Innovations in Healthcare

John Bulger, DO, MBA reviewed the components of the Choosing Wisely campaign and SHM’s recommendations in an era where providing high value cost-conscious care is key to optimizing the health of our patients. Choosing Wisely is an initiative of the ABIM foundation to foster communication between physicians and patients about common tests and procedures that may fail to provide value or enhance patient outcomes. It’s a partnership with 70-plus medical societies including an innovative partnership with Consumer Reports. SHM’s evidence-based recommendations are:

• Don’t leave urinary catheters in place for convenience or monitoring of output for non-critically ill patients.
• Don’t prescribe stress ulcer prophylaxis to hospitalized patients unless they are at high risk for GI complications.
• Avoid transfusion of PRBC for arbitrary hemoglobin in the absence of CAD, CHF or CVA.
• Don’t order continuous telemetry monitoring outside of the ICU without a protocol.
• Don’t perform repetitive CBC and chemistry testing in a clinically stable patient.

Dr. Bulger highlighted that the Choosing Wisely campaign is designed to encourage conversations to

improve patient care. While cost-conscious care is a natural by-product of this effort, the primary focus when these guidelines were developed was to provide better healthcare for our patients. This year, SHM’s Choosing Wisely Case Competition has triggered the application of the above recommendations in institutions across the country. A summary of these efforts will be published in the near future to assist fellow hospitalists with their efforts to minimize waste and improve care in their own institutions. Look for the Hospitalist Guide to Choosing Wisely which is expected to be published in spring 2015. Choosing Wisely has now become a world-wide effort with Canada, Europe and Brazil implementing similar recommendations to improve healthcare.

Dr.Bulger concluded that while tradition is hard to change, it is of paramount importance to think differently to find innovative solutions to common problems in healthcare. Join the conversation using #ChoosingWisely or #LessIsMore on twitter.

Key Takeaways

• Choosing Wisely  is an ABIM campaign developed to address and promote conversations about common tests and procedures that are of low-value.
• SHM’s recommendations were implemented in institutions with positive results as evidenced by the Choosing Wisely case competition at #HospMed15.
• Look for a summary of these efforts to be published in the spring of 2015.
• Use these guidelines to educate, provoke dialogue and achieve optimal patient outcomes in your institution.
• Join the conversation on twitter using #ChoosingWisely and #LessIsMore.

John Bulger, DO, MBA reviewed the components of the Choosing Wisely campaign and SHM’s recommendations in an era where providing high value cost-conscious care is key to optimizing the health of our patients. Choosing Wisely is an initiative of the ABIM foundation to foster communication between physicians and patients about common tests and procedures that may fail to provide value or enhance patient outcomes. It’s a partnership with 70-plus medical societies including an innovative partnership with Consumer Reports. SHM’s evidence-based recommendations are:

• Don’t leave urinary catheters in place for convenience or monitoring of output for non-critically ill patients.
• Don’t prescribe stress ulcer prophylaxis to hospitalized patients unless they are at high risk for GI complications.
• Avoid transfusion of PRBC for arbitrary hemoglobin in the absence of CAD, CHF or CVA.
• Don’t order continuous telemetry monitoring outside of the ICU without a protocol.
• Don’t perform repetitive CBC and chemistry testing in a clinically stable patient.

Dr. Bulger highlighted that the Choosing Wisely campaign is designed to encourage conversations to

improve patient care. While cost-conscious care is a natural by-product of this effort, the primary focus when these guidelines were developed was to provide better healthcare for our patients. This year, SHM’s Choosing Wisely Case Competition has triggered the application of the above recommendations in institutions across the country. A summary of these efforts will be published in the near future to assist fellow hospitalists with their efforts to minimize waste and improve care in their own institutions. Look for the Hospitalist Guide to Choosing Wisely which is expected to be published in spring 2015. Choosing Wisely has now become a world-wide effort with Canada, Europe and Brazil implementing similar recommendations to improve healthcare.

Dr.Bulger concluded that while tradition is hard to change, it is of paramount importance to think differently to find innovative solutions to common problems in healthcare. Join the conversation using #ChoosingWisely or #LessIsMore on twitter.

Key Takeaways

• Choosing Wisely  is an ABIM campaign developed to address and promote conversations about common tests and procedures that are of low-value.
• SHM’s recommendations were implemented in institutions with positive results as evidenced by the Choosing Wisely case competition at #HospMed15.
• Look for a summary of these efforts to be published in the spring of 2015.
• Use these guidelines to educate, provoke dialogue and achieve optimal patient outcomes in your institution.
• Join the conversation on twitter using #ChoosingWisely and #LessIsMore.

John Bulger, DO, MBA reviewed the components of the Choosing Wisely campaign and SHM’s recommendations in an era where providing high value cost-conscious care is key to optimizing the health of our patients. Choosing Wisely is an initiative of the ABIM foundation to foster communication between physicians and patients about common tests and procedures that may fail to provide value or enhance patient outcomes. It’s a partnership with 70-plus medical societies including an innovative partnership with Consumer Reports. SHM’s evidence-based recommendations are:

• Don’t leave urinary catheters in place for convenience or monitoring of output for non-critically ill patients.
• Don’t prescribe stress ulcer prophylaxis to hospitalized patients unless they are at high risk for GI complications.
• Avoid transfusion of PRBC for arbitrary hemoglobin in the absence of CAD, CHF or CVA.
• Don’t order continuous telemetry monitoring outside of the ICU without a protocol.
• Don’t perform repetitive CBC and chemistry testing in a clinically stable patient.

Dr. Bulger highlighted that the Choosing Wisely campaign is designed to encourage conversations to

improve patient care. While cost-conscious care is a natural by-product of this effort, the primary focus when these guidelines were developed was to provide better healthcare for our patients. This year, SHM’s Choosing Wisely Case Competition has triggered the application of the above recommendations in institutions across the country. A summary of these efforts will be published in the near future to assist fellow hospitalists with their efforts to minimize waste and improve care in their own institutions. Look for the Hospitalist Guide to Choosing Wisely which is expected to be published in spring 2015. Choosing Wisely has now become a world-wide effort with Canada, Europe and Brazil implementing similar recommendations to improve healthcare.

Dr.Bulger concluded that while tradition is hard to change, it is of paramount importance to think differently to find innovative solutions to common problems in healthcare. Join the conversation using #ChoosingWisely or #LessIsMore on twitter.

Key Takeaways

• Choosing Wisely  is an ABIM campaign developed to address and promote conversations about common tests and procedures that are of low-value.
• SHM’s recommendations were implemented in institutions with positive results as evidenced by the Choosing Wisely case competition at #HospMed15.
• Look for a summary of these efforts to be published in the spring of 2015.
• Use these guidelines to educate, provoke dialogue and achieve optimal patient outcomes in your institution.
• Join the conversation on twitter using #ChoosingWisely and #LessIsMore.

Mobile devices put information in the palm of your hand. For hospitalists, this presents real opportunities to engage patients, improve care, and streamline hospital workflows. Two hospitalists who were early adopters of mobile tech in their practices, Dr. Henry Feldman of Beth Israel Deaconess and Dr. Richard Pittman of Emory University/Grady share their lessons learned, and their advice for other hospital clinicians and informaticists on using mobile tech in their practices.

Mobile devices put information in the palm of your hand. For hospitalists, this presents real opportunities to engage patients, improve care, and streamline hospital workflows. Two hospitalists who were early adopters of mobile tech in their practices, Dr. Henry Feldman of Beth Israel Deaconess and Dr. Richard Pittman of Emory University/Grady share their lessons learned, and their advice for other hospital clinicians and informaticists on using mobile tech in their practices.

Mobile devices put information in the palm of your hand. For hospitalists, this presents real opportunities to engage patients, improve care, and streamline hospital workflows. Two hospitalists who were early adopters of mobile tech in their practices, Dr. Henry Feldman of Beth Israel Deaconess and Dr. Richard Pittman of Emory University/Grady share their lessons learned, and their advice for other hospital clinicians and informaticists on using mobile tech in their practices.

David Lichtman, PA, director of the Johns Hopkins Central Procedure Service in Baltimore, Md., says bedside procedure training should be consistent and thorough, regardless of whether the trainee is a medical student, a resident, a fellow, or an established physician. He is a strong advocate for training that includes well-designed computer coursework, evaluates practitioners from start to finish, and demonstrates that they are meeting established benchmarks.

“That’s what keeps patients safe,” he says.

Experienced, capable, and proven educators are also critical.

“Let’s face it: Not everybody is a very good teacher,” he adds.

Currently, many medical residents can do rotations that will give them hands-on experience. But some physicians question why certain procedures are still being taught to internal medicine residents if the ABIM no longer requires hands-on experience. Other programs may simply lack the resources, including experienced supervisors, to provide proper training.

The demand for more training is clearly there, however. Sally Wang, MD, FHM, director of procedure education at Brigham and Women’s Hospital and a clinical instructor at Harvard Medical School in Boston, co-leads the procedures pre-course at the SHM annual meeting. She compares the logistically complicated event to throwing a wedding. It consistently sells out despite having doubled in size, to 60 slots for a basic procedure course and 60 slots for a second course that emphasizes ultrasound. At the HM14 pre-course in Las Vegas, Dr. Wang counted enough people on the waiting list to fill an additional course.

“It was mind-boggling,” she says.

Several companies have taken notice of the pent-up demand and are offering their own courses and workshops. Joshua Lenchus, DO, RPh, FACP, SFHM, medical director of the University of Miami-Jackson Memorial Hospital’s procedure service, and others see many of these offerings as introductions only, however. At the University of Miami, he says, his rigorous, simulation-based invasive bedside procedures curriculum is mandatory for all internal medicine residents. The curriculum includes central line, thoracentesis, paracentesis, lumbar puncture, and sometimes arthrocentesis as its core procedures, though Dr. Lenchus says others can easily be added. This fall, for instance, he plans to add chest tube and arterial line placement.

He notes a dramatic reduction in central line placement and thoracentesis complications after his team began performing them to the “four pillars” of his program. Rigorous simulation-based training, strict adherence to a critical skills checklist, consistent use of ultrasound, and direct supervision can form a very effective bundle of safety measures, he says, just like a combination of seat belts, speed reduction, and other precautions can lead to fewer automobile-associated injuries and deaths. TH

David Lichtman, PA, director of the Johns Hopkins Central Procedure Service in Baltimore, Md., says bedside procedure training should be consistent and thorough, regardless of whether the trainee is a medical student, a resident, a fellow, or an established physician. He is a strong advocate for training that includes well-designed computer coursework, evaluates practitioners from start to finish, and demonstrates that they are meeting established benchmarks.

“That’s what keeps patients safe,” he says.

Experienced, capable, and proven educators are also critical.

“Let’s face it: Not everybody is a very good teacher,” he adds.

Currently, many medical residents can do rotations that will give them hands-on experience. But some physicians question why certain procedures are still being taught to internal medicine residents if the ABIM no longer requires hands-on experience. Other programs may simply lack the resources, including experienced supervisors, to provide proper training.

The demand for more training is clearly there, however. Sally Wang, MD, FHM, director of procedure education at Brigham and Women’s Hospital and a clinical instructor at Harvard Medical School in Boston, co-leads the procedures pre-course at the SHM annual meeting. She compares the logistically complicated event to throwing a wedding. It consistently sells out despite having doubled in size, to 60 slots for a basic procedure course and 60 slots for a second course that emphasizes ultrasound. At the HM14 pre-course in Las Vegas, Dr. Wang counted enough people on the waiting list to fill an additional course.

“It was mind-boggling,” she says.

Several companies have taken notice of the pent-up demand and are offering their own courses and workshops. Joshua Lenchus, DO, RPh, FACP, SFHM, medical director of the University of Miami-Jackson Memorial Hospital’s procedure service, and others see many of these offerings as introductions only, however. At the University of Miami, he says, his rigorous, simulation-based invasive bedside procedures curriculum is mandatory for all internal medicine residents. The curriculum includes central line, thoracentesis, paracentesis, lumbar puncture, and sometimes arthrocentesis as its core procedures, though Dr. Lenchus says others can easily be added. This fall, for instance, he plans to add chest tube and arterial line placement.

He notes a dramatic reduction in central line placement and thoracentesis complications after his team began performing them to the “four pillars” of his program. Rigorous simulation-based training, strict adherence to a critical skills checklist, consistent use of ultrasound, and direct supervision can form a very effective bundle of safety measures, he says, just like a combination of seat belts, speed reduction, and other precautions can lead to fewer automobile-associated injuries and deaths. TH

David Lichtman, PA, director of the Johns Hopkins Central Procedure Service in Baltimore, Md., says bedside procedure training should be consistent and thorough, regardless of whether the trainee is a medical student, a resident, a fellow, or an established physician. He is a strong advocate for training that includes well-designed computer coursework, evaluates practitioners from start to finish, and demonstrates that they are meeting established benchmarks.

“That’s what keeps patients safe,” he says.

Experienced, capable, and proven educators are also critical.

“Let’s face it: Not everybody is a very good teacher,” he adds.

Currently, many medical residents can do rotations that will give them hands-on experience. But some physicians question why certain procedures are still being taught to internal medicine residents if the ABIM no longer requires hands-on experience. Other programs may simply lack the resources, including experienced supervisors, to provide proper training.

The demand for more training is clearly there, however. Sally Wang, MD, FHM, director of procedure education at Brigham and Women’s Hospital and a clinical instructor at Harvard Medical School in Boston, co-leads the procedures pre-course at the SHM annual meeting. She compares the logistically complicated event to throwing a wedding. It consistently sells out despite having doubled in size, to 60 slots for a basic procedure course and 60 slots for a second course that emphasizes ultrasound. At the HM14 pre-course in Las Vegas, Dr. Wang counted enough people on the waiting list to fill an additional course.

“It was mind-boggling,” she says.

Several companies have taken notice of the pent-up demand and are offering their own courses and workshops. Joshua Lenchus, DO, RPh, FACP, SFHM, medical director of the University of Miami-Jackson Memorial Hospital’s procedure service, and others see many of these offerings as introductions only, however. At the University of Miami, he says, his rigorous, simulation-based invasive bedside procedures curriculum is mandatory for all internal medicine residents. The curriculum includes central line, thoracentesis, paracentesis, lumbar puncture, and sometimes arthrocentesis as its core procedures, though Dr. Lenchus says others can easily be added. This fall, for instance, he plans to add chest tube and arterial line placement.

He notes a dramatic reduction in central line placement and thoracentesis complications after his team began performing them to the “four pillars” of his program. Rigorous simulation-based training, strict adherence to a critical skills checklist, consistent use of ultrasound, and direct supervision can form a very effective bundle of safety measures, he says, just like a combination of seat belts, speed reduction, and other precautions can lead to fewer automobile-associated injuries and deaths. TH

The University of Vermont Medical Center (UVMC), a 562-bed academic facility in Burlington, has been honored with a Partnership in Prevention award for sustainable improvements to eliminate healthcare-associated infections (HAIs). The award, sponsored by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, the Association for Professionals in Infection Control and Epidemiology, and the Society for Healthcare Epidemiology of America, recognizes the concepts of the National Action Plan to Prevent Healthcare-Associated Infections: Roadmap to Elimination of the federal Office of Disease Prevention and Health Promotion.

UVMC was honored for creating a culture of safety and collaboration across ranks and disciplines, with a team of infection prevention advocates from the hospital, ambulatory clinics, and dialysis center, along with multi-disciplinary teams focused on infection prevention and control initiatives. The hospital posted a 77% reduction in reported central line-associated blood stream infections (CLABSI) in its medical ICU, and its neonatal ICU went 36 months without a CLABSI. Two surgeon-directed initiatives reduced surgical site infection rates for total knee and hip joint replacements by 81%—with 1,677 consecutive infection-free total knee arthroplasties.

UVMC also joined the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s Dialysis Bloodstream Infection Prevention Collaborative in 2009 and has since reduced dialysis-related bloodstream infections by 83%.

One key to its success, according to Anna Noonan, vice president of the Jeffords Institute for Quality and Operational Effectiveness at UVMC, is the fact that executive leadership, infection prevention specialists, clinicians, and quality experts are working together and using data to drive improvement. For example, the medical center implemented protocols for inserting central lines and offered mentored support in its simulation lab for clinicians—including hospitalists—to learn and practice correct insertion techniques.

For more information about UVMC’s award-winning commitment to zero infections, e-mail Noonan at [email protected].

The University of Vermont Medical Center (UVMC), a 562-bed academic facility in Burlington, has been honored with a Partnership in Prevention award for sustainable improvements to eliminate healthcare-associated infections (HAIs). The award, sponsored by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, the Association for Professionals in Infection Control and Epidemiology, and the Society for Healthcare Epidemiology of America, recognizes the concepts of the National Action Plan to Prevent Healthcare-Associated Infections: Roadmap to Elimination of the federal Office of Disease Prevention and Health Promotion.

UVMC was honored for creating a culture of safety and collaboration across ranks and disciplines, with a team of infection prevention advocates from the hospital, ambulatory clinics, and dialysis center, along with multi-disciplinary teams focused on infection prevention and control initiatives. The hospital posted a 77% reduction in reported central line-associated blood stream infections (CLABSI) in its medical ICU, and its neonatal ICU went 36 months without a CLABSI. Two surgeon-directed initiatives reduced surgical site infection rates for total knee and hip joint replacements by 81%—with 1,677 consecutive infection-free total knee arthroplasties.

UVMC also joined the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s Dialysis Bloodstream Infection Prevention Collaborative in 2009 and has since reduced dialysis-related bloodstream infections by 83%.

One key to its success, according to Anna Noonan, vice president of the Jeffords Institute for Quality and Operational Effectiveness at UVMC, is the fact that executive leadership, infection prevention specialists, clinicians, and quality experts are working together and using data to drive improvement. For example, the medical center implemented protocols for inserting central lines and offered mentored support in its simulation lab for clinicians—including hospitalists—to learn and practice correct insertion techniques.

For more information about UVMC’s award-winning commitment to zero infections, e-mail Noonan at [email protected].

The University of Vermont Medical Center (UVMC), a 562-bed academic facility in Burlington, has been honored with a Partnership in Prevention award for sustainable improvements to eliminate healthcare-associated infections (HAIs). The award, sponsored by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, the Association for Professionals in Infection Control and Epidemiology, and the Society for Healthcare Epidemiology of America, recognizes the concepts of the National Action Plan to Prevent Healthcare-Associated Infections: Roadmap to Elimination of the federal Office of Disease Prevention and Health Promotion.

UVMC was honored for creating a culture of safety and collaboration across ranks and disciplines, with a team of infection prevention advocates from the hospital, ambulatory clinics, and dialysis center, along with multi-disciplinary teams focused on infection prevention and control initiatives. The hospital posted a 77% reduction in reported central line-associated blood stream infections (CLABSI) in its medical ICU, and its neonatal ICU went 36 months without a CLABSI. Two surgeon-directed initiatives reduced surgical site infection rates for total knee and hip joint replacements by 81%—with 1,677 consecutive infection-free total knee arthroplasties.

UVMC also joined the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s Dialysis Bloodstream Infection Prevention Collaborative in 2009 and has since reduced dialysis-related bloodstream infections by 83%.

One key to its success, according to Anna Noonan, vice president of the Jeffords Institute for Quality and Operational Effectiveness at UVMC, is the fact that executive leadership, infection prevention specialists, clinicians, and quality experts are working together and using data to drive improvement. For example, the medical center implemented protocols for inserting central lines and offered mentored support in its simulation lab for clinicians—including hospitalists—to learn and practice correct insertion techniques.

For more information about UVMC’s award-winning commitment to zero infections, e-mail Noonan at [email protected].

On Dec. 15 at a White House Roundtable, the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) unveiled its Sustainable and Climate Resilient Health Care Facilities Initiative [PDF], with a new guide to help health facilities enhance their resilience to extreme weather events. Part of the President’s Climate Action Plan, the guide offers a planning framework, case studies of responses to historical extreme weather events, and emerging practices for improving infrastructure resilience. A best practices document and accompanying web-based toolkit are planned for 2015.

HHS considers climate change one of the top public health challenges of our time, and hospitals are an essential part of the country’s responsiveness to the negative impacts of heat waves, floods, wildfires, worsened air pollution, and extreme storms and their aftermath. Damage to hospitals themselves is another key issue, one that was dramatically illustrated by the ravages of Hurricane Katrina in 2005. Climate change is expected to increase the severity of some extreme weather and could alter the range and intensity of infectious diseases, according to the HHS report.

Steps for building a climate-resilient healthcare sector, outlined in the new guide, start with raising awareness among health professionals about climate-related health impacts, particular issues in their regions, and specific resilience strategies. The guide also recommends assessing the vulnerabilities of health facilities, communities, and at-risk populations; building partnerships with energy, transportation, and other sectors of the community; and developing robust communication channels.

On Dec. 15 at a White House Roundtable, the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) unveiled its Sustainable and Climate Resilient Health Care Facilities Initiative [PDF], with a new guide to help health facilities enhance their resilience to extreme weather events. Part of the President’s Climate Action Plan, the guide offers a planning framework, case studies of responses to historical extreme weather events, and emerging practices for improving infrastructure resilience. A best practices document and accompanying web-based toolkit are planned for 2015.

HHS considers climate change one of the top public health challenges of our time, and hospitals are an essential part of the country’s responsiveness to the negative impacts of heat waves, floods, wildfires, worsened air pollution, and extreme storms and their aftermath. Damage to hospitals themselves is another key issue, one that was dramatically illustrated by the ravages of Hurricane Katrina in 2005. Climate change is expected to increase the severity of some extreme weather and could alter the range and intensity of infectious diseases, according to the HHS report.

Steps for building a climate-resilient healthcare sector, outlined in the new guide, start with raising awareness among health professionals about climate-related health impacts, particular issues in their regions, and specific resilience strategies. The guide also recommends assessing the vulnerabilities of health facilities, communities, and at-risk populations; building partnerships with energy, transportation, and other sectors of the community; and developing robust communication channels.

On Dec. 15 at a White House Roundtable, the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) unveiled its Sustainable and Climate Resilient Health Care Facilities Initiative [PDF], with a new guide to help health facilities enhance their resilience to extreme weather events. Part of the President’s Climate Action Plan, the guide offers a planning framework, case studies of responses to historical extreme weather events, and emerging practices for improving infrastructure resilience. A best practices document and accompanying web-based toolkit are planned for 2015.

HHS considers climate change one of the top public health challenges of our time, and hospitals are an essential part of the country’s responsiveness to the negative impacts of heat waves, floods, wildfires, worsened air pollution, and extreme storms and their aftermath. Damage to hospitals themselves is another key issue, one that was dramatically illustrated by the ravages of Hurricane Katrina in 2005. Climate change is expected to increase the severity of some extreme weather and could alter the range and intensity of infectious diseases, according to the HHS report.

Steps for building a climate-resilient healthcare sector, outlined in the new guide, start with raising awareness among health professionals about climate-related health impacts, particular issues in their regions, and specific resilience strategies. The guide also recommends assessing the vulnerabilities of health facilities, communities, and at-risk populations; building partnerships with energy, transportation, and other sectors of the community; and developing robust communication channels.

Citing a lack of accepted benchmarks for quality improvement in pediatric hospital care, researchers described in Pediatrics their process of establishing benchmarks for the treatment of asthma, bronchiolitis, and pneumonia, three common conditions treated by pediatric hospitalists that together amount to 10% of all pediatric hospital admissions. Despite the existence of evidence-based guidelines for these conditions, there is wide variation in adherence by U.S. hospitals.

The researchers, led by Kavita Parikh, MD, MSHM, a pediatric hospitalist at Children’s National Health System and assistant professor of pediatrics at George Washington University School of Medicine and Health Sciences, both in Washington, D.C., measured 2012 performance in freestanding children’s hospitals using recognized clinical quality indicators and data reported to the Pediatric Health Information System of the Children’s Hospital Association to construct what they call “achievable benchmarks of care,” or ABC. The ABCs are calculated from performance averages at the high-performing children’s hospitals.

“In other words, we identified the best measured performance for each quality indicator, based on actual data reflecting the intricacies of real-world pediatric care,” Dr. Parikh recently told Medscape.

The ABCs also emphasize avoiding the overuse of certain treatments that have a potential risk for adverse events. “High performers did not overutilize nonrecommended services,” Dr. Kavikh says.

Citing a lack of accepted benchmarks for quality improvement in pediatric hospital care, researchers described in Pediatrics their process of establishing benchmarks for the treatment of asthma, bronchiolitis, and pneumonia, three common conditions treated by pediatric hospitalists that together amount to 10% of all pediatric hospital admissions. Despite the existence of evidence-based guidelines for these conditions, there is wide variation in adherence by U.S. hospitals.

The researchers, led by Kavita Parikh, MD, MSHM, a pediatric hospitalist at Children’s National Health System and assistant professor of pediatrics at George Washington University School of Medicine and Health Sciences, both in Washington, D.C., measured 2012 performance in freestanding children’s hospitals using recognized clinical quality indicators and data reported to the Pediatric Health Information System of the Children’s Hospital Association to construct what they call “achievable benchmarks of care,” or ABC. The ABCs are calculated from performance averages at the high-performing children’s hospitals.

“In other words, we identified the best measured performance for each quality indicator, based on actual data reflecting the intricacies of real-world pediatric care,” Dr. Parikh recently told Medscape.

The ABCs also emphasize avoiding the overuse of certain treatments that have a potential risk for adverse events. “High performers did not overutilize nonrecommended services,” Dr. Kavikh says.

Citing a lack of accepted benchmarks for quality improvement in pediatric hospital care, researchers described in Pediatrics their process of establishing benchmarks for the treatment of asthma, bronchiolitis, and pneumonia, three common conditions treated by pediatric hospitalists that together amount to 10% of all pediatric hospital admissions. Despite the existence of evidence-based guidelines for these conditions, there is wide variation in adherence by U.S. hospitals.

The researchers, led by Kavita Parikh, MD, MSHM, a pediatric hospitalist at Children’s National Health System and assistant professor of pediatrics at George Washington University School of Medicine and Health Sciences, both in Washington, D.C., measured 2012 performance in freestanding children’s hospitals using recognized clinical quality indicators and data reported to the Pediatric Health Information System of the Children’s Hospital Association to construct what they call “achievable benchmarks of care,” or ABC. The ABCs are calculated from performance averages at the high-performing children’s hospitals.

“In other words, we identified the best measured performance for each quality indicator, based on actual data reflecting the intricacies of real-world pediatric care,” Dr. Parikh recently told Medscape.

The ABCs also emphasize avoiding the overuse of certain treatments that have a potential risk for adverse events. “High performers did not overutilize nonrecommended services,” Dr. Kavikh says.

Estimated total number of saved lives from 2011 to 2013 as a result of reductions in the incidence of hospital-acquired conditions (HACs) in U.S. hospitals, compared with HAC rates in 2010, according to the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS). In 1999, the Institute of Medicine estimated that as many as 98,000 deaths per year resulted from avoidable hospital errors, such as central line-associated blood stream infections, adverse drug events, falls, and bedsores. Rates of avoidable medical errors fell by 17% between 2010 and 2013, (HHS) reports, which resulted in 1.3 million fewer HACs than expected and overall savings of $12 billion for the healthcare system.

Estimated total number of saved lives from 2011 to 2013 as a result of reductions in the incidence of hospital-acquired conditions (HACs) in U.S. hospitals, compared with HAC rates in 2010, according to the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS). In 1999, the Institute of Medicine estimated that as many as 98,000 deaths per year resulted from avoidable hospital errors, such as central line-associated blood stream infections, adverse drug events, falls, and bedsores. Rates of avoidable medical errors fell by 17% between 2010 and 2013, (HHS) reports, which resulted in 1.3 million fewer HACs than expected and overall savings of $12 billion for the healthcare system.

Estimated total number of saved lives from 2011 to 2013 as a result of reductions in the incidence of hospital-acquired conditions (HACs) in U.S. hospitals, compared with HAC rates in 2010, according to the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS). In 1999, the Institute of Medicine estimated that as many as 98,000 deaths per year resulted from avoidable hospital errors, such as central line-associated blood stream infections, adverse drug events, falls, and bedsores. Rates of avoidable medical errors fell by 17% between 2010 and 2013, (HHS) reports, which resulted in 1.3 million fewer HACs than expected and overall savings of $12 billion for the healthcare system.

UpToDate, a leading clinical decision support resource for physicians, in July added palliative care as the newest of its 22 medical specialties. The palliative care section covers a variety of topics focused on improving symptoms and providing best quality of life for patients with serious illnesses. The new service resulted from two years of extensive collaboration by a team of 100 leading palliative care specialists from around the world, led by Harvard Medical School palliative care physicians J. Andrew Billings, MD, and Susan D. Block, MD, reviewing and grading the body of research and scientific literature on palliative care.

UpToDate, a leading clinical decision support resource for physicians, in July added palliative care as the newest of its 22 medical specialties. The palliative care section covers a variety of topics focused on improving symptoms and providing best quality of life for patients with serious illnesses. The new service resulted from two years of extensive collaboration by a team of 100 leading palliative care specialists from around the world, led by Harvard Medical School palliative care physicians J. Andrew Billings, MD, and Susan D. Block, MD, reviewing and grading the body of research and scientific literature on palliative care.

UpToDate, a leading clinical decision support resource for physicians, in July added palliative care as the newest of its 22 medical specialties. The palliative care section covers a variety of topics focused on improving symptoms and providing best quality of life for patients with serious illnesses. The new service resulted from two years of extensive collaboration by a team of 100 leading palliative care specialists from around the world, led by Harvard Medical School palliative care physicians J. Andrew Billings, MD, and Susan D. Block, MD, reviewing and grading the body of research and scientific literature on palliative care.

CMS started the third year of its Hospital Readmissions Reduction Program on October 1, with 2,610 U.S. hospitals—slightly more than in previous years—on the hook for penalties of up to 3% of their Medicare diagnosis-related grouping payments based on 30-day readmissions rates for diagnoses of myocardial infarction, heart failure, pneumonia, COPD, and elective total hip and total knee arthroplasty posted between July 2010 and June 2013.

According to analysis by Kaiser Health News, 39 hospitals will incur the maximum penalty, and hospitals collectively will pay an estimated $428 million in penalties in the current fiscal year for readmission rates deemed higher than expected by CMS formulas.

Medicare’s overall readmission rate in 2013 was 18%, which was down slightly from previous years but still amounted to two million patients. CMS estimates that these readmissions cost $26 billion, 65% of which was attributed to avoidable readmissions. CMS’ fiscal year 2015 final rule for reimbursement under the Hospital Inpatient Prospective Payment System, first published in the Federal Register, spells out fiscal year 2015 penalties and readmissions payment adjustment factors.

CMS started the third year of its Hospital Readmissions Reduction Program on October 1, with 2,610 U.S. hospitals—slightly more than in previous years—on the hook for penalties of up to 3% of their Medicare diagnosis-related grouping payments based on 30-day readmissions rates for diagnoses of myocardial infarction, heart failure, pneumonia, COPD, and elective total hip and total knee arthroplasty posted between July 2010 and June 2013.

According to analysis by Kaiser Health News, 39 hospitals will incur the maximum penalty, and hospitals collectively will pay an estimated $428 million in penalties in the current fiscal year for readmission rates deemed higher than expected by CMS formulas.

Medicare’s overall readmission rate in 2013 was 18%, which was down slightly from previous years but still amounted to two million patients. CMS estimates that these readmissions cost $26 billion, 65% of which was attributed to avoidable readmissions. CMS’ fiscal year 2015 final rule for reimbursement under the Hospital Inpatient Prospective Payment System, first published in the Federal Register, spells out fiscal year 2015 penalties and readmissions payment adjustment factors.

CMS started the third year of its Hospital Readmissions Reduction Program on October 1, with 2,610 U.S. hospitals—slightly more than in previous years—on the hook for penalties of up to 3% of their Medicare diagnosis-related grouping payments based on 30-day readmissions rates for diagnoses of myocardial infarction, heart failure, pneumonia, COPD, and elective total hip and total knee arthroplasty posted between July 2010 and June 2013.

According to analysis by Kaiser Health News, 39 hospitals will incur the maximum penalty, and hospitals collectively will pay an estimated $428 million in penalties in the current fiscal year for readmission rates deemed higher than expected by CMS formulas.

Medicare’s overall readmission rate in 2013 was 18%, which was down slightly from previous years but still amounted to two million patients. CMS estimates that these readmissions cost $26 billion, 65% of which was attributed to avoidable readmissions. CMS’ fiscal year 2015 final rule for reimbursement under the Hospital Inpatient Prospective Payment System, first published in the Federal Register, spells out fiscal year 2015 penalties and readmissions payment adjustment factors.

Antibiotic overprescription remains a problem in the U.S. and abroad and shows no signs of slowing. A study published in the October 2014 issue of JAMA reports that nearly half of all hospitalized patients receive antibiotics, and the drugs most commonly prescribed are broad-spectrum antibiotics, which have been linked with promoting the spread of antibiotic-resistant bacteria. Based on a one-day prevalence survey of more than 11,000 patients in 183 U.S. hospitals in 2011, the study notes that half of inpatients prescribed antibiotics received two or more of them. The CDC estimates that 20% to 50% of all antibiotics prescribed in U.S. hospitals are either unnecessary or inappropriate, and many of them count adverse drug reactions among their side effects .

While a growing body of evidence suggests that hospital-based antibiotic stewardship programs can optimize treatment, reduce antibacterial side effects, and save money, a study published September 2014 in JAMA says those benefits may be lost post-discharge. Results of a randomized trial of an outpatient antimicrobial stewardship intervention found that an initial 50% reduction in antibiotic prescriptions was lost when their targeted interventions ceased.

“These data suggest that audit and feedback was a vital element of this intervention and that antimicrobial stewardship requires continued, active efforts to sustain initial improvements,” says lead author Jeffrey S. Gerber, MD, PhD, CHCP, attending physician in infectious diseases at the Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia.

The federal government has taken a three-pronged approach to the problem: a report from the President’s Council of Advisors on Science and Technology with recommendations for monitoring superbugs and slowing their spread; an executive order issued by President Obama on September 18, 2014 with a commitment to “accelerate scientific research and facilitate the development of new antibacterial drugs;” and the creation of a national task force charged with designing a national strategy to combat antibiotic overuse by February 2015.

The President’s Council report notes that bacteria are becoming resistant to antibiotics in large part because these drugs are overprescribed to patients and overused in animals raised for food. The report recommends the CDC develop rules by 2017 requiring hospitals and nursing homes to implement best practices for antibiotic use.

Antibiotic overprescription remains a problem in the U.S. and abroad and shows no signs of slowing. A study published in the October 2014 issue of JAMA reports that nearly half of all hospitalized patients receive antibiotics, and the drugs most commonly prescribed are broad-spectrum antibiotics, which have been linked with promoting the spread of antibiotic-resistant bacteria. Based on a one-day prevalence survey of more than 11,000 patients in 183 U.S. hospitals in 2011, the study notes that half of inpatients prescribed antibiotics received two or more of them. The CDC estimates that 20% to 50% of all antibiotics prescribed in U.S. hospitals are either unnecessary or inappropriate, and many of them count adverse drug reactions among their side effects .

While a growing body of evidence suggests that hospital-based antibiotic stewardship programs can optimize treatment, reduce antibacterial side effects, and save money, a study published September 2014 in JAMA says those benefits may be lost post-discharge. Results of a randomized trial of an outpatient antimicrobial stewardship intervention found that an initial 50% reduction in antibiotic prescriptions was lost when their targeted interventions ceased.

“These data suggest that audit and feedback was a vital element of this intervention and that antimicrobial stewardship requires continued, active efforts to sustain initial improvements,” says lead author Jeffrey S. Gerber, MD, PhD, CHCP, attending physician in infectious diseases at the Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia.

The federal government has taken a three-pronged approach to the problem: a report from the President’s Council of Advisors on Science and Technology with recommendations for monitoring superbugs and slowing their spread; an executive order issued by President Obama on September 18, 2014 with a commitment to “accelerate scientific research and facilitate the development of new antibacterial drugs;” and the creation of a national task force charged with designing a national strategy to combat antibiotic overuse by February 2015.

The President’s Council report notes that bacteria are becoming resistant to antibiotics in large part because these drugs are overprescribed to patients and overused in animals raised for food. The report recommends the CDC develop rules by 2017 requiring hospitals and nursing homes to implement best practices for antibiotic use.

Antibiotic overprescription remains a problem in the U.S. and abroad and shows no signs of slowing. A study published in the October 2014 issue of JAMA reports that nearly half of all hospitalized patients receive antibiotics, and the drugs most commonly prescribed are broad-spectrum antibiotics, which have been linked with promoting the spread of antibiotic-resistant bacteria. Based on a one-day prevalence survey of more than 11,000 patients in 183 U.S. hospitals in 2011, the study notes that half of inpatients prescribed antibiotics received two or more of them. The CDC estimates that 20% to 50% of all antibiotics prescribed in U.S. hospitals are either unnecessary or inappropriate, and many of them count adverse drug reactions among their side effects .

While a growing body of evidence suggests that hospital-based antibiotic stewardship programs can optimize treatment, reduce antibacterial side effects, and save money, a study published September 2014 in JAMA says those benefits may be lost post-discharge. Results of a randomized trial of an outpatient antimicrobial stewardship intervention found that an initial 50% reduction in antibiotic prescriptions was lost when their targeted interventions ceased.

“These data suggest that audit and feedback was a vital element of this intervention and that antimicrobial stewardship requires continued, active efforts to sustain initial improvements,” says lead author Jeffrey S. Gerber, MD, PhD, CHCP, attending physician in infectious diseases at the Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia.

The federal government has taken a three-pronged approach to the problem: a report from the President’s Council of Advisors on Science and Technology with recommendations for monitoring superbugs and slowing their spread; an executive order issued by President Obama on September 18, 2014 with a commitment to “accelerate scientific research and facilitate the development of new antibacterial drugs;” and the creation of a national task force charged with designing a national strategy to combat antibiotic overuse by February 2015.

The President’s Council report notes that bacteria are becoming resistant to antibiotics in large part because these drugs are overprescribed to patients and overused in animals raised for food. The report recommends the CDC develop rules by 2017 requiring hospitals and nursing homes to implement best practices for antibiotic use.