps with more intensity, Dr. Anderson said. There are comorbidities such as higher rates of PTSD, alcohol use disorder, substance abuse, and mental health issues – all of which have an effect over time on patients. But veterans also have different attitudes about, for example, pain.

“When patients are asked to rate their pain on a scale of 0 to 10, for a veteran of a foreign war, 2 out of 10 is not the same as someone else’s 2 out of 10. How do we compensate for that difference?” he said. “And while awareness of PTSD and efforts to mitigate its impact have made incredible gains over the past 15 years, we still see a lot of these issues and their manifestations in social challenges such as homelessness. We are fortunate to have VA outpatient services and homeless veteran programs to help with these issues.”

There is a different paradigm for care at the VA, Dr. Anderson said. “We are a not-for-profit institution with the welfare of veterans as our primary aim. Beyond their health and wellness, that means supporting them in other ways and reaching out into the community. As doctors and nurses we feel a kinship around that mission, although we also have to be stewards of taxpayer dollars. We recognize that the VA is a large and complicated, somewhat inertia-laden organization in which making changes can be very challenging. But there are also opportunities as a national organization to effect changes on a national scale.”

Dr. Anderson chairs the VA’s Hospitalist Field Advisory Committee (HFAC), a group of about eight hospitalists empaneled to advise the system’s Office of Specialty Care Services on clinical policy and program development. They serve 3-year terms and meet monthly by phone and annually in Washington. The HFAC’s last annual meeting occurred in mid-September 2018 in Washington with a focus on developing a hospital medicine annual survey and needs assessment, revisiting strategic goals, and convening multilateral meetings with the chiefs of medicine and emergency medicine FACs.

“Our biggest emphasis is clinical – this includes clinical pathways, best practices for managing PTSD or acute coronary syndrome, and the like. We also share management issues, such as how to configure medical records or arrange night coverage. This is a national conversation to share what some sites have already experienced and learned,” Dr. Anderson said.

“We also have a VA Academic Hospitalist Subcommittee, working together on multisite research studies and on resident education protocols. Because we’re a large system, we’re able to connect with one another and leverage what we’ve learned. I get emails almost every day about research topics from colleagues across the country,” he said. A collaborative website and email distribution list allows doctors to post questions to their peers nationwide.
 

A calling for hospital medicine

Before moving to Denver, Dr. Anderson served as a major in the Air Force Medical Corps and was based at the David Grant US Air Force Medical Center on Travis Air Force Base in California – which is where he did his residency. In the course of a “traditionalist” internal medical training, including 4-month stints on hospital wards in addition to outpatient services, he realized he had a calling for hospital medicine.

In a job at the Providence (R.I.) VA Medical Center, he exclusively practiced outpatient care, but he found that he missed key aspects of inpatient work, such as the intensity of the clinical issues and teaching encounters. “I cold-called the hospital’s chief of medicine and volunteered to start mentoring inpatient residents,” Dr. Anderson said. “That was 17 years ago.”

Another abiding interest derived from Dr. Anderson’s military service is travel medicine. While a physician in the Air Force, he was deployed to Haiti in 1995 and to Nicaragua in 2000, where he treated thousands of patients – both U.S. service personnel and local populations.

“In Haiti, our primary mission was for U.S. troops who were still based there following the 1994 Operation Uphold Democracy intervention, but there were a lot fewer of them, so we mostly kept busy providing care to Haitian nationals,” he said. “That work was eye opening, to say the least,” and led to a professional interest in tropical illnesses. “Since then, I’ve been a visiting professor for the University of Colorado posted to the University of Zimbabwe in Harare in 2012 and 2016.”

What gives Dr. Anderson such joy and enthusiasm for his VA work? “I am a curious lifelong learner. Every day, there are 10 new things I need to learn, whether clinically or operationally in a big hospital system or just the day-to-day realities of leading a group of physicians. I never feel like I’m treading water,” he said. He is also energized by teaching – seeing “the light bulb go on” for the students he is instructing – and by serving as a role model for doctors in training.

“As I contemplate all the simultaneous balls I have in the air, including our recent move into a new hospital building, sometimes I think it is kind of crazy to be doing as much as I do,” he said. “But I also take time away, balancing work versus nonwork.” He spends quality time with his wife of 21 years, 17-year-old daughter, other relatives, and friends, as well as on physical activity, reading books about philosophy, and his hobby of rebuilding motorcycles, which he says offers a kind of meditative calm.

“I also feel a deep sense of service – to patients, colleagues, students, and to the mission of the VA,” Dr. Anderson said. “There is truly something special about caring for the veteran. It’s hard to articulate, but it really keeps us coming back for more. I’ve had vets sing to me, tell jokes, do magic tricks, share their war stories. I’ve had patients open up to me in ways that were both profound and humbling.”
 

References

1. Young E et al. Impact of altered medication administration time on interdisciplinary bedside rounds on academic medical ward. J Nurs Care Qual. 2017 Jul/Sep;32(3):218-225.

Physician stress and burnout remain major concerns for the U.S. health care system, with frustrations over the electronic health record (EHR) driving much of the dissatisfaction experienced by hospitalists and other physicians in the hospital.¹ Underlying the EHR conundrum is a deeper question: Is entering clinical data on a computer the best use of a doctor’s time and professional skills? Or could a portion of that clerical function be delegated to nonphysicians?

Trained medical scribes, charting specialists who input EHR data for physicians on rounds, have been offered as a solution to potentially affect job stress for physicians and shorten their work days. But while scribes have been used and tested by different hospitalist groups around the country, the concept has not taken off in hospital medicine the way it has in certain other settings, such as emergency departments.

“The demand for scribes doesn’t seem to have materialized in a big way for hospital medicine,” said John Nelson, MD, MHM, a hospitalist and consultant in Bellevue, Wash., and a cofounder of the Society of Hospital Medicine. “I’m not convinced that scribes have had a big impact on hospitalist burnout.” It’s difficult to share scribes between doctors on a shift, and it’s a problem if the scribe and doctor get physically separated in the hospital. There’s also the question of who should pay the scribe’s salary, Dr. Nelson said.

Frustrations with the EHR can be a major factor in the experience of physician burnout, but Dr. Nelson said hospitalists can get proficient more quickly because they’re using the same computer system all day. “The bigger problem is that other doctors like surgeons don’t learn how to use the EHR and dump their routine tasks involving the EHR on the hospitalist, which means more work that is less satisfying.”

Could pairing a scribe with a hospitalist improve efficiency and decrease costs relative to the expense of employing the scribe? Are there specific settings, applications, and caseloads in hospital medicine where it makes more sense to use a scribe to support and assist doctors while they’re meeting with patients, with the doctor reviewing and editing the scribe’s work for accuracy? Could the scribe even help with physician staffing shortages by making doctors more productive?

TeamHealth, a national physician services company based in Knoxville, Tenn., has used scribes in emergency departments for years but had concluded that they made less sense for its hospitalist groups after a failure to document significant net increases in productivity, according to a 2015 report in The Hospitalist.² Michael Corvini, MD, FACP, FACEP, TeamHealth’s new regional medical director for acute care services, said he brought extensive positive experience with scribes to his new job and is quite excited about their potential for hospital medicine. “When I came to TeamHealth in July, I began to suggest that there was unrealized potential for scribes,” he said.

Dr. Corvini noted that a potential benefit of scribes for patients is that their presence may allow for more face time with the doctor. Providers, relieved of worrying about completing the chart in its entirety would be more able to focus on the patient and critical thinking. There are even benefits for scribes themselves. Often scribes are medical students, and those who are interested in pursuing a future in the health professions gain invaluable experience in the workings of medicine. “They are making a real contribution to patient care. They are a member of the health care team,” he said.

Dr. Corvini sees two primary areas in which scribes can contribute to hospital medicine. The first is shadowing the physician who is admitting patients during a high-volume admissions shift. Regular tasks like capturing the patient’s medication list and populating the History and Physical document lend themselves well to data entry by scribes, in contrast to completing more routine daily progress notes, which does not.

“They can also be helpful when there is a major transition from paper charting to the EHR or from one EHR system to another, when there is a lot of stress on the physician and risk for lost billing revenue,” Dr. Corvini said. “If scribes are trained in a particular EHR, they could help teach the physician how to use it.” TeamHealth is now in the process of running a trial of scribes at one of its sites, and the organization plans to measure productivity, provider satisfaction, and HCAHPS patient satisfaction scores.


 

A workaround – or a problem solver?

In a 2015 Viewpoint article in JAMA,³ George Gellert, MD, MPH, MPA, former chief medical information officer for the CHRISTUS Santa Rosa health system in San Antonio, Texas, and his coauthors labeled the use of scribes as a “workaround” that could curtail efforts to make EHRs more functionally operational because their use allows physicians to be satisfied with inferior EHR products.

In an interview, Dr. Gellert stated that he hasn’t changed his views about the negative consequences of scribes on EHR improvement. “The work of clinicians in using and advancing EHR technology is presently the only method we have for massively distributing and ensuring the use of evidence-based medicine,” he said. “That in turn is a critical strategy for reducing high rates of medical errors through a variety of decision-support applications.”

For better or worse, EHRs are an essential part of the solution to the epidemic of preventable, medical error–caused patient deaths, Dr. Gellert said. He also believes that substantial progress has already been made in advancing EHR usability, as reflected in the most recent product releases by leading EHR companies. However, considerable evolution is still needed in both usability and optimization of clinical decision support.

“With respect to your readers, my recommendation is to not use medical scribes, or else delimit their use to only where absolutely required. Instead, develop systematic processes to regularly capture specific physician concerns with the EHR being used, and transmit that critical information to their EHR vendor with a clear expectation that the manufacturer will address the issue in the near term, or at least in their next major product iteration or generation,” Dr. Gellert said.

By contrast, at the Management of the Hospitalized Patient conference in San Francisco in October 2015, Christine Sinsky, MD, FACP, vice president for professional satisfaction at the American Medical Association, identified documentation assistance as a helpful intervention for physician stress and burnout.⁴ In a recent email, Dr. Sinsky called documentation assistance “the most powerful intervention to give patients the time, attention, and care they need from their physicians. The data entry and data retrieval work of health care has grown over the last decade. Sharing this work with nonphysicians allows society to get the most value for its investment in physicians’ training.”

Dr. Sinsky calls documentation assistance – such as that provided by medical scribes – “a logical and strategic delegation of work according to ability for greater value,” not a workaround. She said it makes patient care safer by allowing physicians to focus on medical decision making and relationship building – rather than record keeping.
 

Experience from the front lines

Eric Edwards, MD, FAAP, FHM, of the division of hospital medicine at the University of North Carolina’s Hillsborough Hospital campus, recently presented a poster on his group’s experience with medical scribes at a meeting of the North Carolina Triangle Chapter of SHM. Their research concluded that scribes can be successfully incorporated into an inpatient hospital medicine practice and thus increase provider satisfaction and decrease the time clinicians spend charting.

“We were able to get the support of the hospital administration to pilot the use of scribes 3 days per week, which we’ve now done for almost a year,” Dr. Edwards said. Scribes are employed through a local company, MedScribes, and they work alongside admitting hospitalists during their 10-hour shifts. The hospitalists have been overwhelmingly positive about their experience, he said. “We established that it saves the physician 15 minutes per patient encounter by helping with documentation.”

It’s important that the scribe gets to know an individual provider’s personal preferences, Dr. Edwards said. Some hospitalists create their own charting templates. There’s also a need to train the clinician in how to use the medical scribe. For example, physicians are instructed to call out physical findings during their exam, which simultaneously informs the patient while allowing the scribe to document the exam.

“We are working on getting more formal data about the scribe experience,” he added. “But we have found that our providers love it, and it improves their efficiency and productivity. The danger is if the physician becomes too reliant on the scribe and fails to exercise due diligence in reviewing the scribe’s notes to ensure that all relevant information is in the chart and irrelevant information is not. We need to make sure we are carefully reviewing and signing off on the scribe’s notes,” he explained.

“I think we’re years away from improving the EHR to the point that would allow us to call it doctor friendly,” Dr. Edwards said. “For now, the scribe is a great way to alleviate some of the physician’s burden. But for hospitalist groups to use scribes successfully, it can’t be done haphazardly. We are lucky to have an experienced local scribe company to partner with. They provide systematic training and orientation. It’s also important that scribes are trained in the specific EHR that they will be using.”

Christine Lum Lung, MD, SFHM, CEO and medical director of Northern Colorado Hospitalists, a hospital medicine group at the University of Colorado’s North Campus hospitals in Fort Collins, has been studying the use of scribes since 2014. “We had a gap in bringing on new doctors fast enough for our group’s needs, so I looked into the return on investment from scribes and pitched it to our group,” she said. “It’s difficult to say what has been the actual impact on caseload, but we all think it has reduced physician workdays by an hour or greater.”

The 32-member hospitalist group, which covers two facilities, has a designated director of scribes who periodically surveys the hospitalists’ satisfaction with the scribes. “Now we all embrace the use of scribes. Satisfaction is high, and quality of life has improved,” Dr. Lum Lung said. “It’s hard to quantify, but we feel like it helps with burnout for us to be able to leave work earlier, and it alleviates some of the other stresses in our workday.”

She said scribes are important to the medical team not just with managing the EHR but also with other burdens such as documenting compliance with code status, VTEs, and other quality requirements, and to help with other regulatory issues. Scribes can look up lab values and radiology reports. When there are downtimes, they can prepare discharge plans.

Typically, there are five scribes on duty for 18 hours a day at each hospital, Dr. Lum Lung said. But only those doctors primarily doing admissions are assured of having a scribe to round with them. “Most doctors in the group would say the greatest efficiency of scribes is with admitting,” she said. The company that provides scribes to the UC hospitals, ScribeAmerica, handles administration, training, and human resource issues, and the scribe team has a designated Lead Scribe and Quality Scribe at their facility.


 

Studying the benefits

Andrew Friedson, PhD, a health care economist at the University of Colorado in Denver, recently conducted a 9-month randomized experiment in three hospital emergency rooms in the Denver area to determine the effects of scribes on measures of emergency physician productivity.⁵ He found that scribes reduced patient wait times in the emergency department by about 13 minutes per patient, while greatly decreasing the amount of time physicians spent after a shift completing their charting, which thus lowered overtime costs for ED physicians.

“This is one of the first times medical scribes have been studied with a randomized, controlled trial,” Dr. Friedson said. “I tracked the amount of overtime, patient waiting, and charge capture for each encounter. These were hospitals where the emergency doctors weren’t allowed to go home until their charting was done.” He discovered that there was a large drop in the time between when patients arrived at the ED and when a decision was made regarding whether to admit them. Additionally, charge capture increased significantly, and physicians had more time to perform medical procedures. Dr. Friedson believes that his findings hold implications for other settings and medical groups, including hospital medicine. To the extent that scribes free up hospitalists to perform tasks other than charting, they should provide an efficiency benefit.

So why hasn’t the medical scribe caught on in a bigger way for hospitalists, compared with ED physicians? For Dr. Corvini, the ED is an obvious, high-pressure, high-volume setting where the cost of the scribe can be easily recouped. “That doesn’t exist in such an obvious fashion in hospital medicine, except where high-volume admissions are concentrated in a single physician’s caseload,” he said. Not all hospitalist groups will fit that model. Some may divide admissions between hospitalists on a shift, and others may not be large enough to experience significant caseload pressures.

“EDs are obviously time pressured, and once scribes demonstrate the ability to produce documentation in a high-quality fashion, they are quickly accepted. In hospital medicine, the time pressures are different – not necessarily less, but different,” Dr. Corvini said. There are also differences in physician responsibilities between the ED and hospital medicine, as well as in physicians’ willingness to let go of documentation responsibilities. “My prediction, if the scribe test is rolled out successfully in TeamHealth, with measurable benefits, it will be adopted in other settings where it fits.”
 

References

1. Shanafelt TD et al. Relationship between clerical burden and characteristics of the electronic environment with physician burnout and professional satisfaction. Mayo Clin Proc. 2016 Jul;91(7):836-48.

2. Collins TR. Use of medical scribes spurs debate about costs, difficulties of electronic health records. The Hospitalist; 2015 Oct.

3. Gellert GA et al. The rise of the medical scribe industry: Implications for the advancement of electronic health records. JAMA; 2015;313(13):1315-6.

4. Beresford L. Electronic Health Records Key Driver of Physician Burnout. The Hospitalist; 2015 Dec.

5. Friedson AI. Medical scribes as an input in healthcare production: Evidence from a randomized experiment. Am J Health Econ. 2017 Oct 2. doi: /10.1162/ajhe_a_00103.






 

Physician stress and burnout remain major concerns for the U.S. health care system, with frustrations over the electronic health record (EHR) driving much of the dissatisfaction experienced by hospitalists and other physicians in the hospital.¹ Underlying the EHR conundrum is a deeper question: Is entering clinical data on a computer the best use of a doctor’s time and professional skills? Or could a portion of that clerical function be delegated to nonphysicians?

Trained medical scribes, charting specialists who input EHR data for physicians on rounds, have been offered as a solution to potentially affect job stress for physicians and shorten their work days. But while scribes have been used and tested by different hospitalist groups around the country, the concept has not taken off in hospital medicine the way it has in certain other settings, such as emergency departments.

“The demand for scribes doesn’t seem to have materialized in a big way for hospital medicine,” said John Nelson, MD, MHM, a hospitalist and consultant in Bellevue, Wash., and a cofounder of the Society of Hospital Medicine. “I’m not convinced that scribes have had a big impact on hospitalist burnout.” It’s difficult to share scribes between doctors on a shift, and it’s a problem if the scribe and doctor get physically separated in the hospital. There’s also the question of who should pay the scribe’s salary, Dr. Nelson said.

Frustrations with the EHR can be a major factor in the experience of physician burnout, but Dr. Nelson said hospitalists can get proficient more quickly because they’re using the same computer system all day. “The bigger problem is that other doctors like surgeons don’t learn how to use the EHR and dump their routine tasks involving the EHR on the hospitalist, which means more work that is less satisfying.”

Could pairing a scribe with a hospitalist improve efficiency and decrease costs relative to the expense of employing the scribe? Are there specific settings, applications, and caseloads in hospital medicine where it makes more sense to use a scribe to support and assist doctors while they’re meeting with patients, with the doctor reviewing and editing the scribe’s work for accuracy? Could the scribe even help with physician staffing shortages by making doctors more productive?

TeamHealth, a national physician services company based in Knoxville, Tenn., has used scribes in emergency departments for years but had concluded that they made less sense for its hospitalist groups after a failure to document significant net increases in productivity, according to a 2015 report in The Hospitalist.² Michael Corvini, MD, FACP, FACEP, TeamHealth’s new regional medical director for acute care services, said he brought extensive positive experience with scribes to his new job and is quite excited about their potential for hospital medicine. “When I came to TeamHealth in July, I began to suggest that there was unrealized potential for scribes,” he said.

Dr. Corvini noted that a potential benefit of scribes for patients is that their presence may allow for more face time with the doctor. Providers, relieved of worrying about completing the chart in its entirety would be more able to focus on the patient and critical thinking. There are even benefits for scribes themselves. Often scribes are medical students, and those who are interested in pursuing a future in the health professions gain invaluable experience in the workings of medicine. “They are making a real contribution to patient care. They are a member of the health care team,” he said.

Dr. Corvini sees two primary areas in which scribes can contribute to hospital medicine. The first is shadowing the physician who is admitting patients during a high-volume admissions shift. Regular tasks like capturing the patient’s medication list and populating the History and Physical document lend themselves well to data entry by scribes, in contrast to completing more routine daily progress notes, which does not.

“They can also be helpful when there is a major transition from paper charting to the EHR or from one EHR system to another, when there is a lot of stress on the physician and risk for lost billing revenue,” Dr. Corvini said. “If scribes are trained in a particular EHR, they could help teach the physician how to use it.” TeamHealth is now in the process of running a trial of scribes at one of its sites, and the organization plans to measure productivity, provider satisfaction, and HCAHPS patient satisfaction scores.


 

A workaround – or a problem solver?

In a 2015 Viewpoint article in JAMA,³ George Gellert, MD, MPH, MPA, former chief medical information officer for the CHRISTUS Santa Rosa health system in San Antonio, Texas, and his coauthors labeled the use of scribes as a “workaround” that could curtail efforts to make EHRs more functionally operational because their use allows physicians to be satisfied with inferior EHR products.

In an interview, Dr. Gellert stated that he hasn’t changed his views about the negative consequences of scribes on EHR improvement. “The work of clinicians in using and advancing EHR technology is presently the only method we have for massively distributing and ensuring the use of evidence-based medicine,” he said. “That in turn is a critical strategy for reducing high rates of medical errors through a variety of decision-support applications.”

For better or worse, EHRs are an essential part of the solution to the epidemic of preventable, medical error–caused patient deaths, Dr. Gellert said. He also believes that substantial progress has already been made in advancing EHR usability, as reflected in the most recent product releases by leading EHR companies. However, considerable evolution is still needed in both usability and optimization of clinical decision support.

“With respect to your readers, my recommendation is to not use medical scribes, or else delimit their use to only where absolutely required. Instead, develop systematic processes to regularly capture specific physician concerns with the EHR being used, and transmit that critical information to their EHR vendor with a clear expectation that the manufacturer will address the issue in the near term, or at least in their next major product iteration or generation,” Dr. Gellert said.

By contrast, at the Management of the Hospitalized Patient conference in San Francisco in October 2015, Christine Sinsky, MD, FACP, vice president for professional satisfaction at the American Medical Association, identified documentation assistance as a helpful intervention for physician stress and burnout.⁴ In a recent email, Dr. Sinsky called documentation assistance “the most powerful intervention to give patients the time, attention, and care they need from their physicians. The data entry and data retrieval work of health care has grown over the last decade. Sharing this work with nonphysicians allows society to get the most value for its investment in physicians’ training.”

Dr. Sinsky calls documentation assistance – such as that provided by medical scribes – “a logical and strategic delegation of work according to ability for greater value,” not a workaround. She said it makes patient care safer by allowing physicians to focus on medical decision making and relationship building – rather than record keeping.
 

Experience from the front lines

Eric Edwards, MD, FAAP, FHM, of the division of hospital medicine at the University of North Carolina’s Hillsborough Hospital campus, recently presented a poster on his group’s experience with medical scribes at a meeting of the North Carolina Triangle Chapter of SHM. Their research concluded that scribes can be successfully incorporated into an inpatient hospital medicine practice and thus increase provider satisfaction and decrease the time clinicians spend charting.

“We were able to get the support of the hospital administration to pilot the use of scribes 3 days per week, which we’ve now done for almost a year,” Dr. Edwards said. Scribes are employed through a local company, MedScribes, and they work alongside admitting hospitalists during their 10-hour shifts. The hospitalists have been overwhelmingly positive about their experience, he said. “We established that it saves the physician 15 minutes per patient encounter by helping with documentation.”

It’s important that the scribe gets to know an individual provider’s personal preferences, Dr. Edwards said. Some hospitalists create their own charting templates. There’s also a need to train the clinician in how to use the medical scribe. For example, physicians are instructed to call out physical findings during their exam, which simultaneously informs the patient while allowing the scribe to document the exam.

“We are working on getting more formal data about the scribe experience,” he added. “But we have found that our providers love it, and it improves their efficiency and productivity. The danger is if the physician becomes too reliant on the scribe and fails to exercise due diligence in reviewing the scribe’s notes to ensure that all relevant information is in the chart and irrelevant information is not. We need to make sure we are carefully reviewing and signing off on the scribe’s notes,” he explained.

“I think we’re years away from improving the EHR to the point that would allow us to call it doctor friendly,” Dr. Edwards said. “For now, the scribe is a great way to alleviate some of the physician’s burden. But for hospitalist groups to use scribes successfully, it can’t be done haphazardly. We are lucky to have an experienced local scribe company to partner with. They provide systematic training and orientation. It’s also important that scribes are trained in the specific EHR that they will be using.”

Christine Lum Lung, MD, SFHM, CEO and medical director of Northern Colorado Hospitalists, a hospital medicine group at the University of Colorado’s North Campus hospitals in Fort Collins, has been studying the use of scribes since 2014. “We had a gap in bringing on new doctors fast enough for our group’s needs, so I looked into the return on investment from scribes and pitched it to our group,” she said. “It’s difficult to say what has been the actual impact on caseload, but we all think it has reduced physician workdays by an hour or greater.”

The 32-member hospitalist group, which covers two facilities, has a designated director of scribes who periodically surveys the hospitalists’ satisfaction with the scribes. “Now we all embrace the use of scribes. Satisfaction is high, and quality of life has improved,” Dr. Lum Lung said. “It’s hard to quantify, but we feel like it helps with burnout for us to be able to leave work earlier, and it alleviates some of the other stresses in our workday.”

She said scribes are important to the medical team not just with managing the EHR but also with other burdens such as documenting compliance with code status, VTEs, and other quality requirements, and to help with other regulatory issues. Scribes can look up lab values and radiology reports. When there are downtimes, they can prepare discharge plans.

Typically, there are five scribes on duty for 18 hours a day at each hospital, Dr. Lum Lung said. But only those doctors primarily doing admissions are assured of having a scribe to round with them. “Most doctors in the group would say the greatest efficiency of scribes is with admitting,” she said. The company that provides scribes to the UC hospitals, ScribeAmerica, handles administration, training, and human resource issues, and the scribe team has a designated Lead Scribe and Quality Scribe at their facility.


 

Studying the benefits

Andrew Friedson, PhD, a health care economist at the University of Colorado in Denver, recently conducted a 9-month randomized experiment in three hospital emergency rooms in the Denver area to determine the effects of scribes on measures of emergency physician productivity.⁵ He found that scribes reduced patient wait times in the emergency department by about 13 minutes per patient, while greatly decreasing the amount of time physicians spent after a shift completing their charting, which thus lowered overtime costs for ED physicians.

“This is one of the first times medical scribes have been studied with a randomized, controlled trial,” Dr. Friedson said. “I tracked the amount of overtime, patient waiting, and charge capture for each encounter. These were hospitals where the emergency doctors weren’t allowed to go home until their charting was done.” He discovered that there was a large drop in the time between when patients arrived at the ED and when a decision was made regarding whether to admit them. Additionally, charge capture increased significantly, and physicians had more time to perform medical procedures. Dr. Friedson believes that his findings hold implications for other settings and medical groups, including hospital medicine. To the extent that scribes free up hospitalists to perform tasks other than charting, they should provide an efficiency benefit.

So why hasn’t the medical scribe caught on in a bigger way for hospitalists, compared with ED physicians? For Dr. Corvini, the ED is an obvious, high-pressure, high-volume setting where the cost of the scribe can be easily recouped. “That doesn’t exist in such an obvious fashion in hospital medicine, except where high-volume admissions are concentrated in a single physician’s caseload,” he said. Not all hospitalist groups will fit that model. Some may divide admissions between hospitalists on a shift, and others may not be large enough to experience significant caseload pressures.

“EDs are obviously time pressured, and once scribes demonstrate the ability to produce documentation in a high-quality fashion, they are quickly accepted. In hospital medicine, the time pressures are different – not necessarily less, but different,” Dr. Corvini said. There are also differences in physician responsibilities between the ED and hospital medicine, as well as in physicians’ willingness to let go of documentation responsibilities. “My prediction, if the scribe test is rolled out successfully in TeamHealth, with measurable benefits, it will be adopted in other settings where it fits.”
 

References

1. Shanafelt TD et al. Relationship between clerical burden and characteristics of the electronic environment with physician burnout and professional satisfaction. Mayo Clin Proc. 2016 Jul;91(7):836-48.

2. Collins TR. Use of medical scribes spurs debate about costs, difficulties of electronic health records. The Hospitalist; 2015 Oct.

3. Gellert GA et al. The rise of the medical scribe industry: Implications for the advancement of electronic health records. JAMA; 2015;313(13):1315-6.

4. Beresford L. Electronic Health Records Key Driver of Physician Burnout. The Hospitalist; 2015 Dec.

5. Friedson AI. Medical scribes as an input in healthcare production: Evidence from a randomized experiment. Am J Health Econ. 2017 Oct 2. doi: /10.1162/ajhe_a_00103.






 

Physician stress and burnout remain major concerns for the U.S. health care system, with frustrations over the electronic health record (EHR) driving much of the dissatisfaction experienced by hospitalists and other physicians in the hospital.¹ Underlying the EHR conundrum is a deeper question: Is entering clinical data on a computer the best use of a doctor’s time and professional skills? Or could a portion of that clerical function be delegated to nonphysicians?

Trained medical scribes, charting specialists who input EHR data for physicians on rounds, have been offered as a solution to potentially affect job stress for physicians and shorten their work days. But while scribes have been used and tested by different hospitalist groups around the country, the concept has not taken off in hospital medicine the way it has in certain other settings, such as emergency departments.

“The demand for scribes doesn’t seem to have materialized in a big way for hospital medicine,” said John Nelson, MD, MHM, a hospitalist and consultant in Bellevue, Wash., and a cofounder of the Society of Hospital Medicine. “I’m not convinced that scribes have had a big impact on hospitalist burnout.” It’s difficult to share scribes between doctors on a shift, and it’s a problem if the scribe and doctor get physically separated in the hospital. There’s also the question of who should pay the scribe’s salary, Dr. Nelson said.

Frustrations with the EHR can be a major factor in the experience of physician burnout, but Dr. Nelson said hospitalists can get proficient more quickly because they’re using the same computer system all day. “The bigger problem is that other doctors like surgeons don’t learn how to use the EHR and dump their routine tasks involving the EHR on the hospitalist, which means more work that is less satisfying.”

Could pairing a scribe with a hospitalist improve efficiency and decrease costs relative to the expense of employing the scribe? Are there specific settings, applications, and caseloads in hospital medicine where it makes more sense to use a scribe to support and assist doctors while they’re meeting with patients, with the doctor reviewing and editing the scribe’s work for accuracy? Could the scribe even help with physician staffing shortages by making doctors more productive?

TeamHealth, a national physician services company based in Knoxville, Tenn., has used scribes in emergency departments for years but had concluded that they made less sense for its hospitalist groups after a failure to document significant net increases in productivity, according to a 2015 report in The Hospitalist.² Michael Corvini, MD, FACP, FACEP, TeamHealth’s new regional medical director for acute care services, said he brought extensive positive experience with scribes to his new job and is quite excited about their potential for hospital medicine. “When I came to TeamHealth in July, I began to suggest that there was unrealized potential for scribes,” he said.

Dr. Corvini noted that a potential benefit of scribes for patients is that their presence may allow for more face time with the doctor. Providers, relieved of worrying about completing the chart in its entirety would be more able to focus on the patient and critical thinking. There are even benefits for scribes themselves. Often scribes are medical students, and those who are interested in pursuing a future in the health professions gain invaluable experience in the workings of medicine. “They are making a real contribution to patient care. They are a member of the health care team,” he said.

Dr. Corvini sees two primary areas in which scribes can contribute to hospital medicine. The first is shadowing the physician who is admitting patients during a high-volume admissions shift. Regular tasks like capturing the patient’s medication list and populating the History and Physical document lend themselves well to data entry by scribes, in contrast to completing more routine daily progress notes, which does not.

“They can also be helpful when there is a major transition from paper charting to the EHR or from one EHR system to another, when there is a lot of stress on the physician and risk for lost billing revenue,” Dr. Corvini said. “If scribes are trained in a particular EHR, they could help teach the physician how to use it.” TeamHealth is now in the process of running a trial of scribes at one of its sites, and the organization plans to measure productivity, provider satisfaction, and HCAHPS patient satisfaction scores.


 

A workaround – or a problem solver?

In a 2015 Viewpoint article in JAMA,³ George Gellert, MD, MPH, MPA, former chief medical information officer for the CHRISTUS Santa Rosa health system in San Antonio, Texas, and his coauthors labeled the use of scribes as a “workaround” that could curtail efforts to make EHRs more functionally operational because their use allows physicians to be satisfied with inferior EHR products.

In an interview, Dr. Gellert stated that he hasn’t changed his views about the negative consequences of scribes on EHR improvement. “The work of clinicians in using and advancing EHR technology is presently the only method we have for massively distributing and ensuring the use of evidence-based medicine,” he said. “That in turn is a critical strategy for reducing high rates of medical errors through a variety of decision-support applications.”

For better or worse, EHRs are an essential part of the solution to the epidemic of preventable, medical error–caused patient deaths, Dr. Gellert said. He also believes that substantial progress has already been made in advancing EHR usability, as reflected in the most recent product releases by leading EHR companies. However, considerable evolution is still needed in both usability and optimization of clinical decision support.

“With respect to your readers, my recommendation is to not use medical scribes, or else delimit their use to only where absolutely required. Instead, develop systematic processes to regularly capture specific physician concerns with the EHR being used, and transmit that critical information to their EHR vendor with a clear expectation that the manufacturer will address the issue in the near term, or at least in their next major product iteration or generation,” Dr. Gellert said.

By contrast, at the Management of the Hospitalized Patient conference in San Francisco in October 2015, Christine Sinsky, MD, FACP, vice president for professional satisfaction at the American Medical Association, identified documentation assistance as a helpful intervention for physician stress and burnout.⁴ In a recent email, Dr. Sinsky called documentation assistance “the most powerful intervention to give patients the time, attention, and care they need from their physicians. The data entry and data retrieval work of health care has grown over the last decade. Sharing this work with nonphysicians allows society to get the most value for its investment in physicians’ training.”

Dr. Sinsky calls documentation assistance – such as that provided by medical scribes – “a logical and strategic delegation of work according to ability for greater value,” not a workaround. She said it makes patient care safer by allowing physicians to focus on medical decision making and relationship building – rather than record keeping.
 

Experience from the front lines

Eric Edwards, MD, FAAP, FHM, of the division of hospital medicine at the University of North Carolina’s Hillsborough Hospital campus, recently presented a poster on his group’s experience with medical scribes at a meeting of the North Carolina Triangle Chapter of SHM. Their research concluded that scribes can be successfully incorporated into an inpatient hospital medicine practice and thus increase provider satisfaction and decrease the time clinicians spend charting.

“We were able to get the support of the hospital administration to pilot the use of scribes 3 days per week, which we’ve now done for almost a year,” Dr. Edwards said. Scribes are employed through a local company, MedScribes, and they work alongside admitting hospitalists during their 10-hour shifts. The hospitalists have been overwhelmingly positive about their experience, he said. “We established that it saves the physician 15 minutes per patient encounter by helping with documentation.”

It’s important that the scribe gets to know an individual provider’s personal preferences, Dr. Edwards said. Some hospitalists create their own charting templates. There’s also a need to train the clinician in how to use the medical scribe. For example, physicians are instructed to call out physical findings during their exam, which simultaneously informs the patient while allowing the scribe to document the exam.

“We are working on getting more formal data about the scribe experience,” he added. “But we have found that our providers love it, and it improves their efficiency and productivity. The danger is if the physician becomes too reliant on the scribe and fails to exercise due diligence in reviewing the scribe’s notes to ensure that all relevant information is in the chart and irrelevant information is not. We need to make sure we are carefully reviewing and signing off on the scribe’s notes,” he explained.

“I think we’re years away from improving the EHR to the point that would allow us to call it doctor friendly,” Dr. Edwards said. “For now, the scribe is a great way to alleviate some of the physician’s burden. But for hospitalist groups to use scribes successfully, it can’t be done haphazardly. We are lucky to have an experienced local scribe company to partner with. They provide systematic training and orientation. It’s also important that scribes are trained in the specific EHR that they will be using.”

Christine Lum Lung, MD, SFHM, CEO and medical director of Northern Colorado Hospitalists, a hospital medicine group at the University of Colorado’s North Campus hospitals in Fort Collins, has been studying the use of scribes since 2014. “We had a gap in bringing on new doctors fast enough for our group’s needs, so I looked into the return on investment from scribes and pitched it to our group,” she said. “It’s difficult to say what has been the actual impact on caseload, but we all think it has reduced physician workdays by an hour or greater.”

The 32-member hospitalist group, which covers two facilities, has a designated director of scribes who periodically surveys the hospitalists’ satisfaction with the scribes. “Now we all embrace the use of scribes. Satisfaction is high, and quality of life has improved,” Dr. Lum Lung said. “It’s hard to quantify, but we feel like it helps with burnout for us to be able to leave work earlier, and it alleviates some of the other stresses in our workday.”

She said scribes are important to the medical team not just with managing the EHR but also with other burdens such as documenting compliance with code status, VTEs, and other quality requirements, and to help with other regulatory issues. Scribes can look up lab values and radiology reports. When there are downtimes, they can prepare discharge plans.

Typically, there are five scribes on duty for 18 hours a day at each hospital, Dr. Lum Lung said. But only those doctors primarily doing admissions are assured of having a scribe to round with them. “Most doctors in the group would say the greatest efficiency of scribes is with admitting,” she said. The company that provides scribes to the UC hospitals, ScribeAmerica, handles administration, training, and human resource issues, and the scribe team has a designated Lead Scribe and Quality Scribe at their facility.


 

Studying the benefits

Andrew Friedson, PhD, a health care economist at the University of Colorado in Denver, recently conducted a 9-month randomized experiment in three hospital emergency rooms in the Denver area to determine the effects of scribes on measures of emergency physician productivity.⁵ He found that scribes reduced patient wait times in the emergency department by about 13 minutes per patient, while greatly decreasing the amount of time physicians spent after a shift completing their charting, which thus lowered overtime costs for ED physicians.

“This is one of the first times medical scribes have been studied with a randomized, controlled trial,” Dr. Friedson said. “I tracked the amount of overtime, patient waiting, and charge capture for each encounter. These were hospitals where the emergency doctors weren’t allowed to go home until their charting was done.” He discovered that there was a large drop in the time between when patients arrived at the ED and when a decision was made regarding whether to admit them. Additionally, charge capture increased significantly, and physicians had more time to perform medical procedures. Dr. Friedson believes that his findings hold implications for other settings and medical groups, including hospital medicine. To the extent that scribes free up hospitalists to perform tasks other than charting, they should provide an efficiency benefit.

So why hasn’t the medical scribe caught on in a bigger way for hospitalists, compared with ED physicians? For Dr. Corvini, the ED is an obvious, high-pressure, high-volume setting where the cost of the scribe can be easily recouped. “That doesn’t exist in such an obvious fashion in hospital medicine, except where high-volume admissions are concentrated in a single physician’s caseload,” he said. Not all hospitalist groups will fit that model. Some may divide admissions between hospitalists on a shift, and others may not be large enough to experience significant caseload pressures.

“EDs are obviously time pressured, and once scribes demonstrate the ability to produce documentation in a high-quality fashion, they are quickly accepted. In hospital medicine, the time pressures are different – not necessarily less, but different,” Dr. Corvini said. There are also differences in physician responsibilities between the ED and hospital medicine, as well as in physicians’ willingness to let go of documentation responsibilities. “My prediction, if the scribe test is rolled out successfully in TeamHealth, with measurable benefits, it will be adopted in other settings where it fits.”
 

References

1. Shanafelt TD et al. Relationship between clerical burden and characteristics of the electronic environment with physician burnout and professional satisfaction. Mayo Clin Proc. 2016 Jul;91(7):836-48.

2. Collins TR. Use of medical scribes spurs debate about costs, difficulties of electronic health records. The Hospitalist; 2015 Oct.

3. Gellert GA et al. The rise of the medical scribe industry: Implications for the advancement of electronic health records. JAMA; 2015;313(13):1315-6.

4. Beresford L. Electronic Health Records Key Driver of Physician Burnout. The Hospitalist; 2015 Dec.

5. Friedson AI. Medical scribes as an input in healthcare production: Evidence from a randomized experiment. Am J Health Econ. 2017 Oct 2. doi: /10.1162/ajhe_a_00103.






 

Editor’s note: Each month, the Society of Hospitalist Medicine puts the spotlight on some of our most active members who are making substantial contributions to hospital medicine. Visit www.hospitalmedicine.org for more information on how you can lend your expertise to help improve the care of hospitalized patients.

This month, The Hospitalist spotlights Barbara Egan, MD, FACP, SFHM, chief of the hospital medicine service in the department of medicine at Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center in New York. Barbara has been a member of SHM since 2005, is dual certified in hospital medicine and palliative care, and is the chair of SHM’s Palliative Care Work Group.

When did you first hear about SHM, and why did you decide to become a member?

I first learned about SHM when I was an internal medicine resident at Brigham and Women’s Hospital, Boston, in the early 2000s. BWH had an extremely strong hospitalist group; the staff I worked with served as powerful role models for me and inspired my interest in becoming a hospitalist. One of my attendings suggested that I join SHM, which I did right after I graduated from residency. I attended my first SHM Annual Conference in 2005. By then, I was working as a hospitalist at Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center. SHM and the field of hospital medicine have exploded since my career first began, and I am happy to have grown alongside them. Similarly, our hospital medicine group here at MSKCC has dramatically grown, from 1 hospitalist (me) to more than 30!

How did you get involved with SHM’s Palliative Care Work Group, and what has the work group accomplished since you joined?

I was honored to be invited to join SHM’s Palliative Care Work Group in 2017 by Wendy Anderson, MD, a colleague and now a friend from University of California, San Francisco. Wendy is a visionary leader who practices and researches at the intersection of palliative care and hospital medicine. She and I met during 2015, when we were both invited to join a collaboration between SHM and the Hastings Center in Garrison, N.Y., which was aimed at improving hospitalists’ ability to provide outstanding care to hospitalized patients with life-limiting illnesses. That collaboration resulted in the Improving Communication about Serious Illness–Implementation Guide, a compilation of resources and best practices.

Wendy was chairing the SHM Palliative Care Work Group and invited me to join, which I did with great enthusiasm. This group consists of several passionate and brilliant hospitalists whose practices, in a variety of ways, involve both hospital medicine and palliative medicine. I was so honored when Wendy passed the baton to me last spring and invited me to chair the Work Group. I am lucky to have the opportunity to collaborate with this group of dynamic individuals, and we are well supported by an outstanding SHM staff member, Nick Marzano.
 

Are there any new projects that the work group is currently focusing on?

The primary focus of SHM’s Palliative Care Work Group is educational. That is, we aim to assess and help meet the educational needs of hospitalists, thereby helping to empower them to be outstanding providers of primary palliative care to seriously ill, hospitalized patients. To that end, we were very proud to orchestrate a palliative care mini-track for the first time at HM18. To our group’s delight, the attendance and reviews of that track were great. Thus, we were invited to further expand the palliative care offerings at HM19. We are busy planning for HM19: a full-day pre-course in palliative medicine; several podium presentations which will touch on ethical challenges, symptom management, prognostication, and other important topics; and a workshop in communication skills.
 

What led to your dual certification and how do your two specialties overlap?

I am board certified in internal medicine with Focused Practice in Hospital Medicine by virtue of my clinical training and my primary clinical practice as a hospitalist. As a hospitalist in a cancer center, I spend most of my time caring for patients with late- and end-stage malignancy. As such, early in my career, I had to develop a broad base of palliative medical skills, such as pain and symptom management and communication skills. I find this work extremely rewarding, albeit emotionally taxing. I have learned to redefine what clinical “success” looks like – my patients often have unfixable medical problems, but I can always strive to improve their lives in some way, even if that means helping to provide them with a painless, dignified death as opposed to curing them.

When the American Board of Medical Specialties established a board certification in Hospice and Palliative Medicine, there briefly existed a pathway to be “grandfathered” in, i.e., to qualify for board certification through an examination and clinical experience, as opposed to a fellowship. I jumped at the chance to formalize my palliative care skills and experience, and I attained board certification in 2012. This allowed me to further diversify my clinical practice here at MSKCC.

Hospital medicine is still my first love, and I spend most of my time practicing as a hospitalist on our solid tumor services. But now I also spend several weeks each year attending as a consultant on our inpatient supportive care service. In that role, I am able to collaborate with a fantastic multidisciplinary team consisting of MDs, NPs, a chaplain, a pharmacist, a social worker, and integrative medicine practitioners. I also love the opportunity to teach and mentor our palliative medicine fellows.

To me, the opportunity to marry hospital medicine and palliative medicine in my career was a natural fit. Hospitalists, particularly those caring exclusively for cancer patients like I do, need to provide excellent palliative care to our patients every day. The opportunity to further my training and to obtain board certification was a golden one, and I love being able to wear both hats here at MSKCC.
 

Ms. Steele is a marketing communications specialist at the Society of Hospital Medicine.

Editor’s note: Each month, the Society of Hospitalist Medicine puts the spotlight on some of our most active members who are making substantial contributions to hospital medicine. Visit www.hospitalmedicine.org for more information on how you can lend your expertise to help improve the care of hospitalized patients.

This month, The Hospitalist spotlights Barbara Egan, MD, FACP, SFHM, chief of the hospital medicine service in the department of medicine at Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center in New York. Barbara has been a member of SHM since 2005, is dual certified in hospital medicine and palliative care, and is the chair of SHM’s Palliative Care Work Group.

When did you first hear about SHM, and why did you decide to become a member?

I first learned about SHM when I was an internal medicine resident at Brigham and Women’s Hospital, Boston, in the early 2000s. BWH had an extremely strong hospitalist group; the staff I worked with served as powerful role models for me and inspired my interest in becoming a hospitalist. One of my attendings suggested that I join SHM, which I did right after I graduated from residency. I attended my first SHM Annual Conference in 2005. By then, I was working as a hospitalist at Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center. SHM and the field of hospital medicine have exploded since my career first began, and I am happy to have grown alongside them. Similarly, our hospital medicine group here at MSKCC has dramatically grown, from 1 hospitalist (me) to more than 30!

How did you get involved with SHM’s Palliative Care Work Group, and what has the work group accomplished since you joined?

I was honored to be invited to join SHM’s Palliative Care Work Group in 2017 by Wendy Anderson, MD, a colleague and now a friend from University of California, San Francisco. Wendy is a visionary leader who practices and researches at the intersection of palliative care and hospital medicine. She and I met during 2015, when we were both invited to join a collaboration between SHM and the Hastings Center in Garrison, N.Y., which was aimed at improving hospitalists’ ability to provide outstanding care to hospitalized patients with life-limiting illnesses. That collaboration resulted in the Improving Communication about Serious Illness–Implementation Guide, a compilation of resources and best practices.

Wendy was chairing the SHM Palliative Care Work Group and invited me to join, which I did with great enthusiasm. This group consists of several passionate and brilliant hospitalists whose practices, in a variety of ways, involve both hospital medicine and palliative medicine. I was so honored when Wendy passed the baton to me last spring and invited me to chair the Work Group. I am lucky to have the opportunity to collaborate with this group of dynamic individuals, and we are well supported by an outstanding SHM staff member, Nick Marzano.
 

Are there any new projects that the work group is currently focusing on?

The primary focus of SHM’s Palliative Care Work Group is educational. That is, we aim to assess and help meet the educational needs of hospitalists, thereby helping to empower them to be outstanding providers of primary palliative care to seriously ill, hospitalized patients. To that end, we were very proud to orchestrate a palliative care mini-track for the first time at HM18. To our group’s delight, the attendance and reviews of that track were great. Thus, we were invited to further expand the palliative care offerings at HM19. We are busy planning for HM19: a full-day pre-course in palliative medicine; several podium presentations which will touch on ethical challenges, symptom management, prognostication, and other important topics; and a workshop in communication skills.
 

What led to your dual certification and how do your two specialties overlap?

I am board certified in internal medicine with Focused Practice in Hospital Medicine by virtue of my clinical training and my primary clinical practice as a hospitalist. As a hospitalist in a cancer center, I spend most of my time caring for patients with late- and end-stage malignancy. As such, early in my career, I had to develop a broad base of palliative medical skills, such as pain and symptom management and communication skills. I find this work extremely rewarding, albeit emotionally taxing. I have learned to redefine what clinical “success” looks like – my patients often have unfixable medical problems, but I can always strive to improve their lives in some way, even if that means helping to provide them with a painless, dignified death as opposed to curing them.

When the American Board of Medical Specialties established a board certification in Hospice and Palliative Medicine, there briefly existed a pathway to be “grandfathered” in, i.e., to qualify for board certification through an examination and clinical experience, as opposed to a fellowship. I jumped at the chance to formalize my palliative care skills and experience, and I attained board certification in 2012. This allowed me to further diversify my clinical practice here at MSKCC.

Hospital medicine is still my first love, and I spend most of my time practicing as a hospitalist on our solid tumor services. But now I also spend several weeks each year attending as a consultant on our inpatient supportive care service. In that role, I am able to collaborate with a fantastic multidisciplinary team consisting of MDs, NPs, a chaplain, a pharmacist, a social worker, and integrative medicine practitioners. I also love the opportunity to teach and mentor our palliative medicine fellows.

To me, the opportunity to marry hospital medicine and palliative medicine in my career was a natural fit. Hospitalists, particularly those caring exclusively for cancer patients like I do, need to provide excellent palliative care to our patients every day. The opportunity to further my training and to obtain board certification was a golden one, and I love being able to wear both hats here at MSKCC.
 

Ms. Steele is a marketing communications specialist at the Society of Hospital Medicine.

Editor’s note: Each month, the Society of Hospitalist Medicine puts the spotlight on some of our most active members who are making substantial contributions to hospital medicine. Visit www.hospitalmedicine.org for more information on how you can lend your expertise to help improve the care of hospitalized patients.

This month, The Hospitalist spotlights Barbara Egan, MD, FACP, SFHM, chief of the hospital medicine service in the department of medicine at Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center in New York. Barbara has been a member of SHM since 2005, is dual certified in hospital medicine and palliative care, and is the chair of SHM’s Palliative Care Work Group.

When did you first hear about SHM, and why did you decide to become a member?

I first learned about SHM when I was an internal medicine resident at Brigham and Women’s Hospital, Boston, in the early 2000s. BWH had an extremely strong hospitalist group; the staff I worked with served as powerful role models for me and inspired my interest in becoming a hospitalist. One of my attendings suggested that I join SHM, which I did right after I graduated from residency. I attended my first SHM Annual Conference in 2005. By then, I was working as a hospitalist at Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center. SHM and the field of hospital medicine have exploded since my career first began, and I am happy to have grown alongside them. Similarly, our hospital medicine group here at MSKCC has dramatically grown, from 1 hospitalist (me) to more than 30!

How did you get involved with SHM’s Palliative Care Work Group, and what has the work group accomplished since you joined?

I was honored to be invited to join SHM’s Palliative Care Work Group in 2017 by Wendy Anderson, MD, a colleague and now a friend from University of California, San Francisco. Wendy is a visionary leader who practices and researches at the intersection of palliative care and hospital medicine. She and I met during 2015, when we were both invited to join a collaboration between SHM and the Hastings Center in Garrison, N.Y., which was aimed at improving hospitalists’ ability to provide outstanding care to hospitalized patients with life-limiting illnesses. That collaboration resulted in the Improving Communication about Serious Illness–Implementation Guide, a compilation of resources and best practices.

Wendy was chairing the SHM Palliative Care Work Group and invited me to join, which I did with great enthusiasm. This group consists of several passionate and brilliant hospitalists whose practices, in a variety of ways, involve both hospital medicine and palliative medicine. I was so honored when Wendy passed the baton to me last spring and invited me to chair the Work Group. I am lucky to have the opportunity to collaborate with this group of dynamic individuals, and we are well supported by an outstanding SHM staff member, Nick Marzano.
 

Are there any new projects that the work group is currently focusing on?

The primary focus of SHM’s Palliative Care Work Group is educational. That is, we aim to assess and help meet the educational needs of hospitalists, thereby helping to empower them to be outstanding providers of primary palliative care to seriously ill, hospitalized patients. To that end, we were very proud to orchestrate a palliative care mini-track for the first time at HM18. To our group’s delight, the attendance and reviews of that track were great. Thus, we were invited to further expand the palliative care offerings at HM19. We are busy planning for HM19: a full-day pre-course in palliative medicine; several podium presentations which will touch on ethical challenges, symptom management, prognostication, and other important topics; and a workshop in communication skills.
 

What led to your dual certification and how do your two specialties overlap?

I am board certified in internal medicine with Focused Practice in Hospital Medicine by virtue of my clinical training and my primary clinical practice as a hospitalist. As a hospitalist in a cancer center, I spend most of my time caring for patients with late- and end-stage malignancy. As such, early in my career, I had to develop a broad base of palliative medical skills, such as pain and symptom management and communication skills. I find this work extremely rewarding, albeit emotionally taxing. I have learned to redefine what clinical “success” looks like – my patients often have unfixable medical problems, but I can always strive to improve their lives in some way, even if that means helping to provide them with a painless, dignified death as opposed to curing them.

When the American Board of Medical Specialties established a board certification in Hospice and Palliative Medicine, there briefly existed a pathway to be “grandfathered” in, i.e., to qualify for board certification through an examination and clinical experience, as opposed to a fellowship. I jumped at the chance to formalize my palliative care skills and experience, and I attained board certification in 2012. This allowed me to further diversify my clinical practice here at MSKCC.

Hospital medicine is still my first love, and I spend most of my time practicing as a hospitalist on our solid tumor services. But now I also spend several weeks each year attending as a consultant on our inpatient supportive care service. In that role, I am able to collaborate with a fantastic multidisciplinary team consisting of MDs, NPs, a chaplain, a pharmacist, a social worker, and integrative medicine practitioners. I also love the opportunity to teach and mentor our palliative medicine fellows.

To me, the opportunity to marry hospital medicine and palliative medicine in my career was a natural fit. Hospitalists, particularly those caring exclusively for cancer patients like I do, need to provide excellent palliative care to our patients every day. The opportunity to further my training and to obtain board certification was a golden one, and I love being able to wear both hats here at MSKCC.
 

Ms. Steele is a marketing communications specialist at the Society of Hospital Medicine.

The National Association of Inpatient Physicians (NAIP) “opened its doors” in the spring of 1998, welcoming the first 300 hospitalists. The term “hospitalist” was first coined in Bob Wachter’s 1996 New England Journal of Medicine article,1 although hospitalists were relatively few at that time, and the term not infrequently evoked controversy.

Having full-time hospital-based physicians was highly disruptive to the traditional culture of medicine, where hospital rounds were an integral part of a primary care physicians’ practice, professional identity, and referral patterns. Additionally, many hospital-based specialists were beginning to fill the hospitalist role. 

The decision to include “inpatient physician” rather than “hospitalist” in the name was carefully considered and was intended to be inclusive, without alienating potential allies. Virtually any doctor working in a hospital could identify themselves as an inpatient physician, and all who wanted to participate were welcomed. It also was evident early on that this young specialty was going to comprise many different disciplines, including internal medicine, family practice, and pediatrics to name a few, and reaching out to all potential stakeholders was an urgent priority.

During its’ first 5 years, the field of hospital medicine grew rapidly, with NAIP membership nearing 2,000 members. The bimonthly newsletter The Hospitalist provided a vehicle to reach out to members and other stakeholders, and the annual meeting gave hospitalists a forum to gather, learn from each other, and enjoy camaraderie. Early research efforts focused on patient safety and, just as importantly, in 2002, the publication of the first Productivity and Compensation Survey (which is now known as SHM’s State of Hospital Medicine Report) and the initial development of The Hospitalist Core Competencies (first published in 2006, and now in its’ 2017 revision) all helped define the young specialty and gain acceptance.^2,3

 
The term hospitalist became mainstream and accepted, and the name of our field, hospital medicine, has now become widely recognized. 

Though the term “inpatient physician” had focused on physicians as a primary constituency, the successful growth of hospital medicine now increasingly depended upon other important constituencies and their understanding of the hospital medicine specialty and the role of hospitalists. These stakeholders included virtually all health care professionals and administrators, government officials at the federal, state, and local levels, patients, and the American public.

As NAIP leadership, it was our belief and intent that having a name that accurately portrayed hospitalists and hospital medicine would define our “brand” in an understandable way. This was especially important given the breadth and depth of the responsibilities that NAIP and its’ members were increasingly taking on in a rapidly changing health care system. Additionally, it was a top priority to find a name that would inspire confidence and passion among our members, stir a sense of loyalty and pride, and continue to be inclusive.

With this in mind, the NAIP board undertook a process to search for a new name in the spring of 2002. As NAIP President-Elect, stewarding the name change process was my responsibility.
In approaching this challenge, we initially evaluated the components of other professional organizations’ names, including academy, college, and society among others, and whether the specialist name or professional field was included. We then held focus groups among regional hospitalists, invited feedback from all NAIP members, and solicited leadership feedback from other professional organizations. All of these data were taken into our fall 2002 board meeting in St. Louis. 

Prior to the meeting, it was agreed that making a name change would require a supermajority of two-thirds of the 11 voting board members (though only 10 ultimately attended the meeting). Also participating in the discussion were the nonvoting four ex-officio board members and the NAIP CEO. The initial discussion included presentations arguing for Hospital Medicine versus Hospitalist as part of the name. We then discussed and voted on the primary professional component of the name, with “Society” finally being chosen. After further discussion and a series of ballots, we arrived at the name “Society of Hospital Medicine.” In the final ballot, 7 out of 10 cast their votes in favor of this finalist, and our organization became The Society of Hospital Medicine. Our abbreviation SHM was to become our logo, which was developed in advance of our 2003 annual meeting. 

In the 15 years since, the Society of Hospital Medicine has become well known to our constituents and stakeholders. SHM is recognized for its staunch advocacy, particularly at the federal level, with recent establishment of a Medicare specialty code designation for hospitalists, and support for endeavors such as Project Boost, which focused on patient transitions from hospital discharge to home.^4,5,6 Hospitalists throughout the United States routinely manage hospitalized patients, and now have their specialty expertise recognized via Focused Practice in Hospital Medicine (Internal Medicine and Family Practice), and future specialty training and certification for pediatric hospitalists.^7,8,9 

The Journal of Hospital Medicine now highlights accomplishments in hospital medicine research and knowledge.¹⁰ Hospitalist leaders frequently are developed through the SHM Leadership Academy,¹¹ and hospitalists increasingly fill diverse health care responsibilities in education, research, informatics, palliative care, performance improvement, administration, among many others. Of note, SHM membership currently exceeds 17,000 members, and now offers membership that includes nurse practitioners, physician assistants, fellows, residents, students, and practice administrators, among others.¹² 

These achievements and many more have been driven by the efforts of past and present Society of Hospital Medicine members and staff, and like-minded, invested professionals and organizations. The name Society of Hospital Medicine (SHM) is highly familiar and well regarded by virtually all our stakeholders and is recognized for its proven leadership in continuing to define our brand, hospital medicine.

Dr. Dichter is an intensivist and associate professor of medicine at the University of Minnesota Medical Center, Minneapolis.

References

1. Wachter RM et al. The emerging role of “hospitalists” in the American health care system. N Eng J Med. 1996 Aug 15;335(7):514-7.
2. SHM’s State of Hospital Medicine Report 2018. Fall 2018. 
3. Satyen N et al. Core competencies in hospital medicine 2017 Revision. J Hosp Med. 2017 Apr;12:S1.
4. Society of Hospital Medicine website, Policy & Advocacy homepage (accessed July 26, 2018).  
5. CMS manual system, Oct. 28, 2016 (accessed July 26, 2018). 
6. Society of Hospital Medicine website, Clinical Topics: Advancing successful care transitions to improve outcomes (accessed July 26, 2018). 
7. American Board of Internal Medicine website, MOC requirements: Focused practice in hospital medicine (accessed July 26, 2018). 
8. American Board of Family Medicine website, Designation of practice in hospital medicine (accessed July 26, 2018). 
9. The American Board of Pediatrics website, Pediatric hospital medicine certification (accessed July 26, 2018). 
10. Journal of Hospital Medicine official website (accessed July 26, 2018). 
11. SHM Leadership Academy website (accessed July 26, 2018). 
12. Society of Hospital Medicine website, About SHM membership (accessed July 26, 2018).

The National Association of Inpatient Physicians (NAIP) “opened its doors” in the spring of 1998, welcoming the first 300 hospitalists. The term “hospitalist” was first coined in Bob Wachter’s 1996 New England Journal of Medicine article,1 although hospitalists were relatively few at that time, and the term not infrequently evoked controversy.

Having full-time hospital-based physicians was highly disruptive to the traditional culture of medicine, where hospital rounds were an integral part of a primary care physicians’ practice, professional identity, and referral patterns. Additionally, many hospital-based specialists were beginning to fill the hospitalist role. 

The decision to include “inpatient physician” rather than “hospitalist” in the name was carefully considered and was intended to be inclusive, without alienating potential allies. Virtually any doctor working in a hospital could identify themselves as an inpatient physician, and all who wanted to participate were welcomed. It also was evident early on that this young specialty was going to comprise many different disciplines, including internal medicine, family practice, and pediatrics to name a few, and reaching out to all potential stakeholders was an urgent priority.

During its’ first 5 years, the field of hospital medicine grew rapidly, with NAIP membership nearing 2,000 members. The bimonthly newsletter The Hospitalist provided a vehicle to reach out to members and other stakeholders, and the annual meeting gave hospitalists a forum to gather, learn from each other, and enjoy camaraderie. Early research efforts focused on patient safety and, just as importantly, in 2002, the publication of the first Productivity and Compensation Survey (which is now known as SHM’s State of Hospital Medicine Report) and the initial development of The Hospitalist Core Competencies (first published in 2006, and now in its’ 2017 revision) all helped define the young specialty and gain acceptance.^2,3

 
The term hospitalist became mainstream and accepted, and the name of our field, hospital medicine, has now become widely recognized. 

Though the term “inpatient physician” had focused on physicians as a primary constituency, the successful growth of hospital medicine now increasingly depended upon other important constituencies and their understanding of the hospital medicine specialty and the role of hospitalists. These stakeholders included virtually all health care professionals and administrators, government officials at the federal, state, and local levels, patients, and the American public.

As NAIP leadership, it was our belief and intent that having a name that accurately portrayed hospitalists and hospital medicine would define our “brand” in an understandable way. This was especially important given the breadth and depth of the responsibilities that NAIP and its’ members were increasingly taking on in a rapidly changing health care system. Additionally, it was a top priority to find a name that would inspire confidence and passion among our members, stir a sense of loyalty and pride, and continue to be inclusive.

With this in mind, the NAIP board undertook a process to search for a new name in the spring of 2002. As NAIP President-Elect, stewarding the name change process was my responsibility.
In approaching this challenge, we initially evaluated the components of other professional organizations’ names, including academy, college, and society among others, and whether the specialist name or professional field was included. We then held focus groups among regional hospitalists, invited feedback from all NAIP members, and solicited leadership feedback from other professional organizations. All of these data were taken into our fall 2002 board meeting in St. Louis. 

Prior to the meeting, it was agreed that making a name change would require a supermajority of two-thirds of the 11 voting board members (though only 10 ultimately attended the meeting). Also participating in the discussion were the nonvoting four ex-officio board members and the NAIP CEO. The initial discussion included presentations arguing for Hospital Medicine versus Hospitalist as part of the name. We then discussed and voted on the primary professional component of the name, with “Society” finally being chosen. After further discussion and a series of ballots, we arrived at the name “Society of Hospital Medicine.” In the final ballot, 7 out of 10 cast their votes in favor of this finalist, and our organization became The Society of Hospital Medicine. Our abbreviation SHM was to become our logo, which was developed in advance of our 2003 annual meeting. 

In the 15 years since, the Society of Hospital Medicine has become well known to our constituents and stakeholders. SHM is recognized for its staunch advocacy, particularly at the federal level, with recent establishment of a Medicare specialty code designation for hospitalists, and support for endeavors such as Project Boost, which focused on patient transitions from hospital discharge to home.^4,5,6 Hospitalists throughout the United States routinely manage hospitalized patients, and now have their specialty expertise recognized via Focused Practice in Hospital Medicine (Internal Medicine and Family Practice), and future specialty training and certification for pediatric hospitalists.^7,8,9 

The Journal of Hospital Medicine now highlights accomplishments in hospital medicine research and knowledge.¹⁰ Hospitalist leaders frequently are developed through the SHM Leadership Academy,¹¹ and hospitalists increasingly fill diverse health care responsibilities in education, research, informatics, palliative care, performance improvement, administration, among many others. Of note, SHM membership currently exceeds 17,000 members, and now offers membership that includes nurse practitioners, physician assistants, fellows, residents, students, and practice administrators, among others.¹² 

These achievements and many more have been driven by the efforts of past and present Society of Hospital Medicine members and staff, and like-minded, invested professionals and organizations. The name Society of Hospital Medicine (SHM) is highly familiar and well regarded by virtually all our stakeholders and is recognized for its proven leadership in continuing to define our brand, hospital medicine.

Dr. Dichter is an intensivist and associate professor of medicine at the University of Minnesota Medical Center, Minneapolis.

References

1. Wachter RM et al. The emerging role of “hospitalists” in the American health care system. N Eng J Med. 1996 Aug 15;335(7):514-7.
2. SHM’s State of Hospital Medicine Report 2018. Fall 2018. 
3. Satyen N et al. Core competencies in hospital medicine 2017 Revision. J Hosp Med. 2017 Apr;12:S1.
4. Society of Hospital Medicine website, Policy & Advocacy homepage (accessed July 26, 2018).  
5. CMS manual system, Oct. 28, 2016 (accessed July 26, 2018). 
6. Society of Hospital Medicine website, Clinical Topics: Advancing successful care transitions to improve outcomes (accessed July 26, 2018). 
7. American Board of Internal Medicine website, MOC requirements: Focused practice in hospital medicine (accessed July 26, 2018). 
8. American Board of Family Medicine website, Designation of practice in hospital medicine (accessed July 26, 2018). 
9. The American Board of Pediatrics website, Pediatric hospital medicine certification (accessed July 26, 2018). 
10. Journal of Hospital Medicine official website (accessed July 26, 2018). 
11. SHM Leadership Academy website (accessed July 26, 2018). 
12. Society of Hospital Medicine website, About SHM membership (accessed July 26, 2018).

The National Association of Inpatient Physicians (NAIP) “opened its doors” in the spring of 1998, welcoming the first 300 hospitalists. The term “hospitalist” was first coined in Bob Wachter’s 1996 New England Journal of Medicine article,1 although hospitalists were relatively few at that time, and the term not infrequently evoked controversy.

Having full-time hospital-based physicians was highly disruptive to the traditional culture of medicine, where hospital rounds were an integral part of a primary care physicians’ practice, professional identity, and referral patterns. Additionally, many hospital-based specialists were beginning to fill the hospitalist role. 

The decision to include “inpatient physician” rather than “hospitalist” in the name was carefully considered and was intended to be inclusive, without alienating potential allies. Virtually any doctor working in a hospital could identify themselves as an inpatient physician, and all who wanted to participate were welcomed. It also was evident early on that this young specialty was going to comprise many different disciplines, including internal medicine, family practice, and pediatrics to name a few, and reaching out to all potential stakeholders was an urgent priority.

During its’ first 5 years, the field of hospital medicine grew rapidly, with NAIP membership nearing 2,000 members. The bimonthly newsletter The Hospitalist provided a vehicle to reach out to members and other stakeholders, and the annual meeting gave hospitalists a forum to gather, learn from each other, and enjoy camaraderie. Early research efforts focused on patient safety and, just as importantly, in 2002, the publication of the first Productivity and Compensation Survey (which is now known as SHM’s State of Hospital Medicine Report) and the initial development of The Hospitalist Core Competencies (first published in 2006, and now in its’ 2017 revision) all helped define the young specialty and gain acceptance.^2,3

 
The term hospitalist became mainstream and accepted, and the name of our field, hospital medicine, has now become widely recognized. 

Though the term “inpatient physician” had focused on physicians as a primary constituency, the successful growth of hospital medicine now increasingly depended upon other important constituencies and their understanding of the hospital medicine specialty and the role of hospitalists. These stakeholders included virtually all health care professionals and administrators, government officials at the federal, state, and local levels, patients, and the American public.

As NAIP leadership, it was our belief and intent that having a name that accurately portrayed hospitalists and hospital medicine would define our “brand” in an understandable way. This was especially important given the breadth and depth of the responsibilities that NAIP and its’ members were increasingly taking on in a rapidly changing health care system. Additionally, it was a top priority to find a name that would inspire confidence and passion among our members, stir a sense of loyalty and pride, and continue to be inclusive.

With this in mind, the NAIP board undertook a process to search for a new name in the spring of 2002. As NAIP President-Elect, stewarding the name change process was my responsibility.
In approaching this challenge, we initially evaluated the components of other professional organizations’ names, including academy, college, and society among others, and whether the specialist name or professional field was included. We then held focus groups among regional hospitalists, invited feedback from all NAIP members, and solicited leadership feedback from other professional organizations. All of these data were taken into our fall 2002 board meeting in St. Louis. 

Prior to the meeting, it was agreed that making a name change would require a supermajority of two-thirds of the 11 voting board members (though only 10 ultimately attended the meeting). Also participating in the discussion were the nonvoting four ex-officio board members and the NAIP CEO. The initial discussion included presentations arguing for Hospital Medicine versus Hospitalist as part of the name. We then discussed and voted on the primary professional component of the name, with “Society” finally being chosen. After further discussion and a series of ballots, we arrived at the name “Society of Hospital Medicine.” In the final ballot, 7 out of 10 cast their votes in favor of this finalist, and our organization became The Society of Hospital Medicine. Our abbreviation SHM was to become our logo, which was developed in advance of our 2003 annual meeting. 

In the 15 years since, the Society of Hospital Medicine has become well known to our constituents and stakeholders. SHM is recognized for its staunch advocacy, particularly at the federal level, with recent establishment of a Medicare specialty code designation for hospitalists, and support for endeavors such as Project Boost, which focused on patient transitions from hospital discharge to home.^4,5,6 Hospitalists throughout the United States routinely manage hospitalized patients, and now have their specialty expertise recognized via Focused Practice in Hospital Medicine (Internal Medicine and Family Practice), and future specialty training and certification for pediatric hospitalists.^7,8,9 

The Journal of Hospital Medicine now highlights accomplishments in hospital medicine research and knowledge.¹⁰ Hospitalist leaders frequently are developed through the SHM Leadership Academy,¹¹ and hospitalists increasingly fill diverse health care responsibilities in education, research, informatics, palliative care, performance improvement, administration, among many others. Of note, SHM membership currently exceeds 17,000 members, and now offers membership that includes nurse practitioners, physician assistants, fellows, residents, students, and practice administrators, among others.¹² 

These achievements and many more have been driven by the efforts of past and present Society of Hospital Medicine members and staff, and like-minded, invested professionals and organizations. The name Society of Hospital Medicine (SHM) is highly familiar and well regarded by virtually all our stakeholders and is recognized for its proven leadership in continuing to define our brand, hospital medicine.

Dr. Dichter is an intensivist and associate professor of medicine at the University of Minnesota Medical Center, Minneapolis.

References

1. Wachter RM et al. The emerging role of “hospitalists” in the American health care system. N Eng J Med. 1996 Aug 15;335(7):514-7.
2. SHM’s State of Hospital Medicine Report 2018. Fall 2018. 
3. Satyen N et al. Core competencies in hospital medicine 2017 Revision. J Hosp Med. 2017 Apr;12:S1.
4. Society of Hospital Medicine website, Policy & Advocacy homepage (accessed July 26, 2018).  
5. CMS manual system, Oct. 28, 2016 (accessed July 26, 2018). 
6. Society of Hospital Medicine website, Clinical Topics: Advancing successful care transitions to improve outcomes (accessed July 26, 2018). 
7. American Board of Internal Medicine website, MOC requirements: Focused practice in hospital medicine (accessed July 26, 2018). 
8. American Board of Family Medicine website, Designation of practice in hospital medicine (accessed July 26, 2018). 
9. The American Board of Pediatrics website, Pediatric hospital medicine certification (accessed July 26, 2018). 
10. Journal of Hospital Medicine official website (accessed July 26, 2018). 
11. SHM Leadership Academy website (accessed July 26, 2018). 
12. Society of Hospital Medicine website, About SHM membership (accessed July 26, 2018).

For the last 8 years I have worked as a locum tenens hospitalist. I began on this path when it was the least popular option upon graduation from residency.

I did countless hours of research trying to find accurate information about locum tenens companies, but never found anything written by physicians, only by the companies themselves. So, I stepped into this field blindfolded and learned the hard way. Since than, I have worked with over 16 locum tenens companies, 14 hospitals, and eight electronic medical record systems.

Through these experiences I’ve realized that, unfortunately, some locum tenens companies do not act with the professionalism and efficiency that both physicians and hospital systems would expect. This can lead to more stress than an actual employed position for physicians, and poor coverage with enormous costs for hospitals.

I decided to take matters into my own hands because I wanted to make the locum tenens system easier to navigate. I believe that the system can play a role in decreasing physician burnout, and I deeply understand the need that hospitals have to serve their patients with a shortage of doctors. As locum tenens physicians, we serve a need and shouldn’t have to deal with inefficient placement systems.

Here are five mistakes to avoid for physicians that are first entering into the locum tenens world:

1. Beware choosing a “factory mill” locum tenens company. Bigger companies have higher overhead, which usually means that they take more of a margin from physicians. Generally speaking, larger locum tenens companies pay their recruiters a lower percentage commission, so each recruiter has more physicians. This can lead to mistakes which can cause stress for both physicians and hospitals.

2. Beware long travel. Hourly rates that are $5-$10 dollars more per hour in remote locations are attractive. However, the amount of travel needed to get to these locations may not be worth it. When negotiating a rate, make sure not to lose sight of the amount of time it will take to travel to the hospital or outpatient location.

3. Beware short-term placements. There are a lot of hospitals that just need one or two weeks covered. Even if it’s at a much higher rate, the amount of paper work and credentialing hassle may not be worth the amount of time you work there. The greater number of cumulative hospitals worked, the longer credentialing will take in future locum tenens placements.

4. Beware using multiple travel services. Stick to one airline, one rental car company, and one hotel chain. This way when you are not working, you may be able to use the points earned during your work days for future vacations.

5. Beware companies that are not organized. If you find that a locum tenens company is asking you to do all of the paperwork to get credentialed, move on. This can be a red flag and may mean they lack credentialing staff. You should never have to fill out your own paperwork; rather you should be the one that simply reviews and corrects it.

Dr. Arora works as a liaison between hospitals, physicians, and locum tenens companies and is a member of The Hospitalist’s editorial advisory board. She negotiates rates and expectations with multiple locum tenens companies on behalf of physicians in all fields of practice and does not own or endorse a locum tenens company. You can contact her at www.doctorsliaison.com.

For the last 8 years I have worked as a locum tenens hospitalist. I began on this path when it was the least popular option upon graduation from residency.

I did countless hours of research trying to find accurate information about locum tenens companies, but never found anything written by physicians, only by the companies themselves. So, I stepped into this field blindfolded and learned the hard way. Since than, I have worked with over 16 locum tenens companies, 14 hospitals, and eight electronic medical record systems.

Through these experiences I’ve realized that, unfortunately, some locum tenens companies do not act with the professionalism and efficiency that both physicians and hospital systems would expect. This can lead to more stress than an actual employed position for physicians, and poor coverage with enormous costs for hospitals.

I decided to take matters into my own hands because I wanted to make the locum tenens system easier to navigate. I believe that the system can play a role in decreasing physician burnout, and I deeply understand the need that hospitals have to serve their patients with a shortage of doctors. As locum tenens physicians, we serve a need and shouldn’t have to deal with inefficient placement systems.

Here are five mistakes to avoid for physicians that are first entering into the locum tenens world:

1. Beware choosing a “factory mill” locum tenens company. Bigger companies have higher overhead, which usually means that they take more of a margin from physicians. Generally speaking, larger locum tenens companies pay their recruiters a lower percentage commission, so each recruiter has more physicians. This can lead to mistakes which can cause stress for both physicians and hospitals.

2. Beware long travel. Hourly rates that are $5-$10 dollars more per hour in remote locations are attractive. However, the amount of travel needed to get to these locations may not be worth it. When negotiating a rate, make sure not to lose sight of the amount of time it will take to travel to the hospital or outpatient location.

3. Beware short-term placements. There are a lot of hospitals that just need one or two weeks covered. Even if it’s at a much higher rate, the amount of paper work and credentialing hassle may not be worth the amount of time you work there. The greater number of cumulative hospitals worked, the longer credentialing will take in future locum tenens placements.

4. Beware using multiple travel services. Stick to one airline, one rental car company, and one hotel chain. This way when you are not working, you may be able to use the points earned during your work days for future vacations.

5. Beware companies that are not organized. If you find that a locum tenens company is asking you to do all of the paperwork to get credentialed, move on. This can be a red flag and may mean they lack credentialing staff. You should never have to fill out your own paperwork; rather you should be the one that simply reviews and corrects it.

Dr. Arora works as a liaison between hospitals, physicians, and locum tenens companies and is a member of The Hospitalist’s editorial advisory board. She negotiates rates and expectations with multiple locum tenens companies on behalf of physicians in all fields of practice and does not own or endorse a locum tenens company. You can contact her at www.doctorsliaison.com.

For the last 8 years I have worked as a locum tenens hospitalist. I began on this path when it was the least popular option upon graduation from residency.

I did countless hours of research trying to find accurate information about locum tenens companies, but never found anything written by physicians, only by the companies themselves. So, I stepped into this field blindfolded and learned the hard way. Since than, I have worked with over 16 locum tenens companies, 14 hospitals, and eight electronic medical record systems.

Through these experiences I’ve realized that, unfortunately, some locum tenens companies do not act with the professionalism and efficiency that both physicians and hospital systems would expect. This can lead to more stress than an actual employed position for physicians, and poor coverage with enormous costs for hospitals.

I decided to take matters into my own hands because I wanted to make the locum tenens system easier to navigate. I believe that the system can play a role in decreasing physician burnout, and I deeply understand the need that hospitals have to serve their patients with a shortage of doctors. As locum tenens physicians, we serve a need and shouldn’t have to deal with inefficient placement systems.

Here are five mistakes to avoid for physicians that are first entering into the locum tenens world:

1. Beware choosing a “factory mill” locum tenens company. Bigger companies have higher overhead, which usually means that they take more of a margin from physicians. Generally speaking, larger locum tenens companies pay their recruiters a lower percentage commission, so each recruiter has more physicians. This can lead to mistakes which can cause stress for both physicians and hospitals.

2. Beware long travel. Hourly rates that are $5-$10 dollars more per hour in remote locations are attractive. However, the amount of travel needed to get to these locations may not be worth it. When negotiating a rate, make sure not to lose sight of the amount of time it will take to travel to the hospital or outpatient location.

3. Beware short-term placements. There are a lot of hospitals that just need one or two weeks covered. Even if it’s at a much higher rate, the amount of paper work and credentialing hassle may not be worth the amount of time you work there. The greater number of cumulative hospitals worked, the longer credentialing will take in future locum tenens placements.

4. Beware using multiple travel services. Stick to one airline, one rental car company, and one hotel chain. This way when you are not working, you may be able to use the points earned during your work days for future vacations.

5. Beware companies that are not organized. If you find that a locum tenens company is asking you to do all of the paperwork to get credentialed, move on. This can be a red flag and may mean they lack credentialing staff. You should never have to fill out your own paperwork; rather you should be the one that simply reviews and corrects it.

Dr. Arora works as a liaison between hospitals, physicians, and locum tenens companies and is a member of The Hospitalist’s editorial advisory board. She negotiates rates and expectations with multiple locum tenens companies on behalf of physicians in all fields of practice and does not own or endorse a locum tenens company. You can contact her at www.doctorsliaison.com.

The question of appropriate ward garb is a problem for the ages. Compared with photo stills and films from the 1960s, the doctors of today appear like vagabonds. No ties, no lab coats, and scrub tops have become the norm for a number (a majority?) of hospital-based docs – and even more so on the surgical wards and in the ER.

Digital Vision/Thinkstock

Past studies have addressed patient preferences for provider dress, but none like the results of a recent survey.

From the University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, comes a physician attire survey of a convenience sample of 4,000 patients at 10 U.S. academic medical centers. It included both inpatients and outpatients, and used the design of many previous studies, showing patients the same doctor dressed seven different ways. After viewing the photographs, the patients received surveys as to their preference of physician based on attire, as well as being asked to rate the physician in the areas of knowledge, trust, care, approachability, and comfort.

You can see the domains: casual, scrubs, and formal, each with and without a lab coat. The seventh category is business attire (future C-suite wannabes – you know who you are).

Over half of the participants indicated that how a physician dresses was important to them, with more than one in three stating that this influenced how happy they were with care received. Overall, respondents indicated that formal attire with white coats was the most preferred form of physician dress.

I found the discussion in the study worthwhile, along with the strengths and weaknesses of the author’s outline. They went to great lengths to design a nonbiased questionnaire and used a consistent approach to shooting their photos. They also discussed lab coats, long sleeves, and hygiene.

But what to draw from the findings? Does patient satisfaction matter or just clinical outcomes? Is patient happiness a means to an end or an end unto itself? Can I even get you exercised about a score of 6 versus 8 (a 25% difference)? For instance, imagine the worst-dressed doc – say shorts and flip-flops. Is that a 5.8 or a 2.3? The anchor matters, and it helps to put the ratings in context.

Read the full post at hospitalleader.org.

Dr. Flansbaum works for Geisinger Health System in Danville, Pa., in both the divisions of hospital medicine and population health. He is a founding member of the Society of Hospital Medicine and served as a board member and officer.

Also in The Hospital Leader

•Hospitalists Can Improve Patient Trust…in Their Colleagues by Chris Moriates, MD, SFHM

•Treatment of Type II MIs by Brad Flansbaum, MD, MPH, MHM

•The $64,000 Question: How Can Hospitalists Improve Their HCAHPS Scores? by Leslie Flores, MHA, SFHM

The question of appropriate ward garb is a problem for the ages. Compared with photo stills and films from the 1960s, the doctors of today appear like vagabonds. No ties, no lab coats, and scrub tops have become the norm for a number (a majority?) of hospital-based docs – and even more so on the surgical wards and in the ER.

Digital Vision/Thinkstock

Past studies have addressed patient preferences for provider dress, but none like the results of a recent survey.

From the University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, comes a physician attire survey of a convenience sample of 4,000 patients at 10 U.S. academic medical centers. It included both inpatients and outpatients, and used the design of many previous studies, showing patients the same doctor dressed seven different ways. After viewing the photographs, the patients received surveys as to their preference of physician based on attire, as well as being asked to rate the physician in the areas of knowledge, trust, care, approachability, and comfort.

You can see the domains: casual, scrubs, and formal, each with and without a lab coat. The seventh category is business attire (future C-suite wannabes – you know who you are).

Over half of the participants indicated that how a physician dresses was important to them, with more than one in three stating that this influenced how happy they were with care received. Overall, respondents indicated that formal attire with white coats was the most preferred form of physician dress.

I found the discussion in the study worthwhile, along with the strengths and weaknesses of the author’s outline. They went to great lengths to design a nonbiased questionnaire and used a consistent approach to shooting their photos. They also discussed lab coats, long sleeves, and hygiene.

But what to draw from the findings? Does patient satisfaction matter or just clinical outcomes? Is patient happiness a means to an end or an end unto itself? Can I even get you exercised about a score of 6 versus 8 (a 25% difference)? For instance, imagine the worst-dressed doc – say shorts and flip-flops. Is that a 5.8 or a 2.3? The anchor matters, and it helps to put the ratings in context.

Read the full post at hospitalleader.org.

Dr. Flansbaum works for Geisinger Health System in Danville, Pa., in both the divisions of hospital medicine and population health. He is a founding member of the Society of Hospital Medicine and served as a board member and officer.

Also in The Hospital Leader

•Hospitalists Can Improve Patient Trust…in Their Colleagues by Chris Moriates, MD, SFHM

•Treatment of Type II MIs by Brad Flansbaum, MD, MPH, MHM

•The $64,000 Question: How Can Hospitalists Improve Their HCAHPS Scores? by Leslie Flores, MHA, SFHM

The question of appropriate ward garb is a problem for the ages. Compared with photo stills and films from the 1960s, the doctors of today appear like vagabonds. No ties, no lab coats, and scrub tops have become the norm for a number (a majority?) of hospital-based docs – and even more so on the surgical wards and in the ER.

Digital Vision/Thinkstock

Past studies have addressed patient preferences for provider dress, but none like the results of a recent survey.

From the University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, comes a physician attire survey of a convenience sample of 4,000 patients at 10 U.S. academic medical centers. It included both inpatients and outpatients, and used the design of many previous studies, showing patients the same doctor dressed seven different ways. After viewing the photographs, the patients received surveys as to their preference of physician based on attire, as well as being asked to rate the physician in the areas of knowledge, trust, care, approachability, and comfort.

You can see the domains: casual, scrubs, and formal, each with and without a lab coat. The seventh category is business attire (future C-suite wannabes – you know who you are).

Over half of the participants indicated that how a physician dresses was important to them, with more than one in three stating that this influenced how happy they were with care received. Overall, respondents indicated that formal attire with white coats was the most preferred form of physician dress.

I found the discussion in the study worthwhile, along with the strengths and weaknesses of the author’s outline. They went to great lengths to design a nonbiased questionnaire and used a consistent approach to shooting their photos. They also discussed lab coats, long sleeves, and hygiene.

But what to draw from the findings? Does patient satisfaction matter or just clinical outcomes? Is patient happiness a means to an end or an end unto itself? Can I even get you exercised about a score of 6 versus 8 (a 25% difference)? For instance, imagine the worst-dressed doc – say shorts and flip-flops. Is that a 5.8 or a 2.3? The anchor matters, and it helps to put the ratings in context.

Read the full post at hospitalleader.org.

Dr. Flansbaum works for Geisinger Health System in Danville, Pa., in both the divisions of hospital medicine and population health. He is a founding member of the Society of Hospital Medicine and served as a board member and officer.

Also in The Hospital Leader

•Hospitalists Can Improve Patient Trust…in Their Colleagues by Chris Moriates, MD, SFHM

•Treatment of Type II MIs by Brad Flansbaum, MD, MPH, MHM

•The $64,000 Question: How Can Hospitalists Improve Their HCAHPS Scores? by Leslie Flores, MHA, SFHM

Modern Healthcare recently announced its list of the 50 Most Influential Physician Executives and Leaders, and hospital medicine was well represented among the honorees. The honored physicians were selected by a panel of experts and peers for their leadership and impact on the profession.

Topping the list was Scott Gottlieb, MD, the commissioner of the Food and Drug Administration. Dr. Gottlieb was confirmed to his position in May 2017 and, in his first year, has focused on price transparency and the approval of generic medications.

Dr. Gottlieb was deputy commissioner of the FDA from 2005-2007, and he has worked as an advisor and analyst for GlaxoSmithKline, the American Enterprise Institute, Vertex Pharmaceuticals, and Avilene Health.

Dr. Gottlieb earned his medical degree from the Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, and completed his residency at Mount Sinai Hospital. He has worked as a hospitalist at New York University’s Tisch Hospital, the Hospital for Joint Diseases, and Stamford (Conn.) Hospital.
 

Patrick Conway, MD, was listed at number 23 on Modern Healthcare’s 50 Most Influential Physician Executives and Leaders. Formerly the deputy administrator for innovation and quality at the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, Dr. Conway recently became president and chief executive officer of Blue Cross and Blue Shield of North Carolina.

Dr. Conway is known for his ability to develop and promote alternative payment models. He was elected to the National Academy of Medicine’s Institute of Medicine in 2014 and was selected as a Master of Hospital Medicine by the Society of Hospital Medicine.
 

Lynn Massingale, MD, the cofounder and chairman of TeamHealth, was named one of the 50 Most Influential Physician Executives and Leaders for a third year running, coming in at number 27 on the list. Dr. Massingale, who also recently was named to the Tennessee Healthcare Hall of Fame, founded TeamHealth in 1979 and was its chief executive officer for 30 years before assuming the role of chairman in 2008.

TeamHealth provides outsourced emergency medicine, hospitalist, critical care, anesthesiology, and acute care surgery services, among other specialties, at more than 3,200 facilities and physician groups across the United States.
 

Veeravat Taecharvongphairoj, MD, a veteran internist and hospitalist at Hemet Valley Medical Center in Hemet, Calif., has been honored by the International Association of Healthcare Professionals in its Leading Physicians of the World publication.

Dr. Taecharvongphairoj completed his residency at the University of Hawaii, Honolulu, before accepting a fellowship in hospital and palliative care at Cedars-Sinai Medical Center, Los Angeles. He is a member of the American Academy of Hospice and Palliative Medicine.
 

Sean Bain, MD, has been selected to the Glen Falls (N.Y.) Hospital Foundation Board of Trustees for 2018. Dr. Bain works as a hospitalist/internist at Glen Falls Hospital, where he is the president of medical staff. He manages the credentialing, continuing education, and policies and practices for the staff’s providers.

Dr. Bain received his medical degree at Albany (N.Y.) Medical College and served his residency at Wake Forest Baptist Medical Center, Winston-Salem, N.C.
 

George Harrison, MD, has been tabbed the new chief medical officer at Fairview Park Hospital in Dublin, Ga. Dr. Harrison will be charged with managing clinical quality and patient safety, staff relations, and clinical integration strategies at the hospital.

Prior to his appointment, Dr. Harrison was the codirector of the hospitalist program at Fairview Park. The Georgia native previously worked in management roles at urgent care centers, family practice centers, and hospitalist programs in North Carolina, South Carolina, and Georgia. He is a member of the American Academy of Family Physicians, the Society of Hospital Medicine, and the American Academy of Physician Leaders.

Dr. Harrison taught high school geometry and chemistry before earning his medical degree at the Morehouse School of Medicine, Atlanta. He did his residency at Duke University Medical Center, Durham, N.C.
 

BUSINESS MOVES

U.S. Acute Care Solutions (Canton, Ohio), a physician-owned, national provider of emergency medicine and hospitalist services, has extended its relationship with Central Health of Colorado and western Kansas. USACS has acquired the physicians of Front Range Emergency Specialists (Colorado Springs, Colo.), Southwest Emergency Physicians (Durango, Colo.), and Southern Colorado Emergency Specialists (Pueblo, Colo.).

USACS’s acquisition of these three physician groups adds care to more than 175,000 patients each year in central and southwest Colorado. USACS cares for more than 6 million patients per year at more than 200 locations across the United States.
 

VEP Healthcare (Concord, Calif.), an emergency medicine and hospitalist staffing company, has signed on to manage hospitalist and ED services at City Hospital at White Rock in Dallas. Its goals are to increase patient satisfaction, decrease wait times in seeing providers, raise recommendation rates, and lower malpractice claims.

White Rock is a 218-bed, community hospital providing care to East Texas since 1959.

Modern Healthcare recently announced its list of the 50 Most Influential Physician Executives and Leaders, and hospital medicine was well represented among the honorees. The honored physicians were selected by a panel of experts and peers for their leadership and impact on the profession.

Topping the list was Scott Gottlieb, MD, the commissioner of the Food and Drug Administration. Dr. Gottlieb was confirmed to his position in May 2017 and, in his first year, has focused on price transparency and the approval of generic medications.

Dr. Gottlieb was deputy commissioner of the FDA from 2005-2007, and he has worked as an advisor and analyst for GlaxoSmithKline, the American Enterprise Institute, Vertex Pharmaceuticals, and Avilene Health.

Dr. Gottlieb earned his medical degree from the Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, and completed his residency at Mount Sinai Hospital. He has worked as a hospitalist at New York University’s Tisch Hospital, the Hospital for Joint Diseases, and Stamford (Conn.) Hospital.
 

Patrick Conway, MD, was listed at number 23 on Modern Healthcare’s 50 Most Influential Physician Executives and Leaders. Formerly the deputy administrator for innovation and quality at the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, Dr. Conway recently became president and chief executive officer of Blue Cross and Blue Shield of North Carolina.

Dr. Conway is known for his ability to develop and promote alternative payment models. He was elected to the National Academy of Medicine’s Institute of Medicine in 2014 and was selected as a Master of Hospital Medicine by the Society of Hospital Medicine.
 

Lynn Massingale, MD, the cofounder and chairman of TeamHealth, was named one of the 50 Most Influential Physician Executives and Leaders for a third year running, coming in at number 27 on the list. Dr. Massingale, who also recently was named to the Tennessee Healthcare Hall of Fame, founded TeamHealth in 1979 and was its chief executive officer for 30 years before assuming the role of chairman in 2008.

TeamHealth provides outsourced emergency medicine, hospitalist, critical care, anesthesiology, and acute care surgery services, among other specialties, at more than 3,200 facilities and physician groups across the United States.
 

Veeravat Taecharvongphairoj, MD, a veteran internist and hospitalist at Hemet Valley Medical Center in Hemet, Calif., has been honored by the International Association of Healthcare Professionals in its Leading Physicians of the World publication.

Dr. Taecharvongphairoj completed his residency at the University of Hawaii, Honolulu, before accepting a fellowship in hospital and palliative care at Cedars-Sinai Medical Center, Los Angeles. He is a member of the American Academy of Hospice and Palliative Medicine.
 

Sean Bain, MD, has been selected to the Glen Falls (N.Y.) Hospital Foundation Board of Trustees for 2018. Dr. Bain works as a hospitalist/internist at Glen Falls Hospital, where he is the president of medical staff. He manages the credentialing, continuing education, and policies and practices for the staff’s providers.

Dr. Bain received his medical degree at Albany (N.Y.) Medical College and served his residency at Wake Forest Baptist Medical Center, Winston-Salem, N.C.
 

George Harrison, MD, has been tabbed the new chief medical officer at Fairview Park Hospital in Dublin, Ga. Dr. Harrison will be charged with managing clinical quality and patient safety, staff relations, and clinical integration strategies at the hospital.

Prior to his appointment, Dr. Harrison was the codirector of the hospitalist program at Fairview Park. The Georgia native previously worked in management roles at urgent care centers, family practice centers, and hospitalist programs in North Carolina, South Carolina, and Georgia. He is a member of the American Academy of Family Physicians, the Society of Hospital Medicine, and the American Academy of Physician Leaders.

Dr. Harrison taught high school geometry and chemistry before earning his medical degree at the Morehouse School of Medicine, Atlanta. He did his residency at Duke University Medical Center, Durham, N.C.
 

BUSINESS MOVES

U.S. Acute Care Solutions (Canton, Ohio), a physician-owned, national provider of emergency medicine and hospitalist services, has extended its relationship with Central Health of Colorado and western Kansas. USACS has acquired the physicians of Front Range Emergency Specialists (Colorado Springs, Colo.), Southwest Emergency Physicians (Durango, Colo.), and Southern Colorado Emergency Specialists (Pueblo, Colo.).

USACS’s acquisition of these three physician groups adds care to more than 175,000 patients each year in central and southwest Colorado. USACS cares for more than 6 million patients per year at more than 200 locations across the United States.
 

VEP Healthcare (Concord, Calif.), an emergency medicine and hospitalist staffing company, has signed on to manage hospitalist and ED services at City Hospital at White Rock in Dallas. Its goals are to increase patient satisfaction, decrease wait times in seeing providers, raise recommendation rates, and lower malpractice claims.

White Rock is a 218-bed, community hospital providing care to East Texas since 1959.

Modern Healthcare recently announced its list of the 50 Most Influential Physician Executives and Leaders, and hospital medicine was well represented among the honorees. The honored physicians were selected by a panel of experts and peers for their leadership and impact on the profession.

Topping the list was Scott Gottlieb, MD, the commissioner of the Food and Drug Administration. Dr. Gottlieb was confirmed to his position in May 2017 and, in his first year, has focused on price transparency and the approval of generic medications.

Dr. Gottlieb was deputy commissioner of the FDA from 2005-2007, and he has worked as an advisor and analyst for GlaxoSmithKline, the American Enterprise Institute, Vertex Pharmaceuticals, and Avilene Health.

Dr. Gottlieb earned his medical degree from the Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, and completed his residency at Mount Sinai Hospital. He has worked as a hospitalist at New York University’s Tisch Hospital, the Hospital for Joint Diseases, and Stamford (Conn.) Hospital.
 

Patrick Conway, MD, was listed at number 23 on Modern Healthcare’s 50 Most Influential Physician Executives and Leaders. Formerly the deputy administrator for innovation and quality at the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, Dr. Conway recently became president and chief executive officer of Blue Cross and Blue Shield of North Carolina.

Dr. Conway is known for his ability to develop and promote alternative payment models. He was elected to the National Academy of Medicine’s Institute of Medicine in 2014 and was selected as a Master of Hospital Medicine by the Society of Hospital Medicine.
 

Lynn Massingale, MD, the cofounder and chairman of TeamHealth, was named one of the 50 Most Influential Physician Executives and Leaders for a third year running, coming in at number 27 on the list. Dr. Massingale, who also recently was named to the Tennessee Healthcare Hall of Fame, founded TeamHealth in 1979 and was its chief executive officer for 30 years before assuming the role of chairman in 2008.

TeamHealth provides outsourced emergency medicine, hospitalist, critical care, anesthesiology, and acute care surgery services, among other specialties, at more than 3,200 facilities and physician groups across the United States.
 

Veeravat Taecharvongphairoj, MD, a veteran internist and hospitalist at Hemet Valley Medical Center in Hemet, Calif., has been honored by the International Association of Healthcare Professionals in its Leading Physicians of the World publication.

Dr. Taecharvongphairoj completed his residency at the University of Hawaii, Honolulu, before accepting a fellowship in hospital and palliative care at Cedars-Sinai Medical Center, Los Angeles. He is a member of the American Academy of Hospice and Palliative Medicine.
 

Sean Bain, MD, has been selected to the Glen Falls (N.Y.) Hospital Foundation Board of Trustees for 2018. Dr. Bain works as a hospitalist/internist at Glen Falls Hospital, where he is the president of medical staff. He manages the credentialing, continuing education, and policies and practices for the staff’s providers.

Dr. Bain received his medical degree at Albany (N.Y.) Medical College and served his residency at Wake Forest Baptist Medical Center, Winston-Salem, N.C.
 

George Harrison, MD, has been tabbed the new chief medical officer at Fairview Park Hospital in Dublin, Ga. Dr. Harrison will be charged with managing clinical quality and patient safety, staff relations, and clinical integration strategies at the hospital.

Prior to his appointment, Dr. Harrison was the codirector of the hospitalist program at Fairview Park. The Georgia native previously worked in management roles at urgent care centers, family practice centers, and hospitalist programs in North Carolina, South Carolina, and Georgia. He is a member of the American Academy of Family Physicians, the Society of Hospital Medicine, and the American Academy of Physician Leaders.

Dr. Harrison taught high school geometry and chemistry before earning his medical degree at the Morehouse School of Medicine, Atlanta. He did his residency at Duke University Medical Center, Durham, N.C.
 

BUSINESS MOVES

U.S. Acute Care Solutions (Canton, Ohio), a physician-owned, national provider of emergency medicine and hospitalist services, has extended its relationship with Central Health of Colorado and western Kansas. USACS has acquired the physicians of Front Range Emergency Specialists (Colorado Springs, Colo.), Southwest Emergency Physicians (Durango, Colo.), and Southern Colorado Emergency Specialists (Pueblo, Colo.).

USACS’s acquisition of these three physician groups adds care to more than 175,000 patients each year in central and southwest Colorado. USACS cares for more than 6 million patients per year at more than 200 locations across the United States.
 

VEP Healthcare (Concord, Calif.), an emergency medicine and hospitalist staffing company, has signed on to manage hospitalist and ED services at City Hospital at White Rock in Dallas. Its goals are to increase patient satisfaction, decrease wait times in seeing providers, raise recommendation rates, and lower malpractice claims.

White Rock is a 218-bed, community hospital providing care to East Texas since 1959.

Nurse practitioners (NPs) and physician assistants (PAs) have become a more prominent part of the hospitalist workforce, and at many institutions, they account for a large proportion of patient care and have a powerful effect on a patient’s experience. But NP and PA roles in hospital medicine continue to evolve – and understanding what they do is still, at times, a work in progress.

One myth that persists regarding NPs and PAs is that, if you’ve seen one, you’ve seen them all.

At the 2018 Annual Conference of the Society of Hospital Medicine, Noam Shabani, MS, PA-C, lead physician assistant at Massachusetts General Hospital’s Hospital Medicine Unit, Boston, offered an example to help shatter this misperception.

Mr. Shabani described a 28-year-old woman who had a bachelor’s in biology with a premed track and spent 4 years as a paramedic before attending the physician assistant program at Duke University, Durham, N.C. As a new PA graduate, she was hired as a hospitalist at a community hospital in Kentucky.

Given this new PA’s clinical experience and formal education, there are certain skills she should bring to the table: the ability to develop a differential diagnosis and a good understanding of disease pathophysiology and the mechanisms of action of drugs. And because of her paramedic experience, she should be comfortable with making urgent clinical care decisions and should be proficient with electrocardiograms, as well as chest and abdominal x-rays.

But compared with a newly graduated NP with registered nurse (RN) floor experience, the PA is likely to be less familiar with hospital mechanics and systems, with leading goal of care discussions with patients and families, and with understanding nuances involved with transitions of care.

The subtle differences between NPs and PAs don’t end there. Because of the progressive policies and recently updated bylaws at the Kentucky hospital where the PA was hired, this health care professional can see patients and write notes independently without a physician signature. But because she practices in Kentucky, she is not allowed to prescribe Schedule II medications, per state law.

“This example demonstrates how nuanced and multi-layered the process of integrating NPs and PAs into hospitalist groups can be,” Mr. Shabani said.
 

Goals, roles, and expectations

Physician assistants and nurse practitioners have reported that their job descriptions, and the variety of roles they can play within HM teams, are becoming better understood by hospitalist physicians and administrators. However, they also have acknowledged that both PAs and NPs are still underutilized.

Tricia Marriott, PA-C, MPAS, an orthopedic service line administrator at Saint Mary’s Hospital in Waterbury, Conn., and an expert in NP and PA policy, has noticed growing enlightenment about PAs and NPs in her travels to conferences in recent years.

“I’m no longer explaining what a PA is and what an NP is, and the questions have become very sophisticated,” she said at HM18. “However, I spent the last two days in the exhibit hall, and some of the conversations I had with physicians are interesting in that the practice and utilization styles have not become sophisticated. So I think there is a lot of opportunity out there.”

Mr. Shabani said the hospitalist care provided by PAs and NPs sits “at the intersection” of state regulations, hospital bylaws, department utilization, and – of course – clinical experience and formal medical education.

“What this boils down to is first understanding these factors, followed by strategizing recruitment and training as a response,” he said.

Tracy Cardin, ACNP-BC, SFHM, associate director of clinical integration at Adfinitas Health in Hanover, Md., and a Society of Hospital Medicine board member, said that, even though she usually sees and hears about a 10%-15% productivity gap between physicians and PAs or NPs, there is no good reason that an experienced PA or NP should not be able to handle the same patient load as a physician hospitalist – if that’s the goal.

“Part of it is about communication of expectation,” she said, noting that organizations must provide the training to allows NPs and PAs to reach prescribed goals along with an adequate level of administrative support. “I think we shouldn’t accept those gaps in productivity.”

Nicolas Houghton, DNP, ACNP-BC, CFRN, nurse practitioner/physician assistant manager at the Cleveland Clinic, thinks that it is completely reasonable for health care organizations to have an expectation that, at the 3- to 5-year mark, NPs and PAs “are really going to be functioning at very high levels that may be nearly indistinguishable.”

Dr. Houghton and Mr. Shabani agreed that, while they had considerably different duties at the start of their careers, they now have clinical roles which mirror one another.

For example, they agreed on these basics: NPs must be a certified RN, while a PA can have any undergraduate degree with certain prerequisite courses such as biology and chemistry. All PAs are trained in general medicine, while NPs specialize in areas such as acute care, family medicine, geriatrics, and women’s health. NPs need 500 didactic hours and 500-700 clinical hours in their area of expertise, while physician assistants need 1,000 didactic and 2,000 clinical hours spread over many disciplines.

For NP’s, required clinical rotations depend on the specialty, while all PAs need to complete rotations in inpatient medicine, emergency medicine, primary care, surgery, psychiatry, pediatrics, and ob.gyn. Also, NPs can practice independently in 23 states and the District of Columbia, while PAs must have a supervising physician. About 10% of NPs work in hospital settings, and about 39% of PAs work in hospital settings, they said.

Dr. Houghton and Mr. Shabani emphasized that Medicare does recognize NP and PA services as physician services. The official language, in place since 1998, is that their services “are the type that are considered physician’s services if furnished by a doctor of medicine or osteopathy.”

Mr. Shabani said this remained a very relevant issue. “I can’t overstate how important this is,” he said.
 

Debunking myths

Several myths continue to persist about PAs and NPs, Ms. Marriott said. Some administrators and physicians believe that they can’t see new patients, that a physician must see every patient, that a physician cosignature means that a claim can be submitted under the physician’s name, that reimbursement for services provided by PAs and NPs “leaves 15% on the table,” and that patients won’t be happy being seen by a PA or an NP. All of those things are false, she said.

“We really need to improve people’s understanding in a lot of different places – it’s not just at the clinician level,” she said. “It goes all the way through the operations team, and the operations team has some very old-fashioned thinking about what PAs and NPs really are, which is – they believe – clinical support staff.”

But she suggested that the phrase “working at the top of one’s license” can be used too freely – individual experience and ability will encompass a range of practices, she said.

“I’m licensed to drive a car,” she said. “But you do not want me in the Daytona 500. I am not capable of driving a race car.”

She cautioned that nurse practitioner care must still involve an element of collaboration, according to the Medicaid benefit policy manual, even if they work in states that allow NPs to provide “independent” care. They must have documentation “indicating the relationships that they have with physicians to deal with issues outside their scope of practice,” the manual says.

“Don’t ask me how people prove it,” Ms. Marriott said. “Just know that, if someone were to audit you, then you would need to show what this looks like.”

Regarding the 15% myth, she showed a calculation: Data from the Medical Group Management Association show that median annual compensation for a physician is $134 an hour and that it’s approximately $52 an hour for a PA or NP. An admission history and physical that takes an hour can be reimbursed at $102 for a physician and at 85% of that – $87 – for a PA or NP. That leaves a deficit of $32 for the physician and a surplus of $35 for the PA or NP.

“If you properly deploy your PAs and NPs, you’re going to generate positive margins,” Ms. Marriott said.

Physicians often scurry about seeing all the patients that have already been seen by a PA, she said, because they think they must capture the extra 15% reimbursement. But that is unnecessary, she said.

“Go do another admission. You should see patients because of their clinical condition. My point is not that you go running around because you want to capture the extra 15% – because that provides no additional medically necessary care.”
 

Changing practice

Many institutions continue to be hamstrung by their own bylaws in the use of NPs and PAs. It’s true that a physician doesn’t have to see every patient, unless it’s required in a hospital’s rules, Ms. Marriott noted.

“Somebody step up, get on the bylaws committee, and say, ‘Let’s update these.’ ” she said.

As for patient satisfaction, access and convenience routinely rank higher on the patient priority lists than provider credentials. “The patient wants to get off the gurney in the ED and get to a room,” she said.

But changing hospital bylaws and practices is also about the responsible use of health care dollars, Ms. Marriott affirmed.

“More patients seen in a timely fashion, and quality metrics improvement: Those are all things that are really, really important,” she said. “As a result, [if bylaws and practice patterns are changed] the physicians are hopefully going to be happier, certainly the administration is going to be happier, and the patients are going to fare better.”

Scott Faust, MS, APRN, CNP, an acute care nurse practitioner at Health Partners in St. Paul, Minn., said that teamwork without egos is crucial to success for all providers on the hospital medicine team, especially at busier moments.

“Nobody wants to be in this alone,” he said. “I think the hospitalist teams that work well are the ones that check their titles at the door.”

PAs and NPs generally agree that, as long as all clinical staffers are working within their areas of skill without being overly concerned about specific titles and roles, hospitals and patients will benefit.

“I’ve had physicians at my organization say ‘We need to have an NP and PA set of educational requirements,’ and I said, ‘We have some already for physicians, right? Why aren’t we using that?’ ” Dr. Houghton said. “I think we should have the same expectations clinically. At the end of the day, the patient deserves the same outcomes and the same care, whether they’re being cared for by a physician, an NP, or a PA.”


 

Onboarding NPs and PAs

According to SHM’s Nurse Practitioner/Physician Assistant Committee, the integration of a new NP or PA hire, whether experienced or not, requires up-front organization and planning for the employee as he or she enters into a new practice.

To that end, the NP/PA Committee created a toolkit to aid health care organizations in their integration of NP and PA staffers into hospital medicine practice groups. The document includes resources for recruiting and interviewing NPs and PAs, information about orientation and onboarding, detailed descriptions of models of care to aid in the utilization of NPs and PAs, best practices for staff retention, insights on billing and reimbursement, and ideas for program evaluation.

Readers can download the Onboarding Toolkit in PDF format at shm.hospitalmedicine.org/acton/attachment/25526/f-040f/1/-/-/-/-/SHM_NPPA_OboardingToolkit.pdf.

Nurse practitioners (NPs) and physician assistants (PAs) have become a more prominent part of the hospitalist workforce, and at many institutions, they account for a large proportion of patient care and have a powerful effect on a patient’s experience. But NP and PA roles in hospital medicine continue to evolve – and understanding what they do is still, at times, a work in progress.

One myth that persists regarding NPs and PAs is that, if you’ve seen one, you’ve seen them all.

At the 2018 Annual Conference of the Society of Hospital Medicine, Noam Shabani, MS, PA-C, lead physician assistant at Massachusetts General Hospital’s Hospital Medicine Unit, Boston, offered an example to help shatter this misperception.

Mr. Shabani described a 28-year-old woman who had a bachelor’s in biology with a premed track and spent 4 years as a paramedic before attending the physician assistant program at Duke University, Durham, N.C. As a new PA graduate, she was hired as a hospitalist at a community hospital in Kentucky.

Given this new PA’s clinical experience and formal education, there are certain skills she should bring to the table: the ability to develop a differential diagnosis and a good understanding of disease pathophysiology and the mechanisms of action of drugs. And because of her paramedic experience, she should be comfortable with making urgent clinical care decisions and should be proficient with electrocardiograms, as well as chest and abdominal x-rays.

But compared with a newly graduated NP with registered nurse (RN) floor experience, the PA is likely to be less familiar with hospital mechanics and systems, with leading goal of care discussions with patients and families, and with understanding nuances involved with transitions of care.

The subtle differences between NPs and PAs don’t end there. Because of the progressive policies and recently updated bylaws at the Kentucky hospital where the PA was hired, this health care professional can see patients and write notes independently without a physician signature. But because she practices in Kentucky, she is not allowed to prescribe Schedule II medications, per state law.

“This example demonstrates how nuanced and multi-layered the process of integrating NPs and PAs into hospitalist groups can be,” Mr. Shabani said.
 

Goals, roles, and expectations

Physician assistants and nurse practitioners have reported that their job descriptions, and the variety of roles they can play within HM teams, are becoming better understood by hospitalist physicians and administrators. However, they also have acknowledged that both PAs and NPs are still underutilized.

Tricia Marriott, PA-C, MPAS, an orthopedic service line administrator at Saint Mary’s Hospital in Waterbury, Conn., and an expert in NP and PA policy, has noticed growing enlightenment about PAs and NPs in her travels to conferences in recent years.

“I’m no longer explaining what a PA is and what an NP is, and the questions have become very sophisticated,” she said at HM18. “However, I spent the last two days in the exhibit hall, and some of the conversations I had with physicians are interesting in that the practice and utilization styles have not become sophisticated. So I think there is a lot of opportunity out there.”

Mr. Shabani said the hospitalist care provided by PAs and NPs sits “at the intersection” of state regulations, hospital bylaws, department utilization, and – of course – clinical experience and formal medical education.

“What this boils down to is first understanding these factors, followed by strategizing recruitment and training as a response,” he said.

Tracy Cardin, ACNP-BC, SFHM, associate director of clinical integration at Adfinitas Health in Hanover, Md., and a Society of Hospital Medicine board member, said that, even though she usually sees and hears about a 10%-15% productivity gap between physicians and PAs or NPs, there is no good reason that an experienced PA or NP should not be able to handle the same patient load as a physician hospitalist – if that’s the goal.

“Part of it is about communication of expectation,” she said, noting that organizations must provide the training to allows NPs and PAs to reach prescribed goals along with an adequate level of administrative support. “I think we shouldn’t accept those gaps in productivity.”

Nicolas Houghton, DNP, ACNP-BC, CFRN, nurse practitioner/physician assistant manager at the Cleveland Clinic, thinks that it is completely reasonable for health care organizations to have an expectation that, at the 3- to 5-year mark, NPs and PAs “are really going to be functioning at very high levels that may be nearly indistinguishable.”

Dr. Houghton and Mr. Shabani agreed that, while they had considerably different duties at the start of their careers, they now have clinical roles which mirror one another.

For example, they agreed on these basics: NPs must be a certified RN, while a PA can have any undergraduate degree with certain prerequisite courses such as biology and chemistry. All PAs are trained in general medicine, while NPs specialize in areas such as acute care, family medicine, geriatrics, and women’s health. NPs need 500 didactic hours and 500-700 clinical hours in their area of expertise, while physician assistants need 1,000 didactic and 2,000 clinical hours spread over many disciplines.

For NP’s, required clinical rotations depend on the specialty, while all PAs need to complete rotations in inpatient medicine, emergency medicine, primary care, surgery, psychiatry, pediatrics, and ob.gyn. Also, NPs can practice independently in 23 states and the District of Columbia, while PAs must have a supervising physician. About 10% of NPs work in hospital settings, and about 39% of PAs work in hospital settings, they said.

Dr. Houghton and Mr. Shabani emphasized that Medicare does recognize NP and PA services as physician services. The official language, in place since 1998, is that their services “are the type that are considered physician’s services if furnished by a doctor of medicine or osteopathy.”

Mr. Shabani said this remained a very relevant issue. “I can’t overstate how important this is,” he said.
 

Debunking myths

Several myths continue to persist about PAs and NPs, Ms. Marriott said. Some administrators and physicians believe that they can’t see new patients, that a physician must see every patient, that a physician cosignature means that a claim can be submitted under the physician’s name, that reimbursement for services provided by PAs and NPs “leaves 15% on the table,” and that patients won’t be happy being seen by a PA or an NP. All of those things are false, she said.

“We really need to improve people’s understanding in a lot of different places – it’s not just at the clinician level,” she said. “It goes all the way through the operations team, and the operations team has some very old-fashioned thinking about what PAs and NPs really are, which is – they believe – clinical support staff.”

But she suggested that the phrase “working at the top of one’s license” can be used too freely – individual experience and ability will encompass a range of practices, she said.

“I’m licensed to drive a car,” she said. “But you do not want me in the Daytona 500. I am not capable of driving a race car.”

She cautioned that nurse practitioner care must still involve an element of collaboration, according to the Medicaid benefit policy manual, even if they work in states that allow NPs to provide “independent” care. They must have documentation “indicating the relationships that they have with physicians to deal with issues outside their scope of practice,” the manual says.

“Don’t ask me how people prove it,” Ms. Marriott said. “Just know that, if someone were to audit you, then you would need to show what this looks like.”

Regarding the 15% myth, she showed a calculation: Data from the Medical Group Management Association show that median annual compensation for a physician is $134 an hour and that it’s approximately $52 an hour for a PA or NP. An admission history and physical that takes an hour can be reimbursed at $102 for a physician and at 85% of that – $87 – for a PA or NP. That leaves a deficit of $32 for the physician and a surplus of $35 for the PA or NP.

“If you properly deploy your PAs and NPs, you’re going to generate positive margins,” Ms. Marriott said.

Physicians often scurry about seeing all the patients that have already been seen by a PA, she said, because they think they must capture the extra 15% reimbursement. But that is unnecessary, she said.

“Go do another admission. You should see patients because of their clinical condition. My point is not that you go running around because you want to capture the extra 15% – because that provides no additional medically necessary care.”
 

Changing practice

Many institutions continue to be hamstrung by their own bylaws in the use of NPs and PAs. It’s true that a physician doesn’t have to see every patient, unless it’s required in a hospital’s rules, Ms. Marriott noted.

“Somebody step up, get on the bylaws committee, and say, ‘Let’s update these.’ ” she said.

As for patient satisfaction, access and convenience routinely rank higher on the patient priority lists than provider credentials. “The patient wants to get off the gurney in the ED and get to a room,” she said.

But changing hospital bylaws and practices is also about the responsible use of health care dollars, Ms. Marriott affirmed.

“More patients seen in a timely fashion, and quality metrics improvement: Those are all things that are really, really important,” she said. “As a result, [if bylaws and practice patterns are changed] the physicians are hopefully going to be happier, certainly the administration is going to be happier, and the patients are going to fare better.”

Scott Faust, MS, APRN, CNP, an acute care nurse practitioner at Health Partners in St. Paul, Minn., said that teamwork without egos is crucial to success for all providers on the hospital medicine team, especially at busier moments.

“Nobody wants to be in this alone,” he said. “I think the hospitalist teams that work well are the ones that check their titles at the door.”

PAs and NPs generally agree that, as long as all clinical staffers are working within their areas of skill without being overly concerned about specific titles and roles, hospitals and patients will benefit.

“I’ve had physicians at my organization say ‘We need to have an NP and PA set of educational requirements,’ and I said, ‘We have some already for physicians, right? Why aren’t we using that?’ ” Dr. Houghton said. “I think we should have the same expectations clinically. At the end of the day, the patient deserves the same outcomes and the same care, whether they’re being cared for by a physician, an NP, or a PA.”


 

Onboarding NPs and PAs

According to SHM’s Nurse Practitioner/Physician Assistant Committee, the integration of a new NP or PA hire, whether experienced or not, requires up-front organization and planning for the employee as he or she enters into a new practice.

To that end, the NP/PA Committee created a toolkit to aid health care organizations in their integration of NP and PA staffers into hospital medicine practice groups. The document includes resources for recruiting and interviewing NPs and PAs, information about orientation and onboarding, detailed descriptions of models of care to aid in the utilization of NPs and PAs, best practices for staff retention, insights on billing and reimbursement, and ideas for program evaluation.

Readers can download the Onboarding Toolkit in PDF format at shm.hospitalmedicine.org/acton/attachment/25526/f-040f/1/-/-/-/-/SHM_NPPA_OboardingToolkit.pdf.

Nurse practitioners (NPs) and physician assistants (PAs) have become a more prominent part of the hospitalist workforce, and at many institutions, they account for a large proportion of patient care and have a powerful effect on a patient’s experience. But NP and PA roles in hospital medicine continue to evolve – and understanding what they do is still, at times, a work in progress.

One myth that persists regarding NPs and PAs is that, if you’ve seen one, you’ve seen them all.

At the 2018 Annual Conference of the Society of Hospital Medicine, Noam Shabani, MS, PA-C, lead physician assistant at Massachusetts General Hospital’s Hospital Medicine Unit, Boston, offered an example to help shatter this misperception.

Mr. Shabani described a 28-year-old woman who had a bachelor’s in biology with a premed track and spent 4 years as a paramedic before attending the physician assistant program at Duke University, Durham, N.C. As a new PA graduate, she was hired as a hospitalist at a community hospital in Kentucky.

Given this new PA’s clinical experience and formal education, there are certain skills she should bring to the table: the ability to develop a differential diagnosis and a good understanding of disease pathophysiology and the mechanisms of action of drugs. And because of her paramedic experience, she should be comfortable with making urgent clinical care decisions and should be proficient with electrocardiograms, as well as chest and abdominal x-rays.

But compared with a newly graduated NP with registered nurse (RN) floor experience, the PA is likely to be less familiar with hospital mechanics and systems, with leading goal of care discussions with patients and families, and with understanding nuances involved with transitions of care.

The subtle differences between NPs and PAs don’t end there. Because of the progressive policies and recently updated bylaws at the Kentucky hospital where the PA was hired, this health care professional can see patients and write notes independently without a physician signature. But because she practices in Kentucky, she is not allowed to prescribe Schedule II medications, per state law.

“This example demonstrates how nuanced and multi-layered the process of integrating NPs and PAs into hospitalist groups can be,” Mr. Shabani said.
 

Goals, roles, and expectations

Physician assistants and nurse practitioners have reported that their job descriptions, and the variety of roles they can play within HM teams, are becoming better understood by hospitalist physicians and administrators. However, they also have acknowledged that both PAs and NPs are still underutilized.

Tricia Marriott, PA-C, MPAS, an orthopedic service line administrator at Saint Mary’s Hospital in Waterbury, Conn., and an expert in NP and PA policy, has noticed growing enlightenment about PAs and NPs in her travels to conferences in recent years.

“I’m no longer explaining what a PA is and what an NP is, and the questions have become very sophisticated,” she said at HM18. “However, I spent the last two days in the exhibit hall, and some of the conversations I had with physicians are interesting in that the practice and utilization styles have not become sophisticated. So I think there is a lot of opportunity out there.”

Mr. Shabani said the hospitalist care provided by PAs and NPs sits “at the intersection” of state regulations, hospital bylaws, department utilization, and – of course – clinical experience and formal medical education.

“What this boils down to is first understanding these factors, followed by strategizing recruitment and training as a response,” he said.

Tracy Cardin, ACNP-BC, SFHM, associate director of clinical integration at Adfinitas Health in Hanover, Md., and a Society of Hospital Medicine board member, said that, even though she usually sees and hears about a 10%-15% productivity gap between physicians and PAs or NPs, there is no good reason that an experienced PA or NP should not be able to handle the same patient load as a physician hospitalist – if that’s the goal.

“Part of it is about communication of expectation,” she said, noting that organizations must provide the training to allows NPs and PAs to reach prescribed goals along with an adequate level of administrative support. “I think we shouldn’t accept those gaps in productivity.”

Nicolas Houghton, DNP, ACNP-BC, CFRN, nurse practitioner/physician assistant manager at the Cleveland Clinic, thinks that it is completely reasonable for health care organizations to have an expectation that, at the 3- to 5-year mark, NPs and PAs “are really going to be functioning at very high levels that may be nearly indistinguishable.”

Dr. Houghton and Mr. Shabani agreed that, while they had considerably different duties at the start of their careers, they now have clinical roles which mirror one another.

For example, they agreed on these basics: NPs must be a certified RN, while a PA can have any undergraduate degree with certain prerequisite courses such as biology and chemistry. All PAs are trained in general medicine, while NPs specialize in areas such as acute care, family medicine, geriatrics, and women’s health. NPs need 500 didactic hours and 500-700 clinical hours in their area of expertise, while physician assistants need 1,000 didactic and 2,000 clinical hours spread over many disciplines.

For NP’s, required clinical rotations depend on the specialty, while all PAs need to complete rotations in inpatient medicine, emergency medicine, primary care, surgery, psychiatry, pediatrics, and ob.gyn. Also, NPs can practice independently in 23 states and the District of Columbia, while PAs must have a supervising physician. About 10% of NPs work in hospital settings, and about 39% of PAs work in hospital settings, they said.

Dr. Houghton and Mr. Shabani emphasized that Medicare does recognize NP and PA services as physician services. The official language, in place since 1998, is that their services “are the type that are considered physician’s services if furnished by a doctor of medicine or osteopathy.”

Mr. Shabani said this remained a very relevant issue. “I can’t overstate how important this is,” he said.
 

Debunking myths

Several myths continue to persist about PAs and NPs, Ms. Marriott said. Some administrators and physicians believe that they can’t see new patients, that a physician must see every patient, that a physician cosignature means that a claim can be submitted under the physician’s name, that reimbursement for services provided by PAs and NPs “leaves 15% on the table,” and that patients won’t be happy being seen by a PA or an NP. All of those things are false, she said.

“We really need to improve people’s understanding in a lot of different places – it’s not just at the clinician level,” she said. “It goes all the way through the operations team, and the operations team has some very old-fashioned thinking about what PAs and NPs really are, which is – they believe – clinical support staff.”

But she suggested that the phrase “working at the top of one’s license” can be used too freely – individual experience and ability will encompass a range of practices, she said.

“I’m licensed to drive a car,” she said. “But you do not want me in the Daytona 500. I am not capable of driving a race car.”

She cautioned that nurse practitioner care must still involve an element of collaboration, according to the Medicaid benefit policy manual, even if they work in states that allow NPs to provide “independent” care. They must have documentation “indicating the relationships that they have with physicians to deal with issues outside their scope of practice,” the manual says.

“Don’t ask me how people prove it,” Ms. Marriott said. “Just know that, if someone were to audit you, then you would need to show what this looks like.”

Regarding the 15% myth, she showed a calculation: Data from the Medical Group Management Association show that median annual compensation for a physician is $134 an hour and that it’s approximately $52 an hour for a PA or NP. An admission history and physical that takes an hour can be reimbursed at $102 for a physician and at 85% of that – $87 – for a PA or NP. That leaves a deficit of $32 for the physician and a surplus of $35 for the PA or NP.

“If you properly deploy your PAs and NPs, you’re going to generate positive margins,” Ms. Marriott said.

Physicians often scurry about seeing all the patients that have already been seen by a PA, she said, because they think they must capture the extra 15% reimbursement. But that is unnecessary, she said.

“Go do another admission. You should see patients because of their clinical condition. My point is not that you go running around because you want to capture the extra 15% – because that provides no additional medically necessary care.”
 

Changing practice

Many institutions continue to be hamstrung by their own bylaws in the use of NPs and PAs. It’s true that a physician doesn’t have to see every patient, unless it’s required in a hospital’s rules, Ms. Marriott noted.

“Somebody step up, get on the bylaws committee, and say, ‘Let’s update these.’ ” she said.

As for patient satisfaction, access and convenience routinely rank higher on the patient priority lists than provider credentials. “The patient wants to get off the gurney in the ED and get to a room,” she said.

But changing hospital bylaws and practices is also about the responsible use of health care dollars, Ms. Marriott affirmed.

“More patients seen in a timely fashion, and quality metrics improvement: Those are all things that are really, really important,” she said. “As a result, [if bylaws and practice patterns are changed] the physicians are hopefully going to be happier, certainly the administration is going to be happier, and the patients are going to fare better.”

Scott Faust, MS, APRN, CNP, an acute care nurse practitioner at Health Partners in St. Paul, Minn., said that teamwork without egos is crucial to success for all providers on the hospital medicine team, especially at busier moments.

“Nobody wants to be in this alone,” he said. “I think the hospitalist teams that work well are the ones that check their titles at the door.”

PAs and NPs generally agree that, as long as all clinical staffers are working within their areas of skill without being overly concerned about specific titles and roles, hospitals and patients will benefit.

“I’ve had physicians at my organization say ‘We need to have an NP and PA set of educational requirements,’ and I said, ‘We have some already for physicians, right? Why aren’t we using that?’ ” Dr. Houghton said. “I think we should have the same expectations clinically. At the end of the day, the patient deserves the same outcomes and the same care, whether they’re being cared for by a physician, an NP, or a PA.”


 

Onboarding NPs and PAs

According to SHM’s Nurse Practitioner/Physician Assistant Committee, the integration of a new NP or PA hire, whether experienced or not, requires up-front organization and planning for the employee as he or she enters into a new practice.

To that end, the NP/PA Committee created a toolkit to aid health care organizations in their integration of NP and PA staffers into hospital medicine practice groups. The document includes resources for recruiting and interviewing NPs and PAs, information about orientation and onboarding, detailed descriptions of models of care to aid in the utilization of NPs and PAs, best practices for staff retention, insights on billing and reimbursement, and ideas for program evaluation.

Readers can download the Onboarding Toolkit in PDF format at shm.hospitalmedicine.org/acton/attachment/25526/f-040f/1/-/-/-/-/SHM_NPPA_OboardingToolkit.pdf.