User login
Predicting patient risk of medication-related harm
A new tool is the first of its kind
“An increasing number of older adults are using multiple medicines, and it is important that the benefits are outweighing the risks,” said Nikesh Parekh, MBBS, MPH, lead author of a recent study of a new predictive tool. The study was done in the context of the World Health Organization campaign to halve the incidence of medication-related harm (MRH) by 2022 – reducing MRH following hospital discharge was identified as a priority area.
This works allows clinicians to calculate the risk of a patient suffering MRH post-discharge requiring health care, said Dr. Parekh, a research fellow at Brighton and Sussex Medical School in Great Britain. “This enables practitioners and policy makers to target interventions to reduce MRH at those with highest risk. This should support the delivery of cost-effective care. The knowledge of individual risk can also prompt clinicians to reconsider any high-risk medicines that they intend on prescribing at discharge.”
This is the first prediction tool to calculate individual patient risk of serious MRH post-discharge, he added.The high readmission rate for older adults is often an avoidable pressure for hospitalists, particularly where MRH is the underlying cause. “The prediction tool has the potential to significantly reduce this burden for hospitalists/patients by identifying those individuals at high risk upon discharge and ensuring that monitoring and additional support is provided to them in the community with their medications,” Dr. Parekh said.
This electronic tool could be integrated into the electronic discharge summaries so that the information can be shared with primary care clinicians in a straightforward way. “The risk score should be calculated automatically by a self-population of the tool’s fields from information that exists on the patient within the electronic discharge system.”The tool now needs to be externally validated through testing in new settings to assess its validity and reliability in new populations. “If the tool is found to be usable by hospitalists and demonstrates reasonable predictive accuracy, then it should be implemented widely to reduce the incidence of MRH,” Dr. Parekh said.
Reference
1. Parekh N, et al. Medication-related harm in older adults following hospital discharge: development and validation of a prediction tool. BMJ Qual Saf. Published Online First 2019 Sept 16. doi: 10.1136/bmjqs-2019-009587.
A new tool is the first of its kind
A new tool is the first of its kind
“An increasing number of older adults are using multiple medicines, and it is important that the benefits are outweighing the risks,” said Nikesh Parekh, MBBS, MPH, lead author of a recent study of a new predictive tool. The study was done in the context of the World Health Organization campaign to halve the incidence of medication-related harm (MRH) by 2022 – reducing MRH following hospital discharge was identified as a priority area.
This works allows clinicians to calculate the risk of a patient suffering MRH post-discharge requiring health care, said Dr. Parekh, a research fellow at Brighton and Sussex Medical School in Great Britain. “This enables practitioners and policy makers to target interventions to reduce MRH at those with highest risk. This should support the delivery of cost-effective care. The knowledge of individual risk can also prompt clinicians to reconsider any high-risk medicines that they intend on prescribing at discharge.”
This is the first prediction tool to calculate individual patient risk of serious MRH post-discharge, he added.The high readmission rate for older adults is often an avoidable pressure for hospitalists, particularly where MRH is the underlying cause. “The prediction tool has the potential to significantly reduce this burden for hospitalists/patients by identifying those individuals at high risk upon discharge and ensuring that monitoring and additional support is provided to them in the community with their medications,” Dr. Parekh said.
This electronic tool could be integrated into the electronic discharge summaries so that the information can be shared with primary care clinicians in a straightforward way. “The risk score should be calculated automatically by a self-population of the tool’s fields from information that exists on the patient within the electronic discharge system.”The tool now needs to be externally validated through testing in new settings to assess its validity and reliability in new populations. “If the tool is found to be usable by hospitalists and demonstrates reasonable predictive accuracy, then it should be implemented widely to reduce the incidence of MRH,” Dr. Parekh said.
Reference
1. Parekh N, et al. Medication-related harm in older adults following hospital discharge: development and validation of a prediction tool. BMJ Qual Saf. Published Online First 2019 Sept 16. doi: 10.1136/bmjqs-2019-009587.
“An increasing number of older adults are using multiple medicines, and it is important that the benefits are outweighing the risks,” said Nikesh Parekh, MBBS, MPH, lead author of a recent study of a new predictive tool. The study was done in the context of the World Health Organization campaign to halve the incidence of medication-related harm (MRH) by 2022 – reducing MRH following hospital discharge was identified as a priority area.
This works allows clinicians to calculate the risk of a patient suffering MRH post-discharge requiring health care, said Dr. Parekh, a research fellow at Brighton and Sussex Medical School in Great Britain. “This enables practitioners and policy makers to target interventions to reduce MRH at those with highest risk. This should support the delivery of cost-effective care. The knowledge of individual risk can also prompt clinicians to reconsider any high-risk medicines that they intend on prescribing at discharge.”
This is the first prediction tool to calculate individual patient risk of serious MRH post-discharge, he added.The high readmission rate for older adults is often an avoidable pressure for hospitalists, particularly where MRH is the underlying cause. “The prediction tool has the potential to significantly reduce this burden for hospitalists/patients by identifying those individuals at high risk upon discharge and ensuring that monitoring and additional support is provided to them in the community with their medications,” Dr. Parekh said.
This electronic tool could be integrated into the electronic discharge summaries so that the information can be shared with primary care clinicians in a straightforward way. “The risk score should be calculated automatically by a self-population of the tool’s fields from information that exists on the patient within the electronic discharge system.”The tool now needs to be externally validated through testing in new settings to assess its validity and reliability in new populations. “If the tool is found to be usable by hospitalists and demonstrates reasonable predictive accuracy, then it should be implemented widely to reduce the incidence of MRH,” Dr. Parekh said.
Reference
1. Parekh N, et al. Medication-related harm in older adults following hospital discharge: development and validation of a prediction tool. BMJ Qual Saf. Published Online First 2019 Sept 16. doi: 10.1136/bmjqs-2019-009587.
What hospitalists need to know about health care reimbursement and denial prevention
Under a fee-for-service payment model, health care providers get paid by private and public payers for patient services such as physician visits, hospital stays, procedures, and tests. In an ideal world, providers would receive accurate, complete, and timely reimbursements. Unfortunately, the reality is far from ideal, where payment denials and delays are a common occurrence.
According to one study, out of $3 trillion in total claims submitted by health care organizations, an estimated 9% of charges ($262 billion), were initially denied.1 The good news is that 90% of all denials are preventable, and two-thirds of those preventable denials can be successfully appealed.2
Hospitalists are essential in preventing denials for hospital services and should be familiar with the basics of health care reimbursement and common reasons for denials. In this article we will provide an overview of the U.S. health care payment system, revenue cycle management and types of denials, and focus on the role of physician advisors and hospitalists in preventing and combating denials.
Overview of the U.S. health care payment system
In 2018 alone, the U.S. spent $3.6 trillion on health care. Of those dollars, 33% went to payments for hospital care and 20% went to physician and clinical services.3 So where do the nation’s health care dollars come from?
The United States has a complex multiple-payer system that includes private insurance companies and public payers funded by the federal and state governments, such as Medicare and Medicaid. Per the National Association of Insurance Commissioners’ 2018 Market Share Reports, there are 125 private accident and health insurance companies in the U.S., with the top five – UnitedHealth, Kaiser, Anthem, Humana, and CVS – holding a cumulative market share of almost 40%.4
Medicare accounts for 15% of federal budget spending and provides insurance coverage to almost 60 million people who are 65 and older, have end-stage renal disease, or have been approved for Social Security disability insurance benefits.5 Medicare Part A covers hospital, skilled nursing facility, home health, and hospice care. For example, for inpatient stays, Medicare Part A pays hospitals a predetermined rate per discharge according to the Medicare Severity Diagnosis Related Groups (MS-DRGs), which are based on the principal and secondary diagnoses, and performed procedures.6
Medicare Part B covers physician services and outpatient services and supplies, including labs and durable medical equipment, which are paid based on submitted Healthcare Common Procedure Coding System (HCPCS) codes.7 It is important to know that hospital observation stays are considered outpatient services, and are paid by Medicare Part B. Outpatient stays often are reimbursed at a lower rate than inpatient admissions, even in cases with similar utilization of hospital resources.
Medicaid is jointly funded by the states and the federal government and offers insurance coverage to more than 75 million eligible low-income adults, children, pregnant women, elderly adults, and people with disabilities. Over 10 million people are dually eligible for both Medicare and Medicaid.5 Increasingly, government payers, both state and federal, are contracting with private insurance companies to deliver Medicare and Medicaid services, also known as Medicare Advantage and Managed Medicaid Plans.
According to the U.S. Department of Treasury, in the 2019 fiscal year (October 2018 to September 2019), 33% of the nation’s health care dollars came from private insurance, 21% from Medicare, 16% from Medicaid, 15% from other government programs (for example, Veteran Affairs), 10% from out-of-pocket, and 4% from other private sources.5
Understanding revenue cycle management and denials
Providers, such as physicians or hospitals, submit claims to insurance companies that include, among other information, patient demographics and insurance, diagnoses, MS-DRGs and/or HCPCS codes, and charges. Revenue cycle management’s goal is to receive accurate, complete, and timely reimbursement for provided patient services, which is a complex and resource-intensive process.
According to the Healthcare Financial Management Association (HFMA), revenue cycle management includes “all administrative and clinical functions that contribute to the capture, management, and collection of patient service revenue.” These functions could be broken down into four main categories:
- Claims preparation (for example, patient registration, insurance eligibility, benefit verifications, and preauthorization).
- Claims submission (for example, charge capture, medical coding based on medical record documentation and claims transmission).
- Claims management (for example, payment posting, denial management, and patient collections).
- Reporting and analysis.
Claim denial is “the refusal of an insurance company or carrier to honor a request by an individual (or his or her provider) to pay for health care services obtained from a health care professional.”8 Payers can deny an entire claim or provide only a partial payment. Initial denial rate is tracked at the claim level (number of claims denied/number of claims submitted) and at the dollar level (total dollar amount of claims denied/total dollar amount of claims submitted).
Denials are classified as hard versus soft, and clinical versus technical or administrative:
- Hard denials result in lost revenue unless successfully appealed (for example, lack of medical necessity).
- Soft denials do not require appeal and may be paid if a provider corrects the claim or submits additional information (for example, missing or inaccurate patient information, and missing medical records).
- Clinical denials are based on medical necessity, including level of care determination (for example, inpatient versus outpatient) and length of stay. They can be concurrent and retrospective and typically start as soft denials.
- Technical or administrative denials are based on reasons other than clinical (for example, failure to preauthorize care or lack of benefits).
According to the Advisory Board’s 2017 survey of hospitals and health care systems, 50% of initial denials were technical/demographic errors, 20% medical necessity, 16% eligibility, and 14% authorization. Forty seven percent of those denials came from commercial payers, 33% from Medicare/Medicare Advantage, 17% from Medicaid, and 3% from other payers.9
Determination of medical necessity may vary by payer. As an example, let’s look at inpatient admissions. According to the Medicare Two-Midnight Rule, inpatient admission is appropriate “if the admitting practitioner expects the beneficiary to require medically necessary hospital care spanning two or more midnights, and such reasonable expectation is supported by the medical record documentation.”10
Medicare guidelines acknowledge that a physician’s decision to admit a patient is based on complex medical factors including, but not limited to:
- The beneficiary history and comorbidities, and the severity of signs and symptoms (also known as Severity of Illness or SI).
- Current medical needs (also known as Intensity of Service or IS).
- The risk of an adverse event.
Generally, private payers do not follow the Two-Midnight Rule, and instead utilize evidence-based MCG guidelines,11 InterQual® criteria12 or internal criteria to determine if an inpatient admission is “medically necessary.” Hospital utilization review nurses often use MCG and/or InterQual® to aid admission status decisions and may request secondary review by a physician if medical necessity for an inpatient admission is not clear-cut.
The role of physician advisors
Considering the rising financial pressure and growing complexity of private and public payers’ rules and regulations, many hospitals turned to physician advisors to help prevent and reduce denials. Typically, physician advisors perform concurrent secondary reviews to help determine the most appropriate level of care, participate in peer-to-peer discussions with payers, and write formal appeals to overturn clinical denials.
“Physician advisors are generally not in the business of critiquing clinical practice, instead they review whether the chart documentation supports initial and continued hospitalization,” said Charles Locke, MD, senior physician advisor at the Johns Hopkins Hospital and president of the American College of Physician Advisors (ACPA). “However, physician advisors should seek additional information and provide feedback in those cases where the documentation does not support medical necessity for hospitalization.”
Many physician advisors are current or former hospitalists. Chris Shearer, MD, chief medical officer for remote advisory at Sound Physicians Advisory Services, says that “hospitalists are the natural physician advisors as they have a working knowledge of what patients need to be inpatients and which are less sick and likely to be discharged quickly.”
The role of physician advisors extends beyond reviews to include physician engagement and education. Physician advisors are a critical link between physicians, utilization review nurses, case managers, and clinical documentation integrity (CDI) and revenue cycle teams, and are increasingly involved in hospital-wide denial prevention efforts.
Physician advisors are invaluable in identifying and validating root causes for clinical denials and generating potential solutions, as they bring to the table:
- Clinical expertise.
- Understanding of clinical workflows.
- Knowledge of the most current public and private payers’ regulations.
- Insight into hospital-specific clinical documentation opportunities (for example, by diagnosis, procedure, service line, and provider).
- Understanding of payers’ reasons for clinical denials through peer-to-peer discussions
The role of hospitalists in preventing clinical denials
I asked three experienced physician advisors – Dr. Locke, Dr. Shearer, and Deepak Pahuja, MD, chief medical officer at Aerolib Healthcare Solutions – what hospitalists can do to prevent clinical denials. The experts had the following five recommendations:
1. “THINK IN INK.”
The best tool in combating denials is well-documented clinical judgment that outlines:
- WHY the patient requires hospitalization, based on severity of presenting signs and symptoms, comorbidities, and risk of complications.
- WHAT the plan of care is, including diagnostic tests and/or interventions.
- HOW LONG you anticipate the patient will be in the hospital, including potential implications of social determinants (for example homelessness, active drug use) on discharge planning.
2. MASTER THE TWO-MIDNIGHT RULE.
If you expect that a Medicare Part A patient will require two or more midnights in the hospital, document it in the history and physical along with supporting clinical reasoning and sign an inpatient order. If the patient is discharged prior to the second midnight, document the reason in the progress notes and the discharge summary (for example, death, transfer to another hospital, departure against medical advice, faster than expected clinical improvement, or election of hospice in lieu of continued treatment in the hospital). Remember that Medicare Advantage plans may not follow the Two-Midnight rule and instead may use MCG guidelines, InterQual®, or internal criteria.
3. KNOW “SLAM DUNK” MCG CRITERIA FOR TOP DIAGNOSES.
Most large private payers utilize MCG guidelines to determine medical necessity for hospital admissions. Those guidelines are complex and change every year, and it is not required for hospitalists to know them all. However, it might help to remember a few key inpatient admission criteria for the top 5 to 10 diagnoses, such as:
- First episode of heart failure without prior history.
- Upper gastrointestinal bleeding with liver cirrhosis, syncope, or orthostatic hypotension.
- Pneumonia with documented hypoxia, outpatient treatment failure, pneumonia severity index (PSI) class 4 or 5, or CURB-65 score of 3 or greater.
- Cellulitis with outpatient treatment failure or high-risk comorbid conditions (cirrhosis, symptomatic heart failure, immunosuppression, or HbA1c greater than 10%).
4. EACH DAY, DEFEND WHY THE PATIENT NEEDS TO BE IN THE HOSPITAL.
Don’t let your progress notes be swallowed by a “copy-forward” monster and instead provide daily updates, such as:
- Up-to-date clinical status and response to interventions (for example, oxygenation or pain level).
- Updated plan of care: current interventions, additional diagnostic workup, or changes to the intensity of care (for example, increased intravenous pain medication dose or frequency).
- Why the patient cannot be safely discharged to a lower level of care (for example, a skilled nursing facility or home).
5. WORK WITH YOUR UTILIZATION REVIEW NURSES AND PHYSICIAN ADVISORS.
In the end, the two most powerful tools in combating clinical denials for hospital services are good medicine and clear documentation. Armed with an understanding of health care reimbursement and denial prevention, hospitalists can help their hospitals prevent unnecessary clinical denials and receive the reimbursements they deserve.”
Dr. Farah is a hospitalist, physician advisor, and Lean Six Sigma Black Belt. She is a performance improvement consultant based in Corvallis, Ore., and a member of The Hospitalist’s editorial advisory board.
References
1. LaPointe J. $262B of Total Hospital Charges in 2016 Initially Claim Denials. RevCycle Intelligence. 2017 June 26.
2. The Advisory Board. An ounce of prevention pays off: 90% of denials are preventable. 2014 Dec 11. [www.advisory.com/research/revenue-cycle-advancement-center/at-the-margins/2014/12/denials-management]
3. Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, Office of the Actuary, National Health Statistics Group. The Nation’s Health Dollar: Where It Came From, Where It Went. [www.cms.gov/files/document/nations-health-dollar-where-it-came-where-it-went.pdf]
4. National Association of Insurance Commissioners. 2018 Market Share Reports. [www.naic.org/prod_serv/MSR-HB-19.pdf]
5. Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services. Transforming the Healthcare System through Competition and Innovation. 2019 Nov. [www.cms.gov/files/document/cms-financial-report-fiscal-year-2019.pdf]
6. Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services. MS-DRG Classifications and Software. 2020 Oct. [www.cms.gov/Medicare/Medicare-Fee-for-Service-Payment/AcuteInpatientPPS/MS-DRG-Classifications-and-Software]
7. Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services. HCPCS Coding Questions. 2020 Feb. [www.cms.gov/Medicare/Coding/MedHCPCSGenInfo/HCPCS_Coding_Questions]
8. Healthinsurance.org. Health insurance and Obamacare terms. [www.healthinsurance.org/glossary/denial-of-claim/]
9. The Advisory Board. Latest Trends in Hospital Revenue Cycle Performance. 2017. [mahamweb.org/images/meeting/112817/maham_2017__latest_trends_in_hospital_rev_cycle_performance_abc.pdf]
10. Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services. Medicare Program Integrity Manual. Chapter 6: Medicare Contractor Medical Review Guidelines for Specific Services. 2020 July. [www.cms.gov/Regulations-and-Guidance/Guidance/Manuals/downloads/pim83c06.pdf]
11. MCG Health. Industry-Leading Evidence-Based Care Guidelines. [www.mcg.com/care-guidelines/care-guidelines/]
12. Change Healthcare. What Is InterQual? [www.changehealthcare.com/solutions/clinical-decision-support/interqual]
Under a fee-for-service payment model, health care providers get paid by private and public payers for patient services such as physician visits, hospital stays, procedures, and tests. In an ideal world, providers would receive accurate, complete, and timely reimbursements. Unfortunately, the reality is far from ideal, where payment denials and delays are a common occurrence.
According to one study, out of $3 trillion in total claims submitted by health care organizations, an estimated 9% of charges ($262 billion), were initially denied.1 The good news is that 90% of all denials are preventable, and two-thirds of those preventable denials can be successfully appealed.2
Hospitalists are essential in preventing denials for hospital services and should be familiar with the basics of health care reimbursement and common reasons for denials. In this article we will provide an overview of the U.S. health care payment system, revenue cycle management and types of denials, and focus on the role of physician advisors and hospitalists in preventing and combating denials.
Overview of the U.S. health care payment system
In 2018 alone, the U.S. spent $3.6 trillion on health care. Of those dollars, 33% went to payments for hospital care and 20% went to physician and clinical services.3 So where do the nation’s health care dollars come from?
The United States has a complex multiple-payer system that includes private insurance companies and public payers funded by the federal and state governments, such as Medicare and Medicaid. Per the National Association of Insurance Commissioners’ 2018 Market Share Reports, there are 125 private accident and health insurance companies in the U.S., with the top five – UnitedHealth, Kaiser, Anthem, Humana, and CVS – holding a cumulative market share of almost 40%.4
Medicare accounts for 15% of federal budget spending and provides insurance coverage to almost 60 million people who are 65 and older, have end-stage renal disease, or have been approved for Social Security disability insurance benefits.5 Medicare Part A covers hospital, skilled nursing facility, home health, and hospice care. For example, for inpatient stays, Medicare Part A pays hospitals a predetermined rate per discharge according to the Medicare Severity Diagnosis Related Groups (MS-DRGs), which are based on the principal and secondary diagnoses, and performed procedures.6
Medicare Part B covers physician services and outpatient services and supplies, including labs and durable medical equipment, which are paid based on submitted Healthcare Common Procedure Coding System (HCPCS) codes.7 It is important to know that hospital observation stays are considered outpatient services, and are paid by Medicare Part B. Outpatient stays often are reimbursed at a lower rate than inpatient admissions, even in cases with similar utilization of hospital resources.
Medicaid is jointly funded by the states and the federal government and offers insurance coverage to more than 75 million eligible low-income adults, children, pregnant women, elderly adults, and people with disabilities. Over 10 million people are dually eligible for both Medicare and Medicaid.5 Increasingly, government payers, both state and federal, are contracting with private insurance companies to deliver Medicare and Medicaid services, also known as Medicare Advantage and Managed Medicaid Plans.
According to the U.S. Department of Treasury, in the 2019 fiscal year (October 2018 to September 2019), 33% of the nation’s health care dollars came from private insurance, 21% from Medicare, 16% from Medicaid, 15% from other government programs (for example, Veteran Affairs), 10% from out-of-pocket, and 4% from other private sources.5
Understanding revenue cycle management and denials
Providers, such as physicians or hospitals, submit claims to insurance companies that include, among other information, patient demographics and insurance, diagnoses, MS-DRGs and/or HCPCS codes, and charges. Revenue cycle management’s goal is to receive accurate, complete, and timely reimbursement for provided patient services, which is a complex and resource-intensive process.
According to the Healthcare Financial Management Association (HFMA), revenue cycle management includes “all administrative and clinical functions that contribute to the capture, management, and collection of patient service revenue.” These functions could be broken down into four main categories:
- Claims preparation (for example, patient registration, insurance eligibility, benefit verifications, and preauthorization).
- Claims submission (for example, charge capture, medical coding based on medical record documentation and claims transmission).
- Claims management (for example, payment posting, denial management, and patient collections).
- Reporting and analysis.
Claim denial is “the refusal of an insurance company or carrier to honor a request by an individual (or his or her provider) to pay for health care services obtained from a health care professional.”8 Payers can deny an entire claim or provide only a partial payment. Initial denial rate is tracked at the claim level (number of claims denied/number of claims submitted) and at the dollar level (total dollar amount of claims denied/total dollar amount of claims submitted).
Denials are classified as hard versus soft, and clinical versus technical or administrative:
- Hard denials result in lost revenue unless successfully appealed (for example, lack of medical necessity).
- Soft denials do not require appeal and may be paid if a provider corrects the claim or submits additional information (for example, missing or inaccurate patient information, and missing medical records).
- Clinical denials are based on medical necessity, including level of care determination (for example, inpatient versus outpatient) and length of stay. They can be concurrent and retrospective and typically start as soft denials.
- Technical or administrative denials are based on reasons other than clinical (for example, failure to preauthorize care or lack of benefits).
According to the Advisory Board’s 2017 survey of hospitals and health care systems, 50% of initial denials were technical/demographic errors, 20% medical necessity, 16% eligibility, and 14% authorization. Forty seven percent of those denials came from commercial payers, 33% from Medicare/Medicare Advantage, 17% from Medicaid, and 3% from other payers.9
Determination of medical necessity may vary by payer. As an example, let’s look at inpatient admissions. According to the Medicare Two-Midnight Rule, inpatient admission is appropriate “if the admitting practitioner expects the beneficiary to require medically necessary hospital care spanning two or more midnights, and such reasonable expectation is supported by the medical record documentation.”10
Medicare guidelines acknowledge that a physician’s decision to admit a patient is based on complex medical factors including, but not limited to:
- The beneficiary history and comorbidities, and the severity of signs and symptoms (also known as Severity of Illness or SI).
- Current medical needs (also known as Intensity of Service or IS).
- The risk of an adverse event.
Generally, private payers do not follow the Two-Midnight Rule, and instead utilize evidence-based MCG guidelines,11 InterQual® criteria12 or internal criteria to determine if an inpatient admission is “medically necessary.” Hospital utilization review nurses often use MCG and/or InterQual® to aid admission status decisions and may request secondary review by a physician if medical necessity for an inpatient admission is not clear-cut.
The role of physician advisors
Considering the rising financial pressure and growing complexity of private and public payers’ rules and regulations, many hospitals turned to physician advisors to help prevent and reduce denials. Typically, physician advisors perform concurrent secondary reviews to help determine the most appropriate level of care, participate in peer-to-peer discussions with payers, and write formal appeals to overturn clinical denials.
“Physician advisors are generally not in the business of critiquing clinical practice, instead they review whether the chart documentation supports initial and continued hospitalization,” said Charles Locke, MD, senior physician advisor at the Johns Hopkins Hospital and president of the American College of Physician Advisors (ACPA). “However, physician advisors should seek additional information and provide feedback in those cases where the documentation does not support medical necessity for hospitalization.”
Many physician advisors are current or former hospitalists. Chris Shearer, MD, chief medical officer for remote advisory at Sound Physicians Advisory Services, says that “hospitalists are the natural physician advisors as they have a working knowledge of what patients need to be inpatients and which are less sick and likely to be discharged quickly.”
The role of physician advisors extends beyond reviews to include physician engagement and education. Physician advisors are a critical link between physicians, utilization review nurses, case managers, and clinical documentation integrity (CDI) and revenue cycle teams, and are increasingly involved in hospital-wide denial prevention efforts.
Physician advisors are invaluable in identifying and validating root causes for clinical denials and generating potential solutions, as they bring to the table:
- Clinical expertise.
- Understanding of clinical workflows.
- Knowledge of the most current public and private payers’ regulations.
- Insight into hospital-specific clinical documentation opportunities (for example, by diagnosis, procedure, service line, and provider).
- Understanding of payers’ reasons for clinical denials through peer-to-peer discussions
The role of hospitalists in preventing clinical denials
I asked three experienced physician advisors – Dr. Locke, Dr. Shearer, and Deepak Pahuja, MD, chief medical officer at Aerolib Healthcare Solutions – what hospitalists can do to prevent clinical denials. The experts had the following five recommendations:
1. “THINK IN INK.”
The best tool in combating denials is well-documented clinical judgment that outlines:
- WHY the patient requires hospitalization, based on severity of presenting signs and symptoms, comorbidities, and risk of complications.
- WHAT the plan of care is, including diagnostic tests and/or interventions.
- HOW LONG you anticipate the patient will be in the hospital, including potential implications of social determinants (for example homelessness, active drug use) on discharge planning.
2. MASTER THE TWO-MIDNIGHT RULE.
If you expect that a Medicare Part A patient will require two or more midnights in the hospital, document it in the history and physical along with supporting clinical reasoning and sign an inpatient order. If the patient is discharged prior to the second midnight, document the reason in the progress notes and the discharge summary (for example, death, transfer to another hospital, departure against medical advice, faster than expected clinical improvement, or election of hospice in lieu of continued treatment in the hospital). Remember that Medicare Advantage plans may not follow the Two-Midnight rule and instead may use MCG guidelines, InterQual®, or internal criteria.
3. KNOW “SLAM DUNK” MCG CRITERIA FOR TOP DIAGNOSES.
Most large private payers utilize MCG guidelines to determine medical necessity for hospital admissions. Those guidelines are complex and change every year, and it is not required for hospitalists to know them all. However, it might help to remember a few key inpatient admission criteria for the top 5 to 10 diagnoses, such as:
- First episode of heart failure without prior history.
- Upper gastrointestinal bleeding with liver cirrhosis, syncope, or orthostatic hypotension.
- Pneumonia with documented hypoxia, outpatient treatment failure, pneumonia severity index (PSI) class 4 or 5, or CURB-65 score of 3 or greater.
- Cellulitis with outpatient treatment failure or high-risk comorbid conditions (cirrhosis, symptomatic heart failure, immunosuppression, or HbA1c greater than 10%).
4. EACH DAY, DEFEND WHY THE PATIENT NEEDS TO BE IN THE HOSPITAL.
Don’t let your progress notes be swallowed by a “copy-forward” monster and instead provide daily updates, such as:
- Up-to-date clinical status and response to interventions (for example, oxygenation or pain level).
- Updated plan of care: current interventions, additional diagnostic workup, or changes to the intensity of care (for example, increased intravenous pain medication dose or frequency).
- Why the patient cannot be safely discharged to a lower level of care (for example, a skilled nursing facility or home).
5. WORK WITH YOUR UTILIZATION REVIEW NURSES AND PHYSICIAN ADVISORS.
In the end, the two most powerful tools in combating clinical denials for hospital services are good medicine and clear documentation. Armed with an understanding of health care reimbursement and denial prevention, hospitalists can help their hospitals prevent unnecessary clinical denials and receive the reimbursements they deserve.”
Dr. Farah is a hospitalist, physician advisor, and Lean Six Sigma Black Belt. She is a performance improvement consultant based in Corvallis, Ore., and a member of The Hospitalist’s editorial advisory board.
References
1. LaPointe J. $262B of Total Hospital Charges in 2016 Initially Claim Denials. RevCycle Intelligence. 2017 June 26.
2. The Advisory Board. An ounce of prevention pays off: 90% of denials are preventable. 2014 Dec 11. [www.advisory.com/research/revenue-cycle-advancement-center/at-the-margins/2014/12/denials-management]
3. Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, Office of the Actuary, National Health Statistics Group. The Nation’s Health Dollar: Where It Came From, Where It Went. [www.cms.gov/files/document/nations-health-dollar-where-it-came-where-it-went.pdf]
4. National Association of Insurance Commissioners. 2018 Market Share Reports. [www.naic.org/prod_serv/MSR-HB-19.pdf]
5. Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services. Transforming the Healthcare System through Competition and Innovation. 2019 Nov. [www.cms.gov/files/document/cms-financial-report-fiscal-year-2019.pdf]
6. Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services. MS-DRG Classifications and Software. 2020 Oct. [www.cms.gov/Medicare/Medicare-Fee-for-Service-Payment/AcuteInpatientPPS/MS-DRG-Classifications-and-Software]
7. Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services. HCPCS Coding Questions. 2020 Feb. [www.cms.gov/Medicare/Coding/MedHCPCSGenInfo/HCPCS_Coding_Questions]
8. Healthinsurance.org. Health insurance and Obamacare terms. [www.healthinsurance.org/glossary/denial-of-claim/]
9. The Advisory Board. Latest Trends in Hospital Revenue Cycle Performance. 2017. [mahamweb.org/images/meeting/112817/maham_2017__latest_trends_in_hospital_rev_cycle_performance_abc.pdf]
10. Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services. Medicare Program Integrity Manual. Chapter 6: Medicare Contractor Medical Review Guidelines for Specific Services. 2020 July. [www.cms.gov/Regulations-and-Guidance/Guidance/Manuals/downloads/pim83c06.pdf]
11. MCG Health. Industry-Leading Evidence-Based Care Guidelines. [www.mcg.com/care-guidelines/care-guidelines/]
12. Change Healthcare. What Is InterQual? [www.changehealthcare.com/solutions/clinical-decision-support/interqual]
Under a fee-for-service payment model, health care providers get paid by private and public payers for patient services such as physician visits, hospital stays, procedures, and tests. In an ideal world, providers would receive accurate, complete, and timely reimbursements. Unfortunately, the reality is far from ideal, where payment denials and delays are a common occurrence.
According to one study, out of $3 trillion in total claims submitted by health care organizations, an estimated 9% of charges ($262 billion), were initially denied.1 The good news is that 90% of all denials are preventable, and two-thirds of those preventable denials can be successfully appealed.2
Hospitalists are essential in preventing denials for hospital services and should be familiar with the basics of health care reimbursement and common reasons for denials. In this article we will provide an overview of the U.S. health care payment system, revenue cycle management and types of denials, and focus on the role of physician advisors and hospitalists in preventing and combating denials.
Overview of the U.S. health care payment system
In 2018 alone, the U.S. spent $3.6 trillion on health care. Of those dollars, 33% went to payments for hospital care and 20% went to physician and clinical services.3 So where do the nation’s health care dollars come from?
The United States has a complex multiple-payer system that includes private insurance companies and public payers funded by the federal and state governments, such as Medicare and Medicaid. Per the National Association of Insurance Commissioners’ 2018 Market Share Reports, there are 125 private accident and health insurance companies in the U.S., with the top five – UnitedHealth, Kaiser, Anthem, Humana, and CVS – holding a cumulative market share of almost 40%.4
Medicare accounts for 15% of federal budget spending and provides insurance coverage to almost 60 million people who are 65 and older, have end-stage renal disease, or have been approved for Social Security disability insurance benefits.5 Medicare Part A covers hospital, skilled nursing facility, home health, and hospice care. For example, for inpatient stays, Medicare Part A pays hospitals a predetermined rate per discharge according to the Medicare Severity Diagnosis Related Groups (MS-DRGs), which are based on the principal and secondary diagnoses, and performed procedures.6
Medicare Part B covers physician services and outpatient services and supplies, including labs and durable medical equipment, which are paid based on submitted Healthcare Common Procedure Coding System (HCPCS) codes.7 It is important to know that hospital observation stays are considered outpatient services, and are paid by Medicare Part B. Outpatient stays often are reimbursed at a lower rate than inpatient admissions, even in cases with similar utilization of hospital resources.
Medicaid is jointly funded by the states and the federal government and offers insurance coverage to more than 75 million eligible low-income adults, children, pregnant women, elderly adults, and people with disabilities. Over 10 million people are dually eligible for both Medicare and Medicaid.5 Increasingly, government payers, both state and federal, are contracting with private insurance companies to deliver Medicare and Medicaid services, also known as Medicare Advantage and Managed Medicaid Plans.
According to the U.S. Department of Treasury, in the 2019 fiscal year (October 2018 to September 2019), 33% of the nation’s health care dollars came from private insurance, 21% from Medicare, 16% from Medicaid, 15% from other government programs (for example, Veteran Affairs), 10% from out-of-pocket, and 4% from other private sources.5
Understanding revenue cycle management and denials
Providers, such as physicians or hospitals, submit claims to insurance companies that include, among other information, patient demographics and insurance, diagnoses, MS-DRGs and/or HCPCS codes, and charges. Revenue cycle management’s goal is to receive accurate, complete, and timely reimbursement for provided patient services, which is a complex and resource-intensive process.
According to the Healthcare Financial Management Association (HFMA), revenue cycle management includes “all administrative and clinical functions that contribute to the capture, management, and collection of patient service revenue.” These functions could be broken down into four main categories:
- Claims preparation (for example, patient registration, insurance eligibility, benefit verifications, and preauthorization).
- Claims submission (for example, charge capture, medical coding based on medical record documentation and claims transmission).
- Claims management (for example, payment posting, denial management, and patient collections).
- Reporting and analysis.
Claim denial is “the refusal of an insurance company or carrier to honor a request by an individual (or his or her provider) to pay for health care services obtained from a health care professional.”8 Payers can deny an entire claim or provide only a partial payment. Initial denial rate is tracked at the claim level (number of claims denied/number of claims submitted) and at the dollar level (total dollar amount of claims denied/total dollar amount of claims submitted).
Denials are classified as hard versus soft, and clinical versus technical or administrative:
- Hard denials result in lost revenue unless successfully appealed (for example, lack of medical necessity).
- Soft denials do not require appeal and may be paid if a provider corrects the claim or submits additional information (for example, missing or inaccurate patient information, and missing medical records).
- Clinical denials are based on medical necessity, including level of care determination (for example, inpatient versus outpatient) and length of stay. They can be concurrent and retrospective and typically start as soft denials.
- Technical or administrative denials are based on reasons other than clinical (for example, failure to preauthorize care or lack of benefits).
According to the Advisory Board’s 2017 survey of hospitals and health care systems, 50% of initial denials were technical/demographic errors, 20% medical necessity, 16% eligibility, and 14% authorization. Forty seven percent of those denials came from commercial payers, 33% from Medicare/Medicare Advantage, 17% from Medicaid, and 3% from other payers.9
Determination of medical necessity may vary by payer. As an example, let’s look at inpatient admissions. According to the Medicare Two-Midnight Rule, inpatient admission is appropriate “if the admitting practitioner expects the beneficiary to require medically necessary hospital care spanning two or more midnights, and such reasonable expectation is supported by the medical record documentation.”10
Medicare guidelines acknowledge that a physician’s decision to admit a patient is based on complex medical factors including, but not limited to:
- The beneficiary history and comorbidities, and the severity of signs and symptoms (also known as Severity of Illness or SI).
- Current medical needs (also known as Intensity of Service or IS).
- The risk of an adverse event.
Generally, private payers do not follow the Two-Midnight Rule, and instead utilize evidence-based MCG guidelines,11 InterQual® criteria12 or internal criteria to determine if an inpatient admission is “medically necessary.” Hospital utilization review nurses often use MCG and/or InterQual® to aid admission status decisions and may request secondary review by a physician if medical necessity for an inpatient admission is not clear-cut.
The role of physician advisors
Considering the rising financial pressure and growing complexity of private and public payers’ rules and regulations, many hospitals turned to physician advisors to help prevent and reduce denials. Typically, physician advisors perform concurrent secondary reviews to help determine the most appropriate level of care, participate in peer-to-peer discussions with payers, and write formal appeals to overturn clinical denials.
“Physician advisors are generally not in the business of critiquing clinical practice, instead they review whether the chart documentation supports initial and continued hospitalization,” said Charles Locke, MD, senior physician advisor at the Johns Hopkins Hospital and president of the American College of Physician Advisors (ACPA). “However, physician advisors should seek additional information and provide feedback in those cases where the documentation does not support medical necessity for hospitalization.”
Many physician advisors are current or former hospitalists. Chris Shearer, MD, chief medical officer for remote advisory at Sound Physicians Advisory Services, says that “hospitalists are the natural physician advisors as they have a working knowledge of what patients need to be inpatients and which are less sick and likely to be discharged quickly.”
The role of physician advisors extends beyond reviews to include physician engagement and education. Physician advisors are a critical link between physicians, utilization review nurses, case managers, and clinical documentation integrity (CDI) and revenue cycle teams, and are increasingly involved in hospital-wide denial prevention efforts.
Physician advisors are invaluable in identifying and validating root causes for clinical denials and generating potential solutions, as they bring to the table:
- Clinical expertise.
- Understanding of clinical workflows.
- Knowledge of the most current public and private payers’ regulations.
- Insight into hospital-specific clinical documentation opportunities (for example, by diagnosis, procedure, service line, and provider).
- Understanding of payers’ reasons for clinical denials through peer-to-peer discussions
The role of hospitalists in preventing clinical denials
I asked three experienced physician advisors – Dr. Locke, Dr. Shearer, and Deepak Pahuja, MD, chief medical officer at Aerolib Healthcare Solutions – what hospitalists can do to prevent clinical denials. The experts had the following five recommendations:
1. “THINK IN INK.”
The best tool in combating denials is well-documented clinical judgment that outlines:
- WHY the patient requires hospitalization, based on severity of presenting signs and symptoms, comorbidities, and risk of complications.
- WHAT the plan of care is, including diagnostic tests and/or interventions.
- HOW LONG you anticipate the patient will be in the hospital, including potential implications of social determinants (for example homelessness, active drug use) on discharge planning.
2. MASTER THE TWO-MIDNIGHT RULE.
If you expect that a Medicare Part A patient will require two or more midnights in the hospital, document it in the history and physical along with supporting clinical reasoning and sign an inpatient order. If the patient is discharged prior to the second midnight, document the reason in the progress notes and the discharge summary (for example, death, transfer to another hospital, departure against medical advice, faster than expected clinical improvement, or election of hospice in lieu of continued treatment in the hospital). Remember that Medicare Advantage plans may not follow the Two-Midnight rule and instead may use MCG guidelines, InterQual®, or internal criteria.
3. KNOW “SLAM DUNK” MCG CRITERIA FOR TOP DIAGNOSES.
Most large private payers utilize MCG guidelines to determine medical necessity for hospital admissions. Those guidelines are complex and change every year, and it is not required for hospitalists to know them all. However, it might help to remember a few key inpatient admission criteria for the top 5 to 10 diagnoses, such as:
- First episode of heart failure without prior history.
- Upper gastrointestinal bleeding with liver cirrhosis, syncope, or orthostatic hypotension.
- Pneumonia with documented hypoxia, outpatient treatment failure, pneumonia severity index (PSI) class 4 or 5, or CURB-65 score of 3 or greater.
- Cellulitis with outpatient treatment failure or high-risk comorbid conditions (cirrhosis, symptomatic heart failure, immunosuppression, or HbA1c greater than 10%).
4. EACH DAY, DEFEND WHY THE PATIENT NEEDS TO BE IN THE HOSPITAL.
Don’t let your progress notes be swallowed by a “copy-forward” monster and instead provide daily updates, such as:
- Up-to-date clinical status and response to interventions (for example, oxygenation or pain level).
- Updated plan of care: current interventions, additional diagnostic workup, or changes to the intensity of care (for example, increased intravenous pain medication dose or frequency).
- Why the patient cannot be safely discharged to a lower level of care (for example, a skilled nursing facility or home).
5. WORK WITH YOUR UTILIZATION REVIEW NURSES AND PHYSICIAN ADVISORS.
In the end, the two most powerful tools in combating clinical denials for hospital services are good medicine and clear documentation. Armed with an understanding of health care reimbursement and denial prevention, hospitalists can help their hospitals prevent unnecessary clinical denials and receive the reimbursements they deserve.”
Dr. Farah is a hospitalist, physician advisor, and Lean Six Sigma Black Belt. She is a performance improvement consultant based in Corvallis, Ore., and a member of The Hospitalist’s editorial advisory board.
References
1. LaPointe J. $262B of Total Hospital Charges in 2016 Initially Claim Denials. RevCycle Intelligence. 2017 June 26.
2. The Advisory Board. An ounce of prevention pays off: 90% of denials are preventable. 2014 Dec 11. [www.advisory.com/research/revenue-cycle-advancement-center/at-the-margins/2014/12/denials-management]
3. Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, Office of the Actuary, National Health Statistics Group. The Nation’s Health Dollar: Where It Came From, Where It Went. [www.cms.gov/files/document/nations-health-dollar-where-it-came-where-it-went.pdf]
4. National Association of Insurance Commissioners. 2018 Market Share Reports. [www.naic.org/prod_serv/MSR-HB-19.pdf]
5. Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services. Transforming the Healthcare System through Competition and Innovation. 2019 Nov. [www.cms.gov/files/document/cms-financial-report-fiscal-year-2019.pdf]
6. Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services. MS-DRG Classifications and Software. 2020 Oct. [www.cms.gov/Medicare/Medicare-Fee-for-Service-Payment/AcuteInpatientPPS/MS-DRG-Classifications-and-Software]
7. Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services. HCPCS Coding Questions. 2020 Feb. [www.cms.gov/Medicare/Coding/MedHCPCSGenInfo/HCPCS_Coding_Questions]
8. Healthinsurance.org. Health insurance and Obamacare terms. [www.healthinsurance.org/glossary/denial-of-claim/]
9. The Advisory Board. Latest Trends in Hospital Revenue Cycle Performance. 2017. [mahamweb.org/images/meeting/112817/maham_2017__latest_trends_in_hospital_rev_cycle_performance_abc.pdf]
10. Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services. Medicare Program Integrity Manual. Chapter 6: Medicare Contractor Medical Review Guidelines for Specific Services. 2020 July. [www.cms.gov/Regulations-and-Guidance/Guidance/Manuals/downloads/pim83c06.pdf]
11. MCG Health. Industry-Leading Evidence-Based Care Guidelines. [www.mcg.com/care-guidelines/care-guidelines/]
12. Change Healthcare. What Is InterQual? [www.changehealthcare.com/solutions/clinical-decision-support/interqual]
Monthly needlestick rates suggest a steep learning curve
The rate of injuries with needles and other sharp instruments among hospital staff jumped sharply in July, which suggests the need for safety instruction early in the academic year, researchers say.
“The reason this is important is it gives us an idea of when the best time to intervene might be,” said Jonathan Zampella, MD, an assistant professor of dermatology at New York University.
The findings were published online Nov. 4 in a research letter in JAMA Surgery.
Hundreds of thousands of health care workers incur injuries with needles and other sharp instruments every year, which places them at risk for blood-borne infections.
“Especially amongst dermatologists, it’s not a question of if you get stuck, it’s a question of when,” Dr. Zampella said in an interview. “Most have been stuck at some point in their lives.”
Until now, studies of these injuries have mostly depended on surveys, he said. By contrast, for the current study, Dr. Zampella and colleagues used a dataset of injuries reported to NYU Langone Health’s Occupational Health Services.
They identified 5,395 such injuries that occurred between January 2000 and February 2020. The total number was similar among surgical and nonsurgical specialists, but the mean incident rate was 4.7 for every 10 people among the nonsurgical staff versus 9.4 for every 10 people in the surgical staff.
Dr. Zampella and colleagues further found that the highest rate of injury, at 16.0 incidents for every 10 people, occurred among urology house staff, followed by orthopedic surgery staff, with 14.1, and general surgery staff, with 14.0. The lowest staff rates were among psychiatrists (0.3), radiation oncologists (1.1), and neurologists (2.4).
But even some nonsurgical specialties had high rates. For example, the rate was 11.5 for pathology house staff and 11.3 for dermatology house staff.
Dr. Zampella said his first reaction to the data was, “What the heck? What are pathologists doing that they are getting needlestick injuries?
“But it makes sense,” he said. “Sometimes they do biopsies, and they do fine-needle aspirations – these kinds of things that we might not be paying as much attention to as we should.”
The finding suggests that nonsurgical specialists should receive more training in injury prevention, he said.
The training should be in person, and it should not just be for first-year residents. “Everybody needs to have refreshers on preventing needlesticks,” he said. “And we have to make sure everyone in the hospital is playing for the same team. Residents are learning, and if they see poor technique by one of their attendings, that’s something they may imitate.”
The study’s primary conclusion regards the importance of seasonality in needlestick and other injuries from sharp instruments.
Among house staff, 9.4% of the injuries occurred in July. The proportion then gradually rose to 10.5% in October before gradually going back down to a low of 6.2% in June.
The difference from one quarter to the next was statistically significant (P = .02).
July is when internships and residencies start, Dr. Zampella pointed out. Among the nonhouse staff, the rate was consistent throughout the year.
This suggests that the beginning of the academic year for trainees was the key factor driving the uptick in injuries, he said.
He said that residents are receiving instruction in injury prevention, but perhaps not at the right time of year. For example, dermatology residents at NYU are given a lecture in needlestick injury prevention in February.
Dr. Zampella has received personal fees from X4 pharmaceuticals. The other authors disclosed no relevant financial relationships.
A version of this article originally appeared on Medscape.com.
The rate of injuries with needles and other sharp instruments among hospital staff jumped sharply in July, which suggests the need for safety instruction early in the academic year, researchers say.
“The reason this is important is it gives us an idea of when the best time to intervene might be,” said Jonathan Zampella, MD, an assistant professor of dermatology at New York University.
The findings were published online Nov. 4 in a research letter in JAMA Surgery.
Hundreds of thousands of health care workers incur injuries with needles and other sharp instruments every year, which places them at risk for blood-borne infections.
“Especially amongst dermatologists, it’s not a question of if you get stuck, it’s a question of when,” Dr. Zampella said in an interview. “Most have been stuck at some point in their lives.”
Until now, studies of these injuries have mostly depended on surveys, he said. By contrast, for the current study, Dr. Zampella and colleagues used a dataset of injuries reported to NYU Langone Health’s Occupational Health Services.
They identified 5,395 such injuries that occurred between January 2000 and February 2020. The total number was similar among surgical and nonsurgical specialists, but the mean incident rate was 4.7 for every 10 people among the nonsurgical staff versus 9.4 for every 10 people in the surgical staff.
Dr. Zampella and colleagues further found that the highest rate of injury, at 16.0 incidents for every 10 people, occurred among urology house staff, followed by orthopedic surgery staff, with 14.1, and general surgery staff, with 14.0. The lowest staff rates were among psychiatrists (0.3), radiation oncologists (1.1), and neurologists (2.4).
But even some nonsurgical specialties had high rates. For example, the rate was 11.5 for pathology house staff and 11.3 for dermatology house staff.
Dr. Zampella said his first reaction to the data was, “What the heck? What are pathologists doing that they are getting needlestick injuries?
“But it makes sense,” he said. “Sometimes they do biopsies, and they do fine-needle aspirations – these kinds of things that we might not be paying as much attention to as we should.”
The finding suggests that nonsurgical specialists should receive more training in injury prevention, he said.
The training should be in person, and it should not just be for first-year residents. “Everybody needs to have refreshers on preventing needlesticks,” he said. “And we have to make sure everyone in the hospital is playing for the same team. Residents are learning, and if they see poor technique by one of their attendings, that’s something they may imitate.”
The study’s primary conclusion regards the importance of seasonality in needlestick and other injuries from sharp instruments.
Among house staff, 9.4% of the injuries occurred in July. The proportion then gradually rose to 10.5% in October before gradually going back down to a low of 6.2% in June.
The difference from one quarter to the next was statistically significant (P = .02).
July is when internships and residencies start, Dr. Zampella pointed out. Among the nonhouse staff, the rate was consistent throughout the year.
This suggests that the beginning of the academic year for trainees was the key factor driving the uptick in injuries, he said.
He said that residents are receiving instruction in injury prevention, but perhaps not at the right time of year. For example, dermatology residents at NYU are given a lecture in needlestick injury prevention in February.
Dr. Zampella has received personal fees from X4 pharmaceuticals. The other authors disclosed no relevant financial relationships.
A version of this article originally appeared on Medscape.com.
The rate of injuries with needles and other sharp instruments among hospital staff jumped sharply in July, which suggests the need for safety instruction early in the academic year, researchers say.
“The reason this is important is it gives us an idea of when the best time to intervene might be,” said Jonathan Zampella, MD, an assistant professor of dermatology at New York University.
The findings were published online Nov. 4 in a research letter in JAMA Surgery.
Hundreds of thousands of health care workers incur injuries with needles and other sharp instruments every year, which places them at risk for blood-borne infections.
“Especially amongst dermatologists, it’s not a question of if you get stuck, it’s a question of when,” Dr. Zampella said in an interview. “Most have been stuck at some point in their lives.”
Until now, studies of these injuries have mostly depended on surveys, he said. By contrast, for the current study, Dr. Zampella and colleagues used a dataset of injuries reported to NYU Langone Health’s Occupational Health Services.
They identified 5,395 such injuries that occurred between January 2000 and February 2020. The total number was similar among surgical and nonsurgical specialists, but the mean incident rate was 4.7 for every 10 people among the nonsurgical staff versus 9.4 for every 10 people in the surgical staff.
Dr. Zampella and colleagues further found that the highest rate of injury, at 16.0 incidents for every 10 people, occurred among urology house staff, followed by orthopedic surgery staff, with 14.1, and general surgery staff, with 14.0. The lowest staff rates were among psychiatrists (0.3), radiation oncologists (1.1), and neurologists (2.4).
But even some nonsurgical specialties had high rates. For example, the rate was 11.5 for pathology house staff and 11.3 for dermatology house staff.
Dr. Zampella said his first reaction to the data was, “What the heck? What are pathologists doing that they are getting needlestick injuries?
“But it makes sense,” he said. “Sometimes they do biopsies, and they do fine-needle aspirations – these kinds of things that we might not be paying as much attention to as we should.”
The finding suggests that nonsurgical specialists should receive more training in injury prevention, he said.
The training should be in person, and it should not just be for first-year residents. “Everybody needs to have refreshers on preventing needlesticks,” he said. “And we have to make sure everyone in the hospital is playing for the same team. Residents are learning, and if they see poor technique by one of their attendings, that’s something they may imitate.”
The study’s primary conclusion regards the importance of seasonality in needlestick and other injuries from sharp instruments.
Among house staff, 9.4% of the injuries occurred in July. The proportion then gradually rose to 10.5% in October before gradually going back down to a low of 6.2% in June.
The difference from one quarter to the next was statistically significant (P = .02).
July is when internships and residencies start, Dr. Zampella pointed out. Among the nonhouse staff, the rate was consistent throughout the year.
This suggests that the beginning of the academic year for trainees was the key factor driving the uptick in injuries, he said.
He said that residents are receiving instruction in injury prevention, but perhaps not at the right time of year. For example, dermatology residents at NYU are given a lecture in needlestick injury prevention in February.
Dr. Zampella has received personal fees from X4 pharmaceuticals. The other authors disclosed no relevant financial relationships.
A version of this article originally appeared on Medscape.com.
Treatments for COVID-19: Update for hospitalists
Most patients with COVID-19 will have a mild presentation and not require hospitalization or any treatment. Inpatient management revolves around the supportive management of the most common complications of severe COVID-19, which includes pneumonia, hypoxemic respiratory failure, acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS), and septic shock.
Currently, there is no clinically proven specific antiviral treatment for COVID-19. A few antivirals and treatment modalities have been studied and used, with the hope of decreasing mortality and improving recovery time for those with moderate to severe cases of COVID-19.
Remdesivir
The antiviral remdesivir was the second drug to receive emergency use authorization by the Food and Drug Administration for the treatment of suspected or laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 in adults and children hospitalized with severe disease. Severe disease is defined as patients with an oxygen saturation less than 94% on room air or requiring supplemental oxygen or requiring mechanical ventilation or requiring extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO).
Remdesivir is a nucleotide analogue that has shown in vitro antiviral activity against a range of RNA viruses. It acts by causing premature termination of viral RNA transcription. Remdesivir is administered intravenously and the recommended dose is 200 mg on day 1, followed by 100 mg daily for various time courses.
A few clinical studies have reported benefits of remdesivir rather than no remdesivir for treatment of severe COVID-19 in hospitalized patients. The Infectious Diseases Society of America (IDSA) recommends 5 days of remdesivir in patients with severe COVID-19 on noninvasive supplemental oxygen and 10 days treatment for those on mechanical ventilation and ECMO. In a randomized, uncontrolled, phase 3 trial, investigators compared 5-day (n = 200) versus 10-day (n = 197) courses of remdesivir in patients with severe COVID-19. Clinical data revealed no differences in outcomes in the two groups.
Common reported adverse effects of the drug include elevated alanine aminotransferase (ALT) and/or aspartate aminotransferase (AST) and gastrointestinal symptoms including nausea, vomiting, and hematochezia. There is insufficient data on using remdesivir in patients requiring dialysis.
Corticosteroids
Is dexamethasone effective for treating COVID-19? In the early days of the COVID-19 pandemic, corticosteroids were not recommended with the fear that, if started too soon, you could blunt the body’s natural defense system and that could allow the virus to thrive. Recent clinical data has shown clinical benefits and decreased mortality with the use of dexamethasone in patients with severe COVID-19 infection because glucocorticoids may modulate inflammation-mediated lung injury and reduce progression to respiratory failure and death.
The Recovery Trial was an open label study which used 6-mg once-daily doses of dexamethasone for up to 10 days or until hospital discharge if sooner. The study concluded that the use of dexamethasone for up to 10 days in hospitalized patients with severe COVID-19 resulted in lower 28-day mortality than usual care.
Dexamethasone is recommended in COVID-19 patients who require supplemental oxygen. If dexamethasone is not available, alternative forms of steroids – prednisone, methylprednisolone, or hydrocortisone – can be used. However, there is no clear evidence that the use of other steroids provides the same benefit as dexamethasone.
Both the IDSA and National Institutes of Health guidelines have recommended the use of steroids. However, clinicians should closely monitor the adverse effects like hyperglycemia, secondary infections, psychiatric effects, and avascular necrosis.
Convalescent plasma
Convalescent plasma is a blood product believed to provide passive antibody therapy through the transmission of neutralizing viral antibodies. Convalescent plasma has been used for decades for different viral infections including the treatment of H1N1 influenza virus, polio, chicken pox, measles, SARS-CoV-1, and MERS-CoV.
On Aug. 23, 2020, the FDA issued an emergency use authorization for investigational convalescent plasma for the treatment of COVID-19 in hospitalized patients. The FDA recommends neutralizing antibodies of at least 1:160. However, such assays have not been widely available and titers in plasma have often not been assessed prior to infusion.
There is no current standard recommended dosing. Most study protocols infuse 1-2 units of convalescent plasma for persons with COVID-19.
There is insufficient data to recommend either for or against the use of convalescent plasma for the treatment of COVID-19. Existing data suggest that, if a benefit exists, convalescent plasma is most useful when given early and with a high titer of neutralizing antibodies.
The adverse effects of convalescent plasma is very similar to the receipt of other blood products, including allergic reactions to the plasma, transfusion-associated circulatory overload (TACO), transfusion-related acute lung injury (TRALI), and acquisition of infections, though the latter is rare because of the rigorous screening process.
Tocilizumab
Tocilizumab is a recombinant humanized monoclonal antibody that binds to interleukin (IL)-6 receptors. Tocilizumab is currently FDA approved for the treatment of severe or life-threatening cytokine release syndrome that is associated with chimeric antigen–receptor (CAR) T-cell therapy and for the treatment of rheumatologic disorders.
The interest in using tocilizumab to treat persons with COVID-19 is based on the observations that a subset of patients with COVID-19 develop a severe inflammatory response that can result in cytokine storm resulting in ARDS, multiorgan failure, and potentially death. Very high levels of IL-6 have been observed in these individuals, thereby suggesting IL-6 may play a central role in the acute clinical decompensation seen with severe COVID-19.
The optimal dosing of tocilizumab in patients with COVID-19 is not known. The FDA recommends dosing of tocilizumab for cytokine release syndrome should not exceed 800 mg. There is limited data about the potential benefit of tocilizumab in patients with COVID-19. The COVACTA trial showed no difference between tocilizumab and placebo in regard to mortality. The time to hospital discharge was shorter in patients treated with tocilizumab; however, the difference was not statistically significant.
Reported adverse effects of tocilizumab include increase in ALT and AST, increased risk of serious infections (especially tuberculosis and invasive fungal infections), reactivation of hepatitis B virus, and rare reports of gastrointestinal perforation.
Hydroxychloroquine
Hydroxycholoroquine (HCQ) and its sister drug chloroquine, have been used for many decades as treatment for malaria and autoimmune diseases. HCQ gained widespread popularity in the early days of the COVID-19 pandemic when clinical studies showed that it had significant in vitro activity against SARS-CoV-2, which provided the rationale for its use in the treatment and prevention of COVID-19 infection.
It was the first drug that was authorized for emergency use by the FDA during the COVID-19 pandemic. However, On June 15, 2020, because of accumulating harmful data, the FDA revoked the emergency authorization use of HCQ as a COVID-19 treatment.
Randomized controlled trials showed that patients treated with HCQ experienced a longer hospital stay with increase in mortality rates and increased likelihood of being placed on mechanical ventilation. In addition, studies revealed an increase in QT prolongation in patients treated with HCQ, especially when coadministered with azithromycin, which can lead to torsades de pointes, ventricular tachycardia, and sudden cardiac death.
The IDSA and National Institutes of Health, both recommend against the use of hydroxychloroquine with or without azithromycin to treat COVID-19 because the harms outweigh the benefits, even if high quality RCTs were to become available in the future.
Other drugs
There have been experimental studies on other medications for the treatment of COVID-19, including losartan, amlodipine, ivermectin, famotidine, Anakinra, Bruton’s tyrosine kinase inhibitors such as ibrutinib, and Janus kinase inhibitors, such as tofacitinib. Additionally, a few supplements such as vitamin C, vitamin D, and zinc have been used in both inpatient and outpatient settings for COVID-19 treatment. Polyclonal antibodies are being investigated in phase 3 trials. However, the data is insufficient, and the effectiveness of these drugs is unknown. The COVID-19 treatment guidelines panel recommends against the use of these treatment modalities.
Dr Tiyouh is an infectious diseases physician at Keystone Health in Chambersburg, Pa. Dr. Tenneti completed medical school at Vydehi Institute of Medical Sciences and Research Centre in Karnataka, India, and is interested in pursuing internal medicine residency. Dr. Tirupathi is the medical director of Keystone Infectious Diseases/HIV in Chambersburg, Pa., and currently chair of infection prevention at Wellspan Chambersburg Hospital and Waynesboro (Pa.) Hospitals. Dr. Palabindala is hospital medicine division chief at the University of Mississippi Medical Center, Jackson, and a member of the editorial advisory board for The Hospitalist.
Sources
Goldman JD et al. Remdesivir for 5 or 10 Days in Patients with Severe Covid-19. N Engl J Med. 2020 May 27. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa2015301.
Beigel JH et al. Remdesivir for the Treatment of Covid-19 - Final Report. N Engl J Med. 2020 Oct 8. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa2007764
Wang Y et al. Remdesivir in adults with severe COVID-19: a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, multicentre trial. Lancet. 2020 May 16;395(10236):1569-78.
National Institutes of Health. COVID-19 Treatment Guidelines.
Infectious Diseases Society of America. Infectious Diseases Society of America guidelines on the treatment and management of patients with COVID-19.
Joyner et al. Early safety indicators of COVID-19 convalescent plasma in 5000 patients. J Clin Invest. 2020;130(9):4791-7.
Luo P et al. Tocilizumab treatment in COVID-19: A single center experience. J Med Virol. 2020 Jul;92(7):814-8.
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Healthcare Workers: Interim Clinical Guidance for Management of Patients with Confirmed Coronavirus Disease (COVID-19).
University of Washington. COVID-19 Treatments: Prescribing Information, Clinical Studies, and Slide Decks.
Most patients with COVID-19 will have a mild presentation and not require hospitalization or any treatment. Inpatient management revolves around the supportive management of the most common complications of severe COVID-19, which includes pneumonia, hypoxemic respiratory failure, acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS), and septic shock.
Currently, there is no clinically proven specific antiviral treatment for COVID-19. A few antivirals and treatment modalities have been studied and used, with the hope of decreasing mortality and improving recovery time for those with moderate to severe cases of COVID-19.
Remdesivir
The antiviral remdesivir was the second drug to receive emergency use authorization by the Food and Drug Administration for the treatment of suspected or laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 in adults and children hospitalized with severe disease. Severe disease is defined as patients with an oxygen saturation less than 94% on room air or requiring supplemental oxygen or requiring mechanical ventilation or requiring extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO).
Remdesivir is a nucleotide analogue that has shown in vitro antiviral activity against a range of RNA viruses. It acts by causing premature termination of viral RNA transcription. Remdesivir is administered intravenously and the recommended dose is 200 mg on day 1, followed by 100 mg daily for various time courses.
A few clinical studies have reported benefits of remdesivir rather than no remdesivir for treatment of severe COVID-19 in hospitalized patients. The Infectious Diseases Society of America (IDSA) recommends 5 days of remdesivir in patients with severe COVID-19 on noninvasive supplemental oxygen and 10 days treatment for those on mechanical ventilation and ECMO. In a randomized, uncontrolled, phase 3 trial, investigators compared 5-day (n = 200) versus 10-day (n = 197) courses of remdesivir in patients with severe COVID-19. Clinical data revealed no differences in outcomes in the two groups.
Common reported adverse effects of the drug include elevated alanine aminotransferase (ALT) and/or aspartate aminotransferase (AST) and gastrointestinal symptoms including nausea, vomiting, and hematochezia. There is insufficient data on using remdesivir in patients requiring dialysis.
Corticosteroids
Is dexamethasone effective for treating COVID-19? In the early days of the COVID-19 pandemic, corticosteroids were not recommended with the fear that, if started too soon, you could blunt the body’s natural defense system and that could allow the virus to thrive. Recent clinical data has shown clinical benefits and decreased mortality with the use of dexamethasone in patients with severe COVID-19 infection because glucocorticoids may modulate inflammation-mediated lung injury and reduce progression to respiratory failure and death.
The Recovery Trial was an open label study which used 6-mg once-daily doses of dexamethasone for up to 10 days or until hospital discharge if sooner. The study concluded that the use of dexamethasone for up to 10 days in hospitalized patients with severe COVID-19 resulted in lower 28-day mortality than usual care.
Dexamethasone is recommended in COVID-19 patients who require supplemental oxygen. If dexamethasone is not available, alternative forms of steroids – prednisone, methylprednisolone, or hydrocortisone – can be used. However, there is no clear evidence that the use of other steroids provides the same benefit as dexamethasone.
Both the IDSA and National Institutes of Health guidelines have recommended the use of steroids. However, clinicians should closely monitor the adverse effects like hyperglycemia, secondary infections, psychiatric effects, and avascular necrosis.
Convalescent plasma
Convalescent plasma is a blood product believed to provide passive antibody therapy through the transmission of neutralizing viral antibodies. Convalescent plasma has been used for decades for different viral infections including the treatment of H1N1 influenza virus, polio, chicken pox, measles, SARS-CoV-1, and MERS-CoV.
On Aug. 23, 2020, the FDA issued an emergency use authorization for investigational convalescent plasma for the treatment of COVID-19 in hospitalized patients. The FDA recommends neutralizing antibodies of at least 1:160. However, such assays have not been widely available and titers in plasma have often not been assessed prior to infusion.
There is no current standard recommended dosing. Most study protocols infuse 1-2 units of convalescent plasma for persons with COVID-19.
There is insufficient data to recommend either for or against the use of convalescent plasma for the treatment of COVID-19. Existing data suggest that, if a benefit exists, convalescent plasma is most useful when given early and with a high titer of neutralizing antibodies.
The adverse effects of convalescent plasma is very similar to the receipt of other blood products, including allergic reactions to the plasma, transfusion-associated circulatory overload (TACO), transfusion-related acute lung injury (TRALI), and acquisition of infections, though the latter is rare because of the rigorous screening process.
Tocilizumab
Tocilizumab is a recombinant humanized monoclonal antibody that binds to interleukin (IL)-6 receptors. Tocilizumab is currently FDA approved for the treatment of severe or life-threatening cytokine release syndrome that is associated with chimeric antigen–receptor (CAR) T-cell therapy and for the treatment of rheumatologic disorders.
The interest in using tocilizumab to treat persons with COVID-19 is based on the observations that a subset of patients with COVID-19 develop a severe inflammatory response that can result in cytokine storm resulting in ARDS, multiorgan failure, and potentially death. Very high levels of IL-6 have been observed in these individuals, thereby suggesting IL-6 may play a central role in the acute clinical decompensation seen with severe COVID-19.
The optimal dosing of tocilizumab in patients with COVID-19 is not known. The FDA recommends dosing of tocilizumab for cytokine release syndrome should not exceed 800 mg. There is limited data about the potential benefit of tocilizumab in patients with COVID-19. The COVACTA trial showed no difference between tocilizumab and placebo in regard to mortality. The time to hospital discharge was shorter in patients treated with tocilizumab; however, the difference was not statistically significant.
Reported adverse effects of tocilizumab include increase in ALT and AST, increased risk of serious infections (especially tuberculosis and invasive fungal infections), reactivation of hepatitis B virus, and rare reports of gastrointestinal perforation.
Hydroxychloroquine
Hydroxycholoroquine (HCQ) and its sister drug chloroquine, have been used for many decades as treatment for malaria and autoimmune diseases. HCQ gained widespread popularity in the early days of the COVID-19 pandemic when clinical studies showed that it had significant in vitro activity against SARS-CoV-2, which provided the rationale for its use in the treatment and prevention of COVID-19 infection.
It was the first drug that was authorized for emergency use by the FDA during the COVID-19 pandemic. However, On June 15, 2020, because of accumulating harmful data, the FDA revoked the emergency authorization use of HCQ as a COVID-19 treatment.
Randomized controlled trials showed that patients treated with HCQ experienced a longer hospital stay with increase in mortality rates and increased likelihood of being placed on mechanical ventilation. In addition, studies revealed an increase in QT prolongation in patients treated with HCQ, especially when coadministered with azithromycin, which can lead to torsades de pointes, ventricular tachycardia, and sudden cardiac death.
The IDSA and National Institutes of Health, both recommend against the use of hydroxychloroquine with or without azithromycin to treat COVID-19 because the harms outweigh the benefits, even if high quality RCTs were to become available in the future.
Other drugs
There have been experimental studies on other medications for the treatment of COVID-19, including losartan, amlodipine, ivermectin, famotidine, Anakinra, Bruton’s tyrosine kinase inhibitors such as ibrutinib, and Janus kinase inhibitors, such as tofacitinib. Additionally, a few supplements such as vitamin C, vitamin D, and zinc have been used in both inpatient and outpatient settings for COVID-19 treatment. Polyclonal antibodies are being investigated in phase 3 trials. However, the data is insufficient, and the effectiveness of these drugs is unknown. The COVID-19 treatment guidelines panel recommends against the use of these treatment modalities.
Dr Tiyouh is an infectious diseases physician at Keystone Health in Chambersburg, Pa. Dr. Tenneti completed medical school at Vydehi Institute of Medical Sciences and Research Centre in Karnataka, India, and is interested in pursuing internal medicine residency. Dr. Tirupathi is the medical director of Keystone Infectious Diseases/HIV in Chambersburg, Pa., and currently chair of infection prevention at Wellspan Chambersburg Hospital and Waynesboro (Pa.) Hospitals. Dr. Palabindala is hospital medicine division chief at the University of Mississippi Medical Center, Jackson, and a member of the editorial advisory board for The Hospitalist.
Sources
Goldman JD et al. Remdesivir for 5 or 10 Days in Patients with Severe Covid-19. N Engl J Med. 2020 May 27. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa2015301.
Beigel JH et al. Remdesivir for the Treatment of Covid-19 - Final Report. N Engl J Med. 2020 Oct 8. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa2007764
Wang Y et al. Remdesivir in adults with severe COVID-19: a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, multicentre trial. Lancet. 2020 May 16;395(10236):1569-78.
National Institutes of Health. COVID-19 Treatment Guidelines.
Infectious Diseases Society of America. Infectious Diseases Society of America guidelines on the treatment and management of patients with COVID-19.
Joyner et al. Early safety indicators of COVID-19 convalescent plasma in 5000 patients. J Clin Invest. 2020;130(9):4791-7.
Luo P et al. Tocilizumab treatment in COVID-19: A single center experience. J Med Virol. 2020 Jul;92(7):814-8.
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Healthcare Workers: Interim Clinical Guidance for Management of Patients with Confirmed Coronavirus Disease (COVID-19).
University of Washington. COVID-19 Treatments: Prescribing Information, Clinical Studies, and Slide Decks.
Most patients with COVID-19 will have a mild presentation and not require hospitalization or any treatment. Inpatient management revolves around the supportive management of the most common complications of severe COVID-19, which includes pneumonia, hypoxemic respiratory failure, acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS), and septic shock.
Currently, there is no clinically proven specific antiviral treatment for COVID-19. A few antivirals and treatment modalities have been studied and used, with the hope of decreasing mortality and improving recovery time for those with moderate to severe cases of COVID-19.
Remdesivir
The antiviral remdesivir was the second drug to receive emergency use authorization by the Food and Drug Administration for the treatment of suspected or laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 in adults and children hospitalized with severe disease. Severe disease is defined as patients with an oxygen saturation less than 94% on room air or requiring supplemental oxygen or requiring mechanical ventilation or requiring extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO).
Remdesivir is a nucleotide analogue that has shown in vitro antiviral activity against a range of RNA viruses. It acts by causing premature termination of viral RNA transcription. Remdesivir is administered intravenously and the recommended dose is 200 mg on day 1, followed by 100 mg daily for various time courses.
A few clinical studies have reported benefits of remdesivir rather than no remdesivir for treatment of severe COVID-19 in hospitalized patients. The Infectious Diseases Society of America (IDSA) recommends 5 days of remdesivir in patients with severe COVID-19 on noninvasive supplemental oxygen and 10 days treatment for those on mechanical ventilation and ECMO. In a randomized, uncontrolled, phase 3 trial, investigators compared 5-day (n = 200) versus 10-day (n = 197) courses of remdesivir in patients with severe COVID-19. Clinical data revealed no differences in outcomes in the two groups.
Common reported adverse effects of the drug include elevated alanine aminotransferase (ALT) and/or aspartate aminotransferase (AST) and gastrointestinal symptoms including nausea, vomiting, and hematochezia. There is insufficient data on using remdesivir in patients requiring dialysis.
Corticosteroids
Is dexamethasone effective for treating COVID-19? In the early days of the COVID-19 pandemic, corticosteroids were not recommended with the fear that, if started too soon, you could blunt the body’s natural defense system and that could allow the virus to thrive. Recent clinical data has shown clinical benefits and decreased mortality with the use of dexamethasone in patients with severe COVID-19 infection because glucocorticoids may modulate inflammation-mediated lung injury and reduce progression to respiratory failure and death.
The Recovery Trial was an open label study which used 6-mg once-daily doses of dexamethasone for up to 10 days or until hospital discharge if sooner. The study concluded that the use of dexamethasone for up to 10 days in hospitalized patients with severe COVID-19 resulted in lower 28-day mortality than usual care.
Dexamethasone is recommended in COVID-19 patients who require supplemental oxygen. If dexamethasone is not available, alternative forms of steroids – prednisone, methylprednisolone, or hydrocortisone – can be used. However, there is no clear evidence that the use of other steroids provides the same benefit as dexamethasone.
Both the IDSA and National Institutes of Health guidelines have recommended the use of steroids. However, clinicians should closely monitor the adverse effects like hyperglycemia, secondary infections, psychiatric effects, and avascular necrosis.
Convalescent plasma
Convalescent plasma is a blood product believed to provide passive antibody therapy through the transmission of neutralizing viral antibodies. Convalescent plasma has been used for decades for different viral infections including the treatment of H1N1 influenza virus, polio, chicken pox, measles, SARS-CoV-1, and MERS-CoV.
On Aug. 23, 2020, the FDA issued an emergency use authorization for investigational convalescent plasma for the treatment of COVID-19 in hospitalized patients. The FDA recommends neutralizing antibodies of at least 1:160. However, such assays have not been widely available and titers in plasma have often not been assessed prior to infusion.
There is no current standard recommended dosing. Most study protocols infuse 1-2 units of convalescent plasma for persons with COVID-19.
There is insufficient data to recommend either for or against the use of convalescent plasma for the treatment of COVID-19. Existing data suggest that, if a benefit exists, convalescent plasma is most useful when given early and with a high titer of neutralizing antibodies.
The adverse effects of convalescent plasma is very similar to the receipt of other blood products, including allergic reactions to the plasma, transfusion-associated circulatory overload (TACO), transfusion-related acute lung injury (TRALI), and acquisition of infections, though the latter is rare because of the rigorous screening process.
Tocilizumab
Tocilizumab is a recombinant humanized monoclonal antibody that binds to interleukin (IL)-6 receptors. Tocilizumab is currently FDA approved for the treatment of severe or life-threatening cytokine release syndrome that is associated with chimeric antigen–receptor (CAR) T-cell therapy and for the treatment of rheumatologic disorders.
The interest in using tocilizumab to treat persons with COVID-19 is based on the observations that a subset of patients with COVID-19 develop a severe inflammatory response that can result in cytokine storm resulting in ARDS, multiorgan failure, and potentially death. Very high levels of IL-6 have been observed in these individuals, thereby suggesting IL-6 may play a central role in the acute clinical decompensation seen with severe COVID-19.
The optimal dosing of tocilizumab in patients with COVID-19 is not known. The FDA recommends dosing of tocilizumab for cytokine release syndrome should not exceed 800 mg. There is limited data about the potential benefit of tocilizumab in patients with COVID-19. The COVACTA trial showed no difference between tocilizumab and placebo in regard to mortality. The time to hospital discharge was shorter in patients treated with tocilizumab; however, the difference was not statistically significant.
Reported adverse effects of tocilizumab include increase in ALT and AST, increased risk of serious infections (especially tuberculosis and invasive fungal infections), reactivation of hepatitis B virus, and rare reports of gastrointestinal perforation.
Hydroxychloroquine
Hydroxycholoroquine (HCQ) and its sister drug chloroquine, have been used for many decades as treatment for malaria and autoimmune diseases. HCQ gained widespread popularity in the early days of the COVID-19 pandemic when clinical studies showed that it had significant in vitro activity against SARS-CoV-2, which provided the rationale for its use in the treatment and prevention of COVID-19 infection.
It was the first drug that was authorized for emergency use by the FDA during the COVID-19 pandemic. However, On June 15, 2020, because of accumulating harmful data, the FDA revoked the emergency authorization use of HCQ as a COVID-19 treatment.
Randomized controlled trials showed that patients treated with HCQ experienced a longer hospital stay with increase in mortality rates and increased likelihood of being placed on mechanical ventilation. In addition, studies revealed an increase in QT prolongation in patients treated with HCQ, especially when coadministered with azithromycin, which can lead to torsades de pointes, ventricular tachycardia, and sudden cardiac death.
The IDSA and National Institutes of Health, both recommend against the use of hydroxychloroquine with or without azithromycin to treat COVID-19 because the harms outweigh the benefits, even if high quality RCTs were to become available in the future.
Other drugs
There have been experimental studies on other medications for the treatment of COVID-19, including losartan, amlodipine, ivermectin, famotidine, Anakinra, Bruton’s tyrosine kinase inhibitors such as ibrutinib, and Janus kinase inhibitors, such as tofacitinib. Additionally, a few supplements such as vitamin C, vitamin D, and zinc have been used in both inpatient and outpatient settings for COVID-19 treatment. Polyclonal antibodies are being investigated in phase 3 trials. However, the data is insufficient, and the effectiveness of these drugs is unknown. The COVID-19 treatment guidelines panel recommends against the use of these treatment modalities.
Dr Tiyouh is an infectious diseases physician at Keystone Health in Chambersburg, Pa. Dr. Tenneti completed medical school at Vydehi Institute of Medical Sciences and Research Centre in Karnataka, India, and is interested in pursuing internal medicine residency. Dr. Tirupathi is the medical director of Keystone Infectious Diseases/HIV in Chambersburg, Pa., and currently chair of infection prevention at Wellspan Chambersburg Hospital and Waynesboro (Pa.) Hospitals. Dr. Palabindala is hospital medicine division chief at the University of Mississippi Medical Center, Jackson, and a member of the editorial advisory board for The Hospitalist.
Sources
Goldman JD et al. Remdesivir for 5 or 10 Days in Patients with Severe Covid-19. N Engl J Med. 2020 May 27. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa2015301.
Beigel JH et al. Remdesivir for the Treatment of Covid-19 - Final Report. N Engl J Med. 2020 Oct 8. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa2007764
Wang Y et al. Remdesivir in adults with severe COVID-19: a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, multicentre trial. Lancet. 2020 May 16;395(10236):1569-78.
National Institutes of Health. COVID-19 Treatment Guidelines.
Infectious Diseases Society of America. Infectious Diseases Society of America guidelines on the treatment and management of patients with COVID-19.
Joyner et al. Early safety indicators of COVID-19 convalescent plasma in 5000 patients. J Clin Invest. 2020;130(9):4791-7.
Luo P et al. Tocilizumab treatment in COVID-19: A single center experience. J Med Virol. 2020 Jul;92(7):814-8.
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Healthcare Workers: Interim Clinical Guidance for Management of Patients with Confirmed Coronavirus Disease (COVID-19).
University of Washington. COVID-19 Treatments: Prescribing Information, Clinical Studies, and Slide Decks.
Hospitalist Medicare payments are at risk for large cuts in 2021
Now is the time to act
From the beginning, SHM has consciously and consistently taken a unique approach to its advocacy efforts with the federal government. The advocacy priorities of SHM most often concern issues that we feel have an impact on our patients and the broader delivery system, as opposed to a focus on issues that have direct financial benefit to our members.
This strategy has served SHM well. It has earned respect among policymakers and we have seen significant success for a young and relatively small medical society. The issues where we spend the bulk of our time and effort include advocating for issues like alternative payment models (APMs), which reward care quality as opposed to volume, as well as issues related to data integrity that APMs require. We have advocated strongly for changes to dysfunctional observation status rules, for workforce adequacy and sustainability, and for recognition of the importance of hospital medicine’s contribution to the redesign of our nations delivery system. And SHM will continue to advocate for many other issues identified as being important to hospital medicine and our patients.
This year, for the first time in the two decades that I have served on the SHM Public Policy Committee, Medicare has proposed changes that would create unprecedented financial hardship for hospital medicine groups. Each year, as a part of its advocacy agenda, SHM reviews and comments on proposed changes to the Medicare Physician Fee Schedule (PFS). Among other things, the PFS adjusts payment rates to physicians for specific services. Changes under the PFS are required to be budget neutral. In effect, budget neutrality means that whenever certain services receive an increased payment rate, CMS is required to offset these changes by making cuts to other services. This year, in an effort to correct the long-standing underfunding of primary care services, CMS has increased payment for many Evaluation and Management (E&M) codes associated with outpatient primary care services. However, due to budget neutrality requirements, many inpatient E&M care services will be receiving significant cuts.
The goal of increasing payment rates for primary care services is laudable, as many of these cognitive services have been long underfunded. However, the proposed payment increases will only apply to outpatient E&M codes and not their corresponding inpatient codes. While our outpatient Internal Medicine and Family Practice colleagues will benefit from these changes, inpatient providers, including hospitalists, stand to lose a significant amount revenue. SHM and the hospitalists we represent estimate that the proposed budget neutrality adjustment will lead to an approximate 8 percent decrease in Medicare Fee for Services (FFS) revenue. Hospitalists are among the specialties that will be most impacted from these proposed changes. If put into effect, these proposals will leave hospital medicine behind.
These changes have been proposed at a time when hospitalists, along with their colleagues in critical care and emergency medicine, have been caring for patients on the frontlines of the COVID-19 pandemic at great risk to themselves at their families. While hospitalists are working tirelessly to provide lifesaving care to COVID-positive patients throughout the country, hospitalist groups have struggled financially as a result of the pandemic. Inpatient volumes, and therefore care reimbursement, has dropped significantly. Many hospitalists have already reported pay reductions of 20% or more. Others have seen their shifts reduced, resulting in understaffing, which may compromise the quality of care. For many groups, a Medicare reimbursement cut of this magnitude add fuel to an already strained revenue stream and will not be financially sustainable.
SHM is, of course, fighting back. We are not asking CMS to completely abandon the increases in reimbursement for primary care outpatient codes, and we support properly valuing outpatient care services. However, we are asking CMS to find a solution that does not come at the expense of hospital medicine and the other specialties that care for acutely ill hospitalized patients, including patients with COVID-19. If a better solution requires holding off on the proposal for another year, CMS should do so. Furthermore, SHM is asking Congress to abandon the statutory requirement for budget neutrality in these extraordinary times as CMS and Congress work to find towards a solution that properly values both inpatient and outpatient care services.
To send a message to your representatives urging them to stop these payment cuts, please visit SHM’s Legislative Action Center at www.votervoice.net/SHM/campaigns/77226/respond. You can read our full comments on the Medicare Physician Fee Schedule Proposed Rule at www.hospitalmedicine.org/policy--advocacy/letters/2021-physician-fee-schedule-proposed-rule/.
Now is the time to act
Now is the time to act
From the beginning, SHM has consciously and consistently taken a unique approach to its advocacy efforts with the federal government. The advocacy priorities of SHM most often concern issues that we feel have an impact on our patients and the broader delivery system, as opposed to a focus on issues that have direct financial benefit to our members.
This strategy has served SHM well. It has earned respect among policymakers and we have seen significant success for a young and relatively small medical society. The issues where we spend the bulk of our time and effort include advocating for issues like alternative payment models (APMs), which reward care quality as opposed to volume, as well as issues related to data integrity that APMs require. We have advocated strongly for changes to dysfunctional observation status rules, for workforce adequacy and sustainability, and for recognition of the importance of hospital medicine’s contribution to the redesign of our nations delivery system. And SHM will continue to advocate for many other issues identified as being important to hospital medicine and our patients.
This year, for the first time in the two decades that I have served on the SHM Public Policy Committee, Medicare has proposed changes that would create unprecedented financial hardship for hospital medicine groups. Each year, as a part of its advocacy agenda, SHM reviews and comments on proposed changes to the Medicare Physician Fee Schedule (PFS). Among other things, the PFS adjusts payment rates to physicians for specific services. Changes under the PFS are required to be budget neutral. In effect, budget neutrality means that whenever certain services receive an increased payment rate, CMS is required to offset these changes by making cuts to other services. This year, in an effort to correct the long-standing underfunding of primary care services, CMS has increased payment for many Evaluation and Management (E&M) codes associated with outpatient primary care services. However, due to budget neutrality requirements, many inpatient E&M care services will be receiving significant cuts.
The goal of increasing payment rates for primary care services is laudable, as many of these cognitive services have been long underfunded. However, the proposed payment increases will only apply to outpatient E&M codes and not their corresponding inpatient codes. While our outpatient Internal Medicine and Family Practice colleagues will benefit from these changes, inpatient providers, including hospitalists, stand to lose a significant amount revenue. SHM and the hospitalists we represent estimate that the proposed budget neutrality adjustment will lead to an approximate 8 percent decrease in Medicare Fee for Services (FFS) revenue. Hospitalists are among the specialties that will be most impacted from these proposed changes. If put into effect, these proposals will leave hospital medicine behind.
These changes have been proposed at a time when hospitalists, along with their colleagues in critical care and emergency medicine, have been caring for patients on the frontlines of the COVID-19 pandemic at great risk to themselves at their families. While hospitalists are working tirelessly to provide lifesaving care to COVID-positive patients throughout the country, hospitalist groups have struggled financially as a result of the pandemic. Inpatient volumes, and therefore care reimbursement, has dropped significantly. Many hospitalists have already reported pay reductions of 20% or more. Others have seen their shifts reduced, resulting in understaffing, which may compromise the quality of care. For many groups, a Medicare reimbursement cut of this magnitude add fuel to an already strained revenue stream and will not be financially sustainable.
SHM is, of course, fighting back. We are not asking CMS to completely abandon the increases in reimbursement for primary care outpatient codes, and we support properly valuing outpatient care services. However, we are asking CMS to find a solution that does not come at the expense of hospital medicine and the other specialties that care for acutely ill hospitalized patients, including patients with COVID-19. If a better solution requires holding off on the proposal for another year, CMS should do so. Furthermore, SHM is asking Congress to abandon the statutory requirement for budget neutrality in these extraordinary times as CMS and Congress work to find towards a solution that properly values both inpatient and outpatient care services.
To send a message to your representatives urging them to stop these payment cuts, please visit SHM’s Legislative Action Center at www.votervoice.net/SHM/campaigns/77226/respond. You can read our full comments on the Medicare Physician Fee Schedule Proposed Rule at www.hospitalmedicine.org/policy--advocacy/letters/2021-physician-fee-schedule-proposed-rule/.
From the beginning, SHM has consciously and consistently taken a unique approach to its advocacy efforts with the federal government. The advocacy priorities of SHM most often concern issues that we feel have an impact on our patients and the broader delivery system, as opposed to a focus on issues that have direct financial benefit to our members.
This strategy has served SHM well. It has earned respect among policymakers and we have seen significant success for a young and relatively small medical society. The issues where we spend the bulk of our time and effort include advocating for issues like alternative payment models (APMs), which reward care quality as opposed to volume, as well as issues related to data integrity that APMs require. We have advocated strongly for changes to dysfunctional observation status rules, for workforce adequacy and sustainability, and for recognition of the importance of hospital medicine’s contribution to the redesign of our nations delivery system. And SHM will continue to advocate for many other issues identified as being important to hospital medicine and our patients.
This year, for the first time in the two decades that I have served on the SHM Public Policy Committee, Medicare has proposed changes that would create unprecedented financial hardship for hospital medicine groups. Each year, as a part of its advocacy agenda, SHM reviews and comments on proposed changes to the Medicare Physician Fee Schedule (PFS). Among other things, the PFS adjusts payment rates to physicians for specific services. Changes under the PFS are required to be budget neutral. In effect, budget neutrality means that whenever certain services receive an increased payment rate, CMS is required to offset these changes by making cuts to other services. This year, in an effort to correct the long-standing underfunding of primary care services, CMS has increased payment for many Evaluation and Management (E&M) codes associated with outpatient primary care services. However, due to budget neutrality requirements, many inpatient E&M care services will be receiving significant cuts.
The goal of increasing payment rates for primary care services is laudable, as many of these cognitive services have been long underfunded. However, the proposed payment increases will only apply to outpatient E&M codes and not their corresponding inpatient codes. While our outpatient Internal Medicine and Family Practice colleagues will benefit from these changes, inpatient providers, including hospitalists, stand to lose a significant amount revenue. SHM and the hospitalists we represent estimate that the proposed budget neutrality adjustment will lead to an approximate 8 percent decrease in Medicare Fee for Services (FFS) revenue. Hospitalists are among the specialties that will be most impacted from these proposed changes. If put into effect, these proposals will leave hospital medicine behind.
These changes have been proposed at a time when hospitalists, along with their colleagues in critical care and emergency medicine, have been caring for patients on the frontlines of the COVID-19 pandemic at great risk to themselves at their families. While hospitalists are working tirelessly to provide lifesaving care to COVID-positive patients throughout the country, hospitalist groups have struggled financially as a result of the pandemic. Inpatient volumes, and therefore care reimbursement, has dropped significantly. Many hospitalists have already reported pay reductions of 20% or more. Others have seen their shifts reduced, resulting in understaffing, which may compromise the quality of care. For many groups, a Medicare reimbursement cut of this magnitude add fuel to an already strained revenue stream and will not be financially sustainable.
SHM is, of course, fighting back. We are not asking CMS to completely abandon the increases in reimbursement for primary care outpatient codes, and we support properly valuing outpatient care services. However, we are asking CMS to find a solution that does not come at the expense of hospital medicine and the other specialties that care for acutely ill hospitalized patients, including patients with COVID-19. If a better solution requires holding off on the proposal for another year, CMS should do so. Furthermore, SHM is asking Congress to abandon the statutory requirement for budget neutrality in these extraordinary times as CMS and Congress work to find towards a solution that properly values both inpatient and outpatient care services.
To send a message to your representatives urging them to stop these payment cuts, please visit SHM’s Legislative Action Center at www.votervoice.net/SHM/campaigns/77226/respond. You can read our full comments on the Medicare Physician Fee Schedule Proposed Rule at www.hospitalmedicine.org/policy--advocacy/letters/2021-physician-fee-schedule-proposed-rule/.
The SHM Fellow designation: Class of 2021
Spotlight on Tanisha Hamilton, MD, FHM
As we navigate a time unlike any other, it is clear that the value hospitalists provide is growing stronger as the hospital medicine field expands. Many Society of Hospital Medicine members look to its Fellows program as a worthwhile opportunity to distinguish themselves as leaders in the field and accelerate their careers in the specialty.
An active member of SHM since 2012 and member of its 2020 class of Fellows, Tanisha Hamilton, MD, FHM, is one of these ambitious individuals.
Dr. Hamilton is based at Baylor University Medical Center in Dallas, an affiliate of Baylor Scott & White Health. Known for personalized health and wellness care, Dr. Hamilton has more than 14 years of experience in the medical field.
Her love for the hospital medicine specialty is rooted in its diversity and complexity of patient cases – something that she knew would innately complement her personality. She says that an invaluable aspect of working in the field is the ability to interact and connect with people from all walks of life.
“My patients keep me motivated in this space. Learning from my patients and having the responsibility of serving as their advocate is incredibly rewarding,” Dr. Hamilton said. “I hope my patients feel like I’ve helped to make a difference in their lives, if only for just a moment.”
When reflecting on why she joined SHM 8 years ago, Dr. Hamilton said she was encouraged to do so because of its like-minded membership community and professional development opportunities, including the Fellows program.
“I applied to SHM’s Fellows program because I’m committed to the specialty. Hospital medicine is an ever-changing field loaded with opportunities to enhance personal and professional career growth,” said Dr. Hamilton. “To me, SHM’s Fellow in Hospital Medicine [FHM] designation demonstrates the ability to make a contribution to the field and to be an instrument for change.”
She credits receiving her designation as a distinction that has opened doors to other career-enhancing opportunities and networking resources, including an expansive global community, program development at her institution, and positions within SHM. Since earning her FHM designation, Dr. Hamilton has become an engaged member of the annual meeting committee and the North Central Texas Chapter.
“Since we are taking our annual conference virtual for SHM Converge in 2021, I’m excited to see how we can transform a meeting of more than 5,000 attendees into a full digital experience with interactive workshops, exhibits, research competitions, and more,” Dr. Hamilton said. “It’s certainly going to be a challenge, but I know that our meetings department and annual conference committee will make it a success!”
As Dr. Hamilton looks forward in her hospital medicine career, she is committed to making a positive impact on the field and for her patients.
In the future, Dr. Hamilton hopes to share curriculum she recently developed and sponsored around diversity, equity, and inclusion with her team at Baylor University Medical Center.
“Following the tragic deaths of numerous individuals, including Breonna Taylor, Ahmaud Abery, and George Floyd, and other people of color who have died because of COVID-19, I have felt compelled to educate my colleagues on how to curtail systemic racism, sexism, religious discrimination, and xenophobia in health care,” Dr. Hamilton said. “This curriculum includes courses on health disparities and cultural competencies, launching a lecture series, and other educational components.”
While 2020 has been a trying year, Dr. Hamilton remains hopeful for a prosperous future.
“When I think of the future of hospital medicine, I am hopeful that hospitalists will have a more prominent role in changing the direction of our health care system,” she said. “The pandemic has made the world realize the importance of hospital medicine. We, as hospitalists, are a critical part of its infrastructure and its success.”
If you would like to join Dr. Hamilton and other like-minded hospital medicine leaders in accelerating your career, SHM is currently recruiting for the Fellows and Senior Fellows class of 2021. Applications are open until Nov. 20, 2020. These designations are available across a variety of membership categories, including physicians, nurse practitioners, physician assistants, and qualified practice administrators. Dedicated to promoting excellence, innovation, and quality improvement in patient care, Fellows designations provide members with a distinguishing credential as established pioneers in the industry.
For more information and to review your eligibility, visit hospitalmedicine.org/fellows.
Ms. Cowan is a communications specialist at the Society of Hospital Medicine.
Spotlight on Tanisha Hamilton, MD, FHM
Spotlight on Tanisha Hamilton, MD, FHM
As we navigate a time unlike any other, it is clear that the value hospitalists provide is growing stronger as the hospital medicine field expands. Many Society of Hospital Medicine members look to its Fellows program as a worthwhile opportunity to distinguish themselves as leaders in the field and accelerate their careers in the specialty.
An active member of SHM since 2012 and member of its 2020 class of Fellows, Tanisha Hamilton, MD, FHM, is one of these ambitious individuals.
Dr. Hamilton is based at Baylor University Medical Center in Dallas, an affiliate of Baylor Scott & White Health. Known for personalized health and wellness care, Dr. Hamilton has more than 14 years of experience in the medical field.
Her love for the hospital medicine specialty is rooted in its diversity and complexity of patient cases – something that she knew would innately complement her personality. She says that an invaluable aspect of working in the field is the ability to interact and connect with people from all walks of life.
“My patients keep me motivated in this space. Learning from my patients and having the responsibility of serving as their advocate is incredibly rewarding,” Dr. Hamilton said. “I hope my patients feel like I’ve helped to make a difference in their lives, if only for just a moment.”
When reflecting on why she joined SHM 8 years ago, Dr. Hamilton said she was encouraged to do so because of its like-minded membership community and professional development opportunities, including the Fellows program.
“I applied to SHM’s Fellows program because I’m committed to the specialty. Hospital medicine is an ever-changing field loaded with opportunities to enhance personal and professional career growth,” said Dr. Hamilton. “To me, SHM’s Fellow in Hospital Medicine [FHM] designation demonstrates the ability to make a contribution to the field and to be an instrument for change.”
She credits receiving her designation as a distinction that has opened doors to other career-enhancing opportunities and networking resources, including an expansive global community, program development at her institution, and positions within SHM. Since earning her FHM designation, Dr. Hamilton has become an engaged member of the annual meeting committee and the North Central Texas Chapter.
“Since we are taking our annual conference virtual for SHM Converge in 2021, I’m excited to see how we can transform a meeting of more than 5,000 attendees into a full digital experience with interactive workshops, exhibits, research competitions, and more,” Dr. Hamilton said. “It’s certainly going to be a challenge, but I know that our meetings department and annual conference committee will make it a success!”
As Dr. Hamilton looks forward in her hospital medicine career, she is committed to making a positive impact on the field and for her patients.
In the future, Dr. Hamilton hopes to share curriculum she recently developed and sponsored around diversity, equity, and inclusion with her team at Baylor University Medical Center.
“Following the tragic deaths of numerous individuals, including Breonna Taylor, Ahmaud Abery, and George Floyd, and other people of color who have died because of COVID-19, I have felt compelled to educate my colleagues on how to curtail systemic racism, sexism, religious discrimination, and xenophobia in health care,” Dr. Hamilton said. “This curriculum includes courses on health disparities and cultural competencies, launching a lecture series, and other educational components.”
While 2020 has been a trying year, Dr. Hamilton remains hopeful for a prosperous future.
“When I think of the future of hospital medicine, I am hopeful that hospitalists will have a more prominent role in changing the direction of our health care system,” she said. “The pandemic has made the world realize the importance of hospital medicine. We, as hospitalists, are a critical part of its infrastructure and its success.”
If you would like to join Dr. Hamilton and other like-minded hospital medicine leaders in accelerating your career, SHM is currently recruiting for the Fellows and Senior Fellows class of 2021. Applications are open until Nov. 20, 2020. These designations are available across a variety of membership categories, including physicians, nurse practitioners, physician assistants, and qualified practice administrators. Dedicated to promoting excellence, innovation, and quality improvement in patient care, Fellows designations provide members with a distinguishing credential as established pioneers in the industry.
For more information and to review your eligibility, visit hospitalmedicine.org/fellows.
Ms. Cowan is a communications specialist at the Society of Hospital Medicine.
As we navigate a time unlike any other, it is clear that the value hospitalists provide is growing stronger as the hospital medicine field expands. Many Society of Hospital Medicine members look to its Fellows program as a worthwhile opportunity to distinguish themselves as leaders in the field and accelerate their careers in the specialty.
An active member of SHM since 2012 and member of its 2020 class of Fellows, Tanisha Hamilton, MD, FHM, is one of these ambitious individuals.
Dr. Hamilton is based at Baylor University Medical Center in Dallas, an affiliate of Baylor Scott & White Health. Known for personalized health and wellness care, Dr. Hamilton has more than 14 years of experience in the medical field.
Her love for the hospital medicine specialty is rooted in its diversity and complexity of patient cases – something that she knew would innately complement her personality. She says that an invaluable aspect of working in the field is the ability to interact and connect with people from all walks of life.
“My patients keep me motivated in this space. Learning from my patients and having the responsibility of serving as their advocate is incredibly rewarding,” Dr. Hamilton said. “I hope my patients feel like I’ve helped to make a difference in their lives, if only for just a moment.”
When reflecting on why she joined SHM 8 years ago, Dr. Hamilton said she was encouraged to do so because of its like-minded membership community and professional development opportunities, including the Fellows program.
“I applied to SHM’s Fellows program because I’m committed to the specialty. Hospital medicine is an ever-changing field loaded with opportunities to enhance personal and professional career growth,” said Dr. Hamilton. “To me, SHM’s Fellow in Hospital Medicine [FHM] designation demonstrates the ability to make a contribution to the field and to be an instrument for change.”
She credits receiving her designation as a distinction that has opened doors to other career-enhancing opportunities and networking resources, including an expansive global community, program development at her institution, and positions within SHM. Since earning her FHM designation, Dr. Hamilton has become an engaged member of the annual meeting committee and the North Central Texas Chapter.
“Since we are taking our annual conference virtual for SHM Converge in 2021, I’m excited to see how we can transform a meeting of more than 5,000 attendees into a full digital experience with interactive workshops, exhibits, research competitions, and more,” Dr. Hamilton said. “It’s certainly going to be a challenge, but I know that our meetings department and annual conference committee will make it a success!”
As Dr. Hamilton looks forward in her hospital medicine career, she is committed to making a positive impact on the field and for her patients.
In the future, Dr. Hamilton hopes to share curriculum she recently developed and sponsored around diversity, equity, and inclusion with her team at Baylor University Medical Center.
“Following the tragic deaths of numerous individuals, including Breonna Taylor, Ahmaud Abery, and George Floyd, and other people of color who have died because of COVID-19, I have felt compelled to educate my colleagues on how to curtail systemic racism, sexism, religious discrimination, and xenophobia in health care,” Dr. Hamilton said. “This curriculum includes courses on health disparities and cultural competencies, launching a lecture series, and other educational components.”
While 2020 has been a trying year, Dr. Hamilton remains hopeful for a prosperous future.
“When I think of the future of hospital medicine, I am hopeful that hospitalists will have a more prominent role in changing the direction of our health care system,” she said. “The pandemic has made the world realize the importance of hospital medicine. We, as hospitalists, are a critical part of its infrastructure and its success.”
If you would like to join Dr. Hamilton and other like-minded hospital medicine leaders in accelerating your career, SHM is currently recruiting for the Fellows and Senior Fellows class of 2021. Applications are open until Nov. 20, 2020. These designations are available across a variety of membership categories, including physicians, nurse practitioners, physician assistants, and qualified practice administrators. Dedicated to promoting excellence, innovation, and quality improvement in patient care, Fellows designations provide members with a distinguishing credential as established pioneers in the industry.
For more information and to review your eligibility, visit hospitalmedicine.org/fellows.
Ms. Cowan is a communications specialist at the Society of Hospital Medicine.
Burnout risk may be exacerbated by COVID crisis
New kinds of job stress multiply in unusual times
Clarissa Barnes, MD, a hospitalist at Avera McKennan Hospital in Sioux Falls, S.D., and until recently medical director of Avera’s LIGHT Program, a wellness-oriented service for doctors, nurse practitioners, and physician assistants, watched the COVID-19 crisis unfold up close in her community and her hospital. Sioux Falls traced its surge of COVID patients to an outbreak at a local meatpacking plant.
“In the beginning, we didn’t know much about the virus and its communicability, although we have since gotten a better handle on that,” she said. “We had questions: Should we give patients more fluids – or less? Steroids or not? In my experience as a hospitalist I never had patients die every day on my shift, but that was happening with COVID.” The crisis imposed serious stresses on frontline providers, and hospitalists were concerned about personal safety and exposure risk – not just for themselves but for their families.
“The first time I worked on the COVID unit, I moved into the guest room in our home, apart from my husband and our young children,” Dr. Barnes said. “Ultimately I caught the virus, although I have since recovered.” Her experience has highlighted how existing issues of job stress and burnout in hospital medicine have been exacerbated by COVID-19. Even physicians who consider themselves healthy may have little emotional reserve to draw upon in a crisis of this magnitude.
“We are social distancing at work, wearing masks, not eating together with our colleagues – with less camaraderie and social support than we used to have,” she said. “I feel exhausted and there’s no question that my colleagues and I have sacrificed a lot to deal with the pandemic.” Add to that the second front of the COVID-19 crisis, Dr. Barnes said, which is “fighting the medical information wars, trying to correct misinformation put out there by people. Physicians who have been on the front lines of the pandemic know how demoralizing it can be to have people negate your first-hand experience.”
The situation has gotten better in Sioux Falls, Dr. Barnes said, although cases have started rising in the state again. The stress, while not gone, is reduced. For some doctors, “COVID reminded us of why we do what we do. Some of the usual bureaucratic requirements were set aside and we could focus on what our patients needed and how to take care of them.”
Taking job stress seriously
Tiffani Panek, MA, SFHM, CLHM, administrator of the division of hospital medicine at Johns Hopkins Bayview Medical Center in Baltimore, said job stress is a major issue for hospitalist groups.
“We take it seriously here, and use a survey tool to measure morale in our group annually,” she said. “So far, knock on wood, Baltimore has not been one of the big hot spots, but we’ve definitely had waves of COVID patients.”
The Bayview hospitalist group has a diversified set of leaders, including a wellness director. “They’re always checking up on our people, keeping an eye on those who are most vulnerable. One of the stressors we hadn’t thought about before was for our people who live alone. With the isolation and lockdown, they haven’t been able to socialize, so we’ve made direct outreach, asking people how they were doing,” Ms. Panek said. “People know we’ve got their back – professionally and personally. They know, if there’s something we can do to help, we will do it.”
Bayview Medical Center has COVID-specific units and non-COVID units, and has tried to rotate hospitalist assignments because more than a couple days in a row spent wearing full personal protective equipment (PPE) is exhausting, Ms. Panek said. The group also allocated a respite room just outside the biocontainment unit, with a computer and opportunities for providers to just sit and take a breather – with appropriate social distancing. “It’s not fancy, but you just have to wear a mask, not full PPE.”
The Hopkins hospitalist group’s wellness director, Catherine Washburn, MD, also a working hospitalist, said providers are exhausted, and trying to transition to the new normal is a moving target.
“It’s hard for anyone to say what our lives will look like in 6 months,” she said. “People in our group have lost family members to COVID, or postponed major life events, like weddings. We acknowledge losses together as a group, and celebrate things worth celebrating, like babies or birthdays.”
Greatest COVID caseload
Joshua Case, MD, hospitalist medical director for 16 acute care hospitals of Northwell Health serving metropolitan New York City and Long Island, said his group’s hospitalists and other staff worked incredibly hard during the surge of COVID-19 patients in New York. “Northwell likely cared for more COVID patients than any other health care system in the U.S., if not the world.
“It’s vastly different now. We went from a peak of thousands of cases per day down to about 70-90 new cases a day across our system. We’re lucky our system recognized that COVID could be an issue early on, with all of the multifaceted stressors on patient care,” Dr. Case said. “We’ve done whatever we could to give people time off, especially as the census started to come down. We freed up as many supportive mental health services as we could, working with the health system’s employee assistance program.”
Northwell gave out numbers for the psychiatry department, with clinicians available 24/7 for a confidential call, along with outside volunteers and a network of trauma psychologists. “Our system also provided emergency child care for staff, including hospitalists, wherever we could, drawing upon community resources,” Dr. Case added.
“We recognize that we’re all in the same foxhole. That’s been a helpful attitude – recognizing that it’s okay to be upset in a crisis and to have trouble dealing with what’s going on,” he said. “We need to acknowledge that some of us are suffering and try to encourage people to face it head on. For a lot of physicians, especially those who were redeployed here from other departments, it was important just to have us ask if they were doing okay.”
Brian Schroeder, MHA, FACHE, FHM, assistant vice president for hospital and emergency medicine for Atrium Health, based in Charlotte, N.C., said one of the biggest sources of stress on his staff has been the constant pace of change – whether local hospital protocols, state policies, or guidelines from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. “The updating is difficult to keep up with. A lot of our physicians get worried and anxious that they’re not following the latest guidelines or correctly doing what they should be doing to care for COVID patients. One thing we’ve done to alleviate some of that fear and anxiety is through weekly huddles with our hospital teams, focusing on changes relevant to their work. We also have weekly ‘all-hands’ meetings for our 250 providers across 13 acute and four postacute facilities.”
Before COVID, it was difficult to get everyone together as one big group from hospitals up to 5 hours apart, but with the Microsoft Teams platform, they can all meet together.
“At the height of the pandemic, we’d convene weekly and share national statistics, organizational statistics, testing updates, changes to protocols,” Mr. Schroeder said. As the pace of change has slowed, these meetings were cut back to monthly. “Our physicians feel we are passing on information as soon as we get it. They know we’ll always tell them what we know.”
Sarah Richards, MD, assistant professor of internal medicine at the University of Nebraska, Omaha, who heads the Society of Hospital Medicine’s Well-Being Task Force, formed to address staff stress in the COVID environment, said there are things that health care systems can do to help mitigate job stress and burnout. But broader issues may need to be addressed at a national level. “SHM is trying to understand work-related stress – and to identify resources that could support doctors, so they can spend more of their time doing what they enjoy most, which is taking care of patients,” she said.
“We also recognize that people have had very different experiences, depending on geography, and at the individual level stressors are experienced very differently,” Dr. Richard noted. “One of the most common stressors we’ve heard from doctors is the challenge of caring for patients who are lonely and isolated in their hospital rooms, suffering and dying in new ways. In low-incidence areas, doctors are expressing guilt because they aren’t under as much stress as their colleagues. In high-incidence areas, doctors are already experiencing posttraumatic stress disorder.”
SHM’s Well-Being Task Force is working on a tool to help normalize these stressors and encourage open conversations about mental health issues. A guide called “HM COVID Check-in Guide for Self & Peers” is designed to help hospitalists break the culture of silence around well-being and burnout during COVID-19 and how people are handling and processing the pandemic experience. It is expected to be completed later this year, Dr. Richards said. Other SHM projects and resources for staff support are also in the works.
The impact on women doctors
In a recent Journal of Hospital Medicine article entitled “Collateral Damage: How COVID-19 is Adversely Impacting Women Physicians,” hospitalist Yemisi Jones, MD, medical director of continuing medical education at Cincinnati Children’s Hospital Medical Center, and colleagues argue that preexisting gender inequities in compensation, academic rank and leadership positions for physicians have made the COVID-19 crisis even more burdensome on female hospitalists.1
“Increased childcare and schooling obligations, coupled with disproportionate household responsibilities and an inability to work from home, will likely result in female hospitalists struggling to meet family needs while pandemic-related work responsibilities are ramping up,” they write. COVID may intensify workplace inequalities, with a lack of recognition of the undue strain that group policies place on women.
“Often women suffer in silence,” said coauthor Jennifer O’Toole, MD, MEd, director of education in the division of hospital medicine at Cincinnati Children’s Hospital Medical Center and program director of the internal medicine–pediatrics residency. “We are not always the best self-advocates, although many of us are working on that.”
When women in hospital medicine take leadership roles, these often tend to involve mutual support activities, taking care of colleagues, and promoting collaborative work environments, Dr. Jones added. The stereotypical example is the committee that organizes celebrations when group members get married or have babies.
These activities can take a lot of time, she said. “We need to pay attention to that kind of role in our groups, because it’s important to the cohesiveness of the group. But it often goes unrecognized and doesn’t translate into the currency of promotion and leadership in medicine. When women go for promotions in the future, how will what happened during the COVID crisis impact their opportunities?”
What is the answer to overcoming these systemic inequities? Start with making sure women are part of the leadership team, with responsibilities for group policies, schedules, and other important decisions. “Look at your group’s leadership – particularly the higher positions. If it’s not diverse, ask why. ‘What is it about the structure of our group?’ Make a more concerted effort in your recruitment and retention,” Dr. Jones said.
The JHM article also recommends closely monitoring the direct and indirect effects of COVID-19 on female hospitalists, inquiring specifically about the needs of women in the organization, and ensuring that diversity, inclusion, and equity efforts are not suspended during the pandemic. Gender-based disparities in pay also need a closer look, and not just one time but reviewed periodically and adjusted accordingly.
Mentoring for early career women is important, but more so is sponsorship – someone in a high-level leadership role in the group sponsoring women who are rising up the career ladder, Dr. O’Toole said. “Professional women tend to be overmentored and undersponsored.”
What are the answers?
Ultimately, listening is key to try to help people get through the pandemic, Dr. Washburn said. “People become burned out when they feel leadership doesn’t understand their needs or doesn’t hear their concerns. Our group leaders all do clinical work, so they are seen as one of us. They try very hard; they have listening ears. But listening is just the first step. Next step is to work creatively to get the identified needs met.”
A few years ago, Johns Hopkins developed training in enhanced communication in health care for all hospital providers, including nurses and doctors, encouraging them to get trained in how to actively listen and address their patients’ emotional and social experiences as well as disease, Dr. Washburn explained. Learning how to listen better to patients can enhance skills at listening to colleagues, and vice versa. “We recognize the importance of better communication – for reducing sentinel events in the hospital and also for preventing staff burnout.”
Dr. Barnes also does physician coaching, and says a lot of that work is helping people achieve clarity on their core values. “Healing patients is a core identify for physicians; we want to take care of people. But other things can get in the way of that, and hospitalist groups can work at minimizing those barriers. We also need to learn, as hospitalists, that we work in a group. You need to be creative in how you do your team building, especially now, when you can no longer get together for dinner. Whatever it is, how do we bring our team back together? The biggest source of support for many hospitalists, beyond their family, is the group.”
Dr. Case said there is a longer-term need to study the root causes of burnout in hospitalists and to identify the issues that cause job stress. “What is modifiable? How can we tackle it? I see that as big part of my job every day. Being a physician is hard enough as it is. Let’s work to resolve those issues that add needlessly to the stress.”
“I think the pandemic brought a magnifying glass to how important a concern staff stress is,” Ms. Panek said. Resilience is important.
“We were working in our group on creating a culture that values trust and transparency, and then the COVID crisis hit,” she said. “But you can still keep working on those things. We would not have been as good or as positive as we were in managing this crisis without that preexisting culture to draw upon. We always said it was important. Now we know that’s true.”
Reference
1. Jones Y et al. Collateral Damage: How COVID-19 Is Adversely Impacting Women Physicians. J Hosp Med. 2020 August;15(8):507-9.
New kinds of job stress multiply in unusual times
New kinds of job stress multiply in unusual times
Clarissa Barnes, MD, a hospitalist at Avera McKennan Hospital in Sioux Falls, S.D., and until recently medical director of Avera’s LIGHT Program, a wellness-oriented service for doctors, nurse practitioners, and physician assistants, watched the COVID-19 crisis unfold up close in her community and her hospital. Sioux Falls traced its surge of COVID patients to an outbreak at a local meatpacking plant.
“In the beginning, we didn’t know much about the virus and its communicability, although we have since gotten a better handle on that,” she said. “We had questions: Should we give patients more fluids – or less? Steroids or not? In my experience as a hospitalist I never had patients die every day on my shift, but that was happening with COVID.” The crisis imposed serious stresses on frontline providers, and hospitalists were concerned about personal safety and exposure risk – not just for themselves but for their families.
“The first time I worked on the COVID unit, I moved into the guest room in our home, apart from my husband and our young children,” Dr. Barnes said. “Ultimately I caught the virus, although I have since recovered.” Her experience has highlighted how existing issues of job stress and burnout in hospital medicine have been exacerbated by COVID-19. Even physicians who consider themselves healthy may have little emotional reserve to draw upon in a crisis of this magnitude.
“We are social distancing at work, wearing masks, not eating together with our colleagues – with less camaraderie and social support than we used to have,” she said. “I feel exhausted and there’s no question that my colleagues and I have sacrificed a lot to deal with the pandemic.” Add to that the second front of the COVID-19 crisis, Dr. Barnes said, which is “fighting the medical information wars, trying to correct misinformation put out there by people. Physicians who have been on the front lines of the pandemic know how demoralizing it can be to have people negate your first-hand experience.”
The situation has gotten better in Sioux Falls, Dr. Barnes said, although cases have started rising in the state again. The stress, while not gone, is reduced. For some doctors, “COVID reminded us of why we do what we do. Some of the usual bureaucratic requirements were set aside and we could focus on what our patients needed and how to take care of them.”
Taking job stress seriously
Tiffani Panek, MA, SFHM, CLHM, administrator of the division of hospital medicine at Johns Hopkins Bayview Medical Center in Baltimore, said job stress is a major issue for hospitalist groups.
“We take it seriously here, and use a survey tool to measure morale in our group annually,” she said. “So far, knock on wood, Baltimore has not been one of the big hot spots, but we’ve definitely had waves of COVID patients.”
The Bayview hospitalist group has a diversified set of leaders, including a wellness director. “They’re always checking up on our people, keeping an eye on those who are most vulnerable. One of the stressors we hadn’t thought about before was for our people who live alone. With the isolation and lockdown, they haven’t been able to socialize, so we’ve made direct outreach, asking people how they were doing,” Ms. Panek said. “People know we’ve got their back – professionally and personally. They know, if there’s something we can do to help, we will do it.”
Bayview Medical Center has COVID-specific units and non-COVID units, and has tried to rotate hospitalist assignments because more than a couple days in a row spent wearing full personal protective equipment (PPE) is exhausting, Ms. Panek said. The group also allocated a respite room just outside the biocontainment unit, with a computer and opportunities for providers to just sit and take a breather – with appropriate social distancing. “It’s not fancy, but you just have to wear a mask, not full PPE.”
The Hopkins hospitalist group’s wellness director, Catherine Washburn, MD, also a working hospitalist, said providers are exhausted, and trying to transition to the new normal is a moving target.
“It’s hard for anyone to say what our lives will look like in 6 months,” she said. “People in our group have lost family members to COVID, or postponed major life events, like weddings. We acknowledge losses together as a group, and celebrate things worth celebrating, like babies or birthdays.”
Greatest COVID caseload
Joshua Case, MD, hospitalist medical director for 16 acute care hospitals of Northwell Health serving metropolitan New York City and Long Island, said his group’s hospitalists and other staff worked incredibly hard during the surge of COVID-19 patients in New York. “Northwell likely cared for more COVID patients than any other health care system in the U.S., if not the world.
“It’s vastly different now. We went from a peak of thousands of cases per day down to about 70-90 new cases a day across our system. We’re lucky our system recognized that COVID could be an issue early on, with all of the multifaceted stressors on patient care,” Dr. Case said. “We’ve done whatever we could to give people time off, especially as the census started to come down. We freed up as many supportive mental health services as we could, working with the health system’s employee assistance program.”
Northwell gave out numbers for the psychiatry department, with clinicians available 24/7 for a confidential call, along with outside volunteers and a network of trauma psychologists. “Our system also provided emergency child care for staff, including hospitalists, wherever we could, drawing upon community resources,” Dr. Case added.
“We recognize that we’re all in the same foxhole. That’s been a helpful attitude – recognizing that it’s okay to be upset in a crisis and to have trouble dealing with what’s going on,” he said. “We need to acknowledge that some of us are suffering and try to encourage people to face it head on. For a lot of physicians, especially those who were redeployed here from other departments, it was important just to have us ask if they were doing okay.”
Brian Schroeder, MHA, FACHE, FHM, assistant vice president for hospital and emergency medicine for Atrium Health, based in Charlotte, N.C., said one of the biggest sources of stress on his staff has been the constant pace of change – whether local hospital protocols, state policies, or guidelines from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. “The updating is difficult to keep up with. A lot of our physicians get worried and anxious that they’re not following the latest guidelines or correctly doing what they should be doing to care for COVID patients. One thing we’ve done to alleviate some of that fear and anxiety is through weekly huddles with our hospital teams, focusing on changes relevant to their work. We also have weekly ‘all-hands’ meetings for our 250 providers across 13 acute and four postacute facilities.”
Before COVID, it was difficult to get everyone together as one big group from hospitals up to 5 hours apart, but with the Microsoft Teams platform, they can all meet together.
“At the height of the pandemic, we’d convene weekly and share national statistics, organizational statistics, testing updates, changes to protocols,” Mr. Schroeder said. As the pace of change has slowed, these meetings were cut back to monthly. “Our physicians feel we are passing on information as soon as we get it. They know we’ll always tell them what we know.”
Sarah Richards, MD, assistant professor of internal medicine at the University of Nebraska, Omaha, who heads the Society of Hospital Medicine’s Well-Being Task Force, formed to address staff stress in the COVID environment, said there are things that health care systems can do to help mitigate job stress and burnout. But broader issues may need to be addressed at a national level. “SHM is trying to understand work-related stress – and to identify resources that could support doctors, so they can spend more of their time doing what they enjoy most, which is taking care of patients,” she said.
“We also recognize that people have had very different experiences, depending on geography, and at the individual level stressors are experienced very differently,” Dr. Richard noted. “One of the most common stressors we’ve heard from doctors is the challenge of caring for patients who are lonely and isolated in their hospital rooms, suffering and dying in new ways. In low-incidence areas, doctors are expressing guilt because they aren’t under as much stress as their colleagues. In high-incidence areas, doctors are already experiencing posttraumatic stress disorder.”
SHM’s Well-Being Task Force is working on a tool to help normalize these stressors and encourage open conversations about mental health issues. A guide called “HM COVID Check-in Guide for Self & Peers” is designed to help hospitalists break the culture of silence around well-being and burnout during COVID-19 and how people are handling and processing the pandemic experience. It is expected to be completed later this year, Dr. Richards said. Other SHM projects and resources for staff support are also in the works.
The impact on women doctors
In a recent Journal of Hospital Medicine article entitled “Collateral Damage: How COVID-19 is Adversely Impacting Women Physicians,” hospitalist Yemisi Jones, MD, medical director of continuing medical education at Cincinnati Children’s Hospital Medical Center, and colleagues argue that preexisting gender inequities in compensation, academic rank and leadership positions for physicians have made the COVID-19 crisis even more burdensome on female hospitalists.1
“Increased childcare and schooling obligations, coupled with disproportionate household responsibilities and an inability to work from home, will likely result in female hospitalists struggling to meet family needs while pandemic-related work responsibilities are ramping up,” they write. COVID may intensify workplace inequalities, with a lack of recognition of the undue strain that group policies place on women.
“Often women suffer in silence,” said coauthor Jennifer O’Toole, MD, MEd, director of education in the division of hospital medicine at Cincinnati Children’s Hospital Medical Center and program director of the internal medicine–pediatrics residency. “We are not always the best self-advocates, although many of us are working on that.”
When women in hospital medicine take leadership roles, these often tend to involve mutual support activities, taking care of colleagues, and promoting collaborative work environments, Dr. Jones added. The stereotypical example is the committee that organizes celebrations when group members get married or have babies.
These activities can take a lot of time, she said. “We need to pay attention to that kind of role in our groups, because it’s important to the cohesiveness of the group. But it often goes unrecognized and doesn’t translate into the currency of promotion and leadership in medicine. When women go for promotions in the future, how will what happened during the COVID crisis impact their opportunities?”
What is the answer to overcoming these systemic inequities? Start with making sure women are part of the leadership team, with responsibilities for group policies, schedules, and other important decisions. “Look at your group’s leadership – particularly the higher positions. If it’s not diverse, ask why. ‘What is it about the structure of our group?’ Make a more concerted effort in your recruitment and retention,” Dr. Jones said.
The JHM article also recommends closely monitoring the direct and indirect effects of COVID-19 on female hospitalists, inquiring specifically about the needs of women in the organization, and ensuring that diversity, inclusion, and equity efforts are not suspended during the pandemic. Gender-based disparities in pay also need a closer look, and not just one time but reviewed periodically and adjusted accordingly.
Mentoring for early career women is important, but more so is sponsorship – someone in a high-level leadership role in the group sponsoring women who are rising up the career ladder, Dr. O’Toole said. “Professional women tend to be overmentored and undersponsored.”
What are the answers?
Ultimately, listening is key to try to help people get through the pandemic, Dr. Washburn said. “People become burned out when they feel leadership doesn’t understand their needs or doesn’t hear their concerns. Our group leaders all do clinical work, so they are seen as one of us. They try very hard; they have listening ears. But listening is just the first step. Next step is to work creatively to get the identified needs met.”
A few years ago, Johns Hopkins developed training in enhanced communication in health care for all hospital providers, including nurses and doctors, encouraging them to get trained in how to actively listen and address their patients’ emotional and social experiences as well as disease, Dr. Washburn explained. Learning how to listen better to patients can enhance skills at listening to colleagues, and vice versa. “We recognize the importance of better communication – for reducing sentinel events in the hospital and also for preventing staff burnout.”
Dr. Barnes also does physician coaching, and says a lot of that work is helping people achieve clarity on their core values. “Healing patients is a core identify for physicians; we want to take care of people. But other things can get in the way of that, and hospitalist groups can work at minimizing those barriers. We also need to learn, as hospitalists, that we work in a group. You need to be creative in how you do your team building, especially now, when you can no longer get together for dinner. Whatever it is, how do we bring our team back together? The biggest source of support for many hospitalists, beyond their family, is the group.”
Dr. Case said there is a longer-term need to study the root causes of burnout in hospitalists and to identify the issues that cause job stress. “What is modifiable? How can we tackle it? I see that as big part of my job every day. Being a physician is hard enough as it is. Let’s work to resolve those issues that add needlessly to the stress.”
“I think the pandemic brought a magnifying glass to how important a concern staff stress is,” Ms. Panek said. Resilience is important.
“We were working in our group on creating a culture that values trust and transparency, and then the COVID crisis hit,” she said. “But you can still keep working on those things. We would not have been as good or as positive as we were in managing this crisis without that preexisting culture to draw upon. We always said it was important. Now we know that’s true.”
Reference
1. Jones Y et al. Collateral Damage: How COVID-19 Is Adversely Impacting Women Physicians. J Hosp Med. 2020 August;15(8):507-9.
Clarissa Barnes, MD, a hospitalist at Avera McKennan Hospital in Sioux Falls, S.D., and until recently medical director of Avera’s LIGHT Program, a wellness-oriented service for doctors, nurse practitioners, and physician assistants, watched the COVID-19 crisis unfold up close in her community and her hospital. Sioux Falls traced its surge of COVID patients to an outbreak at a local meatpacking plant.
“In the beginning, we didn’t know much about the virus and its communicability, although we have since gotten a better handle on that,” she said. “We had questions: Should we give patients more fluids – or less? Steroids or not? In my experience as a hospitalist I never had patients die every day on my shift, but that was happening with COVID.” The crisis imposed serious stresses on frontline providers, and hospitalists were concerned about personal safety and exposure risk – not just for themselves but for their families.
“The first time I worked on the COVID unit, I moved into the guest room in our home, apart from my husband and our young children,” Dr. Barnes said. “Ultimately I caught the virus, although I have since recovered.” Her experience has highlighted how existing issues of job stress and burnout in hospital medicine have been exacerbated by COVID-19. Even physicians who consider themselves healthy may have little emotional reserve to draw upon in a crisis of this magnitude.
“We are social distancing at work, wearing masks, not eating together with our colleagues – with less camaraderie and social support than we used to have,” she said. “I feel exhausted and there’s no question that my colleagues and I have sacrificed a lot to deal with the pandemic.” Add to that the second front of the COVID-19 crisis, Dr. Barnes said, which is “fighting the medical information wars, trying to correct misinformation put out there by people. Physicians who have been on the front lines of the pandemic know how demoralizing it can be to have people negate your first-hand experience.”
The situation has gotten better in Sioux Falls, Dr. Barnes said, although cases have started rising in the state again. The stress, while not gone, is reduced. For some doctors, “COVID reminded us of why we do what we do. Some of the usual bureaucratic requirements were set aside and we could focus on what our patients needed and how to take care of them.”
Taking job stress seriously
Tiffani Panek, MA, SFHM, CLHM, administrator of the division of hospital medicine at Johns Hopkins Bayview Medical Center in Baltimore, said job stress is a major issue for hospitalist groups.
“We take it seriously here, and use a survey tool to measure morale in our group annually,” she said. “So far, knock on wood, Baltimore has not been one of the big hot spots, but we’ve definitely had waves of COVID patients.”
The Bayview hospitalist group has a diversified set of leaders, including a wellness director. “They’re always checking up on our people, keeping an eye on those who are most vulnerable. One of the stressors we hadn’t thought about before was for our people who live alone. With the isolation and lockdown, they haven’t been able to socialize, so we’ve made direct outreach, asking people how they were doing,” Ms. Panek said. “People know we’ve got their back – professionally and personally. They know, if there’s something we can do to help, we will do it.”
Bayview Medical Center has COVID-specific units and non-COVID units, and has tried to rotate hospitalist assignments because more than a couple days in a row spent wearing full personal protective equipment (PPE) is exhausting, Ms. Panek said. The group also allocated a respite room just outside the biocontainment unit, with a computer and opportunities for providers to just sit and take a breather – with appropriate social distancing. “It’s not fancy, but you just have to wear a mask, not full PPE.”
The Hopkins hospitalist group’s wellness director, Catherine Washburn, MD, also a working hospitalist, said providers are exhausted, and trying to transition to the new normal is a moving target.
“It’s hard for anyone to say what our lives will look like in 6 months,” she said. “People in our group have lost family members to COVID, or postponed major life events, like weddings. We acknowledge losses together as a group, and celebrate things worth celebrating, like babies or birthdays.”
Greatest COVID caseload
Joshua Case, MD, hospitalist medical director for 16 acute care hospitals of Northwell Health serving metropolitan New York City and Long Island, said his group’s hospitalists and other staff worked incredibly hard during the surge of COVID-19 patients in New York. “Northwell likely cared for more COVID patients than any other health care system in the U.S., if not the world.
“It’s vastly different now. We went from a peak of thousands of cases per day down to about 70-90 new cases a day across our system. We’re lucky our system recognized that COVID could be an issue early on, with all of the multifaceted stressors on patient care,” Dr. Case said. “We’ve done whatever we could to give people time off, especially as the census started to come down. We freed up as many supportive mental health services as we could, working with the health system’s employee assistance program.”
Northwell gave out numbers for the psychiatry department, with clinicians available 24/7 for a confidential call, along with outside volunteers and a network of trauma psychologists. “Our system also provided emergency child care for staff, including hospitalists, wherever we could, drawing upon community resources,” Dr. Case added.
“We recognize that we’re all in the same foxhole. That’s been a helpful attitude – recognizing that it’s okay to be upset in a crisis and to have trouble dealing with what’s going on,” he said. “We need to acknowledge that some of us are suffering and try to encourage people to face it head on. For a lot of physicians, especially those who were redeployed here from other departments, it was important just to have us ask if they were doing okay.”
Brian Schroeder, MHA, FACHE, FHM, assistant vice president for hospital and emergency medicine for Atrium Health, based in Charlotte, N.C., said one of the biggest sources of stress on his staff has been the constant pace of change – whether local hospital protocols, state policies, or guidelines from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. “The updating is difficult to keep up with. A lot of our physicians get worried and anxious that they’re not following the latest guidelines or correctly doing what they should be doing to care for COVID patients. One thing we’ve done to alleviate some of that fear and anxiety is through weekly huddles with our hospital teams, focusing on changes relevant to their work. We also have weekly ‘all-hands’ meetings for our 250 providers across 13 acute and four postacute facilities.”
Before COVID, it was difficult to get everyone together as one big group from hospitals up to 5 hours apart, but with the Microsoft Teams platform, they can all meet together.
“At the height of the pandemic, we’d convene weekly and share national statistics, organizational statistics, testing updates, changes to protocols,” Mr. Schroeder said. As the pace of change has slowed, these meetings were cut back to monthly. “Our physicians feel we are passing on information as soon as we get it. They know we’ll always tell them what we know.”
Sarah Richards, MD, assistant professor of internal medicine at the University of Nebraska, Omaha, who heads the Society of Hospital Medicine’s Well-Being Task Force, formed to address staff stress in the COVID environment, said there are things that health care systems can do to help mitigate job stress and burnout. But broader issues may need to be addressed at a national level. “SHM is trying to understand work-related stress – and to identify resources that could support doctors, so they can spend more of their time doing what they enjoy most, which is taking care of patients,” she said.
“We also recognize that people have had very different experiences, depending on geography, and at the individual level stressors are experienced very differently,” Dr. Richard noted. “One of the most common stressors we’ve heard from doctors is the challenge of caring for patients who are lonely and isolated in their hospital rooms, suffering and dying in new ways. In low-incidence areas, doctors are expressing guilt because they aren’t under as much stress as their colleagues. In high-incidence areas, doctors are already experiencing posttraumatic stress disorder.”
SHM’s Well-Being Task Force is working on a tool to help normalize these stressors and encourage open conversations about mental health issues. A guide called “HM COVID Check-in Guide for Self & Peers” is designed to help hospitalists break the culture of silence around well-being and burnout during COVID-19 and how people are handling and processing the pandemic experience. It is expected to be completed later this year, Dr. Richards said. Other SHM projects and resources for staff support are also in the works.
The impact on women doctors
In a recent Journal of Hospital Medicine article entitled “Collateral Damage: How COVID-19 is Adversely Impacting Women Physicians,” hospitalist Yemisi Jones, MD, medical director of continuing medical education at Cincinnati Children’s Hospital Medical Center, and colleagues argue that preexisting gender inequities in compensation, academic rank and leadership positions for physicians have made the COVID-19 crisis even more burdensome on female hospitalists.1
“Increased childcare and schooling obligations, coupled with disproportionate household responsibilities and an inability to work from home, will likely result in female hospitalists struggling to meet family needs while pandemic-related work responsibilities are ramping up,” they write. COVID may intensify workplace inequalities, with a lack of recognition of the undue strain that group policies place on women.
“Often women suffer in silence,” said coauthor Jennifer O’Toole, MD, MEd, director of education in the division of hospital medicine at Cincinnati Children’s Hospital Medical Center and program director of the internal medicine–pediatrics residency. “We are not always the best self-advocates, although many of us are working on that.”
When women in hospital medicine take leadership roles, these often tend to involve mutual support activities, taking care of colleagues, and promoting collaborative work environments, Dr. Jones added. The stereotypical example is the committee that organizes celebrations when group members get married or have babies.
These activities can take a lot of time, she said. “We need to pay attention to that kind of role in our groups, because it’s important to the cohesiveness of the group. But it often goes unrecognized and doesn’t translate into the currency of promotion and leadership in medicine. When women go for promotions in the future, how will what happened during the COVID crisis impact their opportunities?”
What is the answer to overcoming these systemic inequities? Start with making sure women are part of the leadership team, with responsibilities for group policies, schedules, and other important decisions. “Look at your group’s leadership – particularly the higher positions. If it’s not diverse, ask why. ‘What is it about the structure of our group?’ Make a more concerted effort in your recruitment and retention,” Dr. Jones said.
The JHM article also recommends closely monitoring the direct and indirect effects of COVID-19 on female hospitalists, inquiring specifically about the needs of women in the organization, and ensuring that diversity, inclusion, and equity efforts are not suspended during the pandemic. Gender-based disparities in pay also need a closer look, and not just one time but reviewed periodically and adjusted accordingly.
Mentoring for early career women is important, but more so is sponsorship – someone in a high-level leadership role in the group sponsoring women who are rising up the career ladder, Dr. O’Toole said. “Professional women tend to be overmentored and undersponsored.”
What are the answers?
Ultimately, listening is key to try to help people get through the pandemic, Dr. Washburn said. “People become burned out when they feel leadership doesn’t understand their needs or doesn’t hear their concerns. Our group leaders all do clinical work, so they are seen as one of us. They try very hard; they have listening ears. But listening is just the first step. Next step is to work creatively to get the identified needs met.”
A few years ago, Johns Hopkins developed training in enhanced communication in health care for all hospital providers, including nurses and doctors, encouraging them to get trained in how to actively listen and address their patients’ emotional and social experiences as well as disease, Dr. Washburn explained. Learning how to listen better to patients can enhance skills at listening to colleagues, and vice versa. “We recognize the importance of better communication – for reducing sentinel events in the hospital and also for preventing staff burnout.”
Dr. Barnes also does physician coaching, and says a lot of that work is helping people achieve clarity on their core values. “Healing patients is a core identify for physicians; we want to take care of people. But other things can get in the way of that, and hospitalist groups can work at minimizing those barriers. We also need to learn, as hospitalists, that we work in a group. You need to be creative in how you do your team building, especially now, when you can no longer get together for dinner. Whatever it is, how do we bring our team back together? The biggest source of support for many hospitalists, beyond their family, is the group.”
Dr. Case said there is a longer-term need to study the root causes of burnout in hospitalists and to identify the issues that cause job stress. “What is modifiable? How can we tackle it? I see that as big part of my job every day. Being a physician is hard enough as it is. Let’s work to resolve those issues that add needlessly to the stress.”
“I think the pandemic brought a magnifying glass to how important a concern staff stress is,” Ms. Panek said. Resilience is important.
“We were working in our group on creating a culture that values trust and transparency, and then the COVID crisis hit,” she said. “But you can still keep working on those things. We would not have been as good or as positive as we were in managing this crisis without that preexisting culture to draw upon. We always said it was important. Now we know that’s true.”
Reference
1. Jones Y et al. Collateral Damage: How COVID-19 Is Adversely Impacting Women Physicians. J Hosp Med. 2020 August;15(8):507-9.
AMA discharge linked to increased readmissions, discontinuity of care
Background: AMA discharges are common (1%-2% of all U.S. discharges) and disproportionately affect vulnerable patient populations, specifically those of lower socioeconomic status and the uninsured. Previous studies have been insufficiently powered to assess the effects of AMA discharge on 30-day readmission rates at a national level.
Study design: Retrospective cohort.
Setting: Community and teaching hospitals in 22 states.
Synopsis: With use of the 2014 Nationwide Readmissions Database of 23,110,641 index hospitalizations of patients 18 years or older, this study found that AMA discharge occurred with 1.3% of admissions. AMA discharge was associated with greater than twice the odds of 30-day readmission, compared with routine discharge. Of patients discharged AMA, 20.2% had an unplanned readmission within 30 days, compared with 10.1% of patients discharged routinely (OR, 2.25; 95% CI, 2.20-2.30; P less than .001).
Patients who were discharged AMA had almost 20 times the odds of undergoing repeat AMA discharge at readmission (OR, 18.41; 95% CI, 17.46-19.41; P less than .001) and twice the odds of presenting to a different hospital (OR, 2.35; 95% CI, 2.22-2.49; P less than .001). The study did not capture readmissions in a different state than that of the index hospital and was limited to the 22 states participating in the 2014 Readmissions Database.
Bottom line: Discharge AMA is associated with significantly higher odds of 30-day readmission, subsequent AMA discharge and presentation to another hospital, compared with routine discharge.
Citation: Kumar N. Burden of 30-day readmissions associated with discharge against medical advice among inpatients in the United States. Am J Med. 2019 Jun;132(6):708-17.
Dr. Webber is a hospitalist at Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, Tenn.
Background: AMA discharges are common (1%-2% of all U.S. discharges) and disproportionately affect vulnerable patient populations, specifically those of lower socioeconomic status and the uninsured. Previous studies have been insufficiently powered to assess the effects of AMA discharge on 30-day readmission rates at a national level.
Study design: Retrospective cohort.
Setting: Community and teaching hospitals in 22 states.
Synopsis: With use of the 2014 Nationwide Readmissions Database of 23,110,641 index hospitalizations of patients 18 years or older, this study found that AMA discharge occurred with 1.3% of admissions. AMA discharge was associated with greater than twice the odds of 30-day readmission, compared with routine discharge. Of patients discharged AMA, 20.2% had an unplanned readmission within 30 days, compared with 10.1% of patients discharged routinely (OR, 2.25; 95% CI, 2.20-2.30; P less than .001).
Patients who were discharged AMA had almost 20 times the odds of undergoing repeat AMA discharge at readmission (OR, 18.41; 95% CI, 17.46-19.41; P less than .001) and twice the odds of presenting to a different hospital (OR, 2.35; 95% CI, 2.22-2.49; P less than .001). The study did not capture readmissions in a different state than that of the index hospital and was limited to the 22 states participating in the 2014 Readmissions Database.
Bottom line: Discharge AMA is associated with significantly higher odds of 30-day readmission, subsequent AMA discharge and presentation to another hospital, compared with routine discharge.
Citation: Kumar N. Burden of 30-day readmissions associated with discharge against medical advice among inpatients in the United States. Am J Med. 2019 Jun;132(6):708-17.
Dr. Webber is a hospitalist at Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, Tenn.
Background: AMA discharges are common (1%-2% of all U.S. discharges) and disproportionately affect vulnerable patient populations, specifically those of lower socioeconomic status and the uninsured. Previous studies have been insufficiently powered to assess the effects of AMA discharge on 30-day readmission rates at a national level.
Study design: Retrospective cohort.
Setting: Community and teaching hospitals in 22 states.
Synopsis: With use of the 2014 Nationwide Readmissions Database of 23,110,641 index hospitalizations of patients 18 years or older, this study found that AMA discharge occurred with 1.3% of admissions. AMA discharge was associated with greater than twice the odds of 30-day readmission, compared with routine discharge. Of patients discharged AMA, 20.2% had an unplanned readmission within 30 days, compared with 10.1% of patients discharged routinely (OR, 2.25; 95% CI, 2.20-2.30; P less than .001).
Patients who were discharged AMA had almost 20 times the odds of undergoing repeat AMA discharge at readmission (OR, 18.41; 95% CI, 17.46-19.41; P less than .001) and twice the odds of presenting to a different hospital (OR, 2.35; 95% CI, 2.22-2.49; P less than .001). The study did not capture readmissions in a different state than that of the index hospital and was limited to the 22 states participating in the 2014 Readmissions Database.
Bottom line: Discharge AMA is associated with significantly higher odds of 30-day readmission, subsequent AMA discharge and presentation to another hospital, compared with routine discharge.
Citation: Kumar N. Burden of 30-day readmissions associated with discharge against medical advice among inpatients in the United States. Am J Med. 2019 Jun;132(6):708-17.
Dr. Webber is a hospitalist at Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, Tenn.
Physician burnout costly to organizations and U.S. health system
Background: Occupational burnout is more prevalent among physicians than among the general population, and physician burnout is associated with several negative clinical outcomes. However, little is known about the economic cost of this widespread issue.
Study design: Cost-consequence analysis using a novel mathematical model.
Setting: Simulated population of U.S. physicians.
Synopsis: Researchers conducted a cost-consequence analysis using a mathematical model designed to determine the financial impact of burnout – or the difference in observed cost and the theoretical cost if physicians did not experience burnout. The model used a hypothetical physician population based on a 2013 profile of U.S. physicians, a 2014 survey of physicians that assessed burnout, and preexisting literature on burnout to generate the input data for their model. The investigators focused on two outcomes: turnover and reduction in clinical hours. They found that approximately $4.6 billion per year is lost in direct cost secondary to physician burnout, with the greatest proportion coming from physician turnover. The figure ranged from $2.6 billion to $6.3 billion in multivariate sensitivity analysis. For an organization, the cost of burnout is about $7,600 per physician per year, with a range of $4,100 to $10,200. Though statistical modeling can be imprecise, and the input data were imperfect, the study was the first to examine the systemwide cost of physician burnout in the United States.
Bottom line: Along with the negative effects on physician and patient well-being, physician burnout is financially costly to the U.S. health care system and to individual organizations. Programs to reduce burnout could be both ethically and economically advantageous.
Citation: Han S et al. Estimating the attributable cost of physician burnout in the United States. Ann Intern Med. 2019;170(11):784-90.
Dr. Suojanen is a hospitalist at Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, Tenn.
Background: Occupational burnout is more prevalent among physicians than among the general population, and physician burnout is associated with several negative clinical outcomes. However, little is known about the economic cost of this widespread issue.
Study design: Cost-consequence analysis using a novel mathematical model.
Setting: Simulated population of U.S. physicians.
Synopsis: Researchers conducted a cost-consequence analysis using a mathematical model designed to determine the financial impact of burnout – or the difference in observed cost and the theoretical cost if physicians did not experience burnout. The model used a hypothetical physician population based on a 2013 profile of U.S. physicians, a 2014 survey of physicians that assessed burnout, and preexisting literature on burnout to generate the input data for their model. The investigators focused on two outcomes: turnover and reduction in clinical hours. They found that approximately $4.6 billion per year is lost in direct cost secondary to physician burnout, with the greatest proportion coming from physician turnover. The figure ranged from $2.6 billion to $6.3 billion in multivariate sensitivity analysis. For an organization, the cost of burnout is about $7,600 per physician per year, with a range of $4,100 to $10,200. Though statistical modeling can be imprecise, and the input data were imperfect, the study was the first to examine the systemwide cost of physician burnout in the United States.
Bottom line: Along with the negative effects on physician and patient well-being, physician burnout is financially costly to the U.S. health care system and to individual organizations. Programs to reduce burnout could be both ethically and economically advantageous.
Citation: Han S et al. Estimating the attributable cost of physician burnout in the United States. Ann Intern Med. 2019;170(11):784-90.
Dr. Suojanen is a hospitalist at Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, Tenn.
Background: Occupational burnout is more prevalent among physicians than among the general population, and physician burnout is associated with several negative clinical outcomes. However, little is known about the economic cost of this widespread issue.
Study design: Cost-consequence analysis using a novel mathematical model.
Setting: Simulated population of U.S. physicians.
Synopsis: Researchers conducted a cost-consequence analysis using a mathematical model designed to determine the financial impact of burnout – or the difference in observed cost and the theoretical cost if physicians did not experience burnout. The model used a hypothetical physician population based on a 2013 profile of U.S. physicians, a 2014 survey of physicians that assessed burnout, and preexisting literature on burnout to generate the input data for their model. The investigators focused on two outcomes: turnover and reduction in clinical hours. They found that approximately $4.6 billion per year is lost in direct cost secondary to physician burnout, with the greatest proportion coming from physician turnover. The figure ranged from $2.6 billion to $6.3 billion in multivariate sensitivity analysis. For an organization, the cost of burnout is about $7,600 per physician per year, with a range of $4,100 to $10,200. Though statistical modeling can be imprecise, and the input data were imperfect, the study was the first to examine the systemwide cost of physician burnout in the United States.
Bottom line: Along with the negative effects on physician and patient well-being, physician burnout is financially costly to the U.S. health care system and to individual organizations. Programs to reduce burnout could be both ethically and economically advantageous.
Citation: Han S et al. Estimating the attributable cost of physician burnout in the United States. Ann Intern Med. 2019;170(11):784-90.
Dr. Suojanen is a hospitalist at Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, Tenn.
Hospitalists are natural leaders in the COVID-19 battle
Christopher Pribula, MD, a hospitalist at Sanford Broadway Medical Center in Fargo, N.D., didn’t anticipate becoming his hospital’s resident expert on COVID-19. Having just returned from vacation in March, he agreed to cover for a colleague on what would become the special care unit. “When our hospital medicine group decided that it would be the COVID unit, I just ran with it,” he said. Dr. Pribula spent the next 18 days doing 8- to 14-hour shifts and learning as much as he could as the hospital – and the nation – wrestled with the pandemic.
“Because I was the first hospitalist, along with our infectious disease specialist, Dr. Avish Nagpal, to really engage with the virus, people came to me with their questions,” Dr. Pribula said. Working to establish protocols for the care of COVID-19 patients involved a lot of planning, from nursing protocols to discharge planning.
Dr. Pribula was part of the hospital’s incident command structure, thought about how the system could scale up for a potential surge, and worked with the North Dakota Medical Association to reach out to outlying medical centers on safety and infection control. He even drew on his prior work experience as a medical technologist doing negative-pressure containment in a cell-processing facility to help create the hospital’s negative-pressure unit in an old ICU.
“We did a lot of communication from the start. To a certain extent we were making it up as we went along, but we sat down and huddled as a team every day at 9 and 4,” he explained. “We started out with observation and retrospective research, and learned piece by piece. But that’s how science works.”
Hospitalists across the country have played leading roles in their hospitals’ and health systems’ response to the pandemic, and not just because they are on the front lines providing patient care. Their job as doctors who work full-time in the hospital makes them natural leaders in improving clinical quality and hospital administrative protocols as well as studying the latest information and educating their colleagues. Responding to the pandemic has required lots of planning, careful attention to schedules and assignments and staff stress, and working with other departments in the hospital and groups in the community, including public health authorities.
Where is hospital treatment for COVID-19 at today?
As knowledge has grown, Dr. Pribula said, COVID-19 treatment in the hospital has come to incorporate remdesivir, a broad-spectrum antiviral; dexamethasone, a common steroid medication; and convalescent plasma, blood products from people who have recovered from the illness. “We went from no steroids to giving steroids. We went from putting patients on ventilators to avoid acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) initially to now working to avoid intubation at all costs,” he said.
“What we found is that we need to pressure-support these patients. We do proning and CPAP while we let the lungs heal. By the time they arrive at the hospital, more often than not they’re on the backside of the viral load. But now we’re dealing with the body’s inflammatory response.”
Navneet Attri, MD, a hospitalist at Sutter Santa Rosa Regional Hospital in Santa Rosa, Calif., 50 miles north of San Francisco, experienced fears and uncertainties working at a hospital that treated early COVID patients from the Grand Princess cruise ship. Early on, she wrote a post describing her experience for The Hospitalist Leader, the Society of Hospital Medicine’s blog page.
Dr. Attri said she has gone through the gamut of emotions while caring for COVID-19 patients, addressing their fears and trying to support family members who aren’t allowed to enter the hospital to be at their loved one’s side. Sometimes, patient after patient with COVID-19 becomes almost too much. But seeing a lot of them in the intervening 6 months has increased her confidence level.
Understanding of how the disease is spread has continued to evolve, with a recent return to focusing on airborne transmission, she said. Frontline workers need N95 masks and eye shields, even if all of that PPE feels like a burden. Dr. Attri said she hardly notices the PPE anymore. “Putting it on is just a habit.”
She sits on Sonoma County’s COVID-19 surge planning group, which has representatives from the three local hospitals, the public health department, and other community agencies. “I report back to my hospitalist group about the situation in the community. Because our facilities were well prepared, our hospitals have not been overwhelmed,” she said.
The importance of teamwork
Sunil Shah, MD, a hospitalist with Northwell Health’s Southside Hospital in Bay Shore, N.Y., is part of the massive hospital medicine team, including reassigned specialists and volunteers from across the country, deployed at Northwell hospitals in Greater New York City and Long Island during the COVID-19 surge. Northwell probably has cared for more COVID-19 patients than any other health system in the country, and at the height of the surge the intensity of hospital care was like nothing he’s ever seen. But he also expressed gratitude that doctors from other parts of the country were willing to come and help out.
Southside Hospital went almost overnight from a 200-bed acute facility to a full, 350-bed, regional COVID-19–only hospital. “On busy days, our entire hospital was like a floating ICU,” he said. “You’d hear ‘rapid response’ or ‘code blue’ over the intercom every few seconds. Normally we’d have a designated rapid response person for the day, but with COVID, everybody stepped in to help – whoever was closest,” he said.
Majid Sheikh, MD, a hospitalist at Emory University Hospital in Atlanta, also became a go-to COVID-19 expert for his group. “I didn’t specifically volunteer, but my partner and I had the first cases, and the leadership group was happy to have us there,” he explained.
“One interesting thing I learned was the concept of the ‘happy’ hypoxemic patient, who is having a significant drop in oxygen saturation without developing any obvious signs of respiratory distress,” he said. “We’d be checking the accuracy of the reading and trying to figure out if it was real.” Emory was also one of the leaders in studying anticoagulant treatments for COVID-19 patients.
“Six months later I would say we’re definitely getting better outcomes on the floor, and our COVID patients aren’t landing in the ICU as easily,” Dr. Sheikh said. “It was scary at first, and doubly scary when doctors sometimes don’t feel they can say, ‘Hey, I’m scared too,’ or ‘By the way, I really don’t know what I’m doing.’ So, we’d be trying to reassure the patients when the information was coming to us in fragments.”
But he also believes that the pandemic has afforded hospitalists the opportunity to be the clinical detectives they were trained to be, sifting through clues. “I had to think more and really pay attention clinically in a much different way. You could say it was exciting and scary at the same time,” he said.
A human fix in the hospital
Dr. Pribula agreed that the pandemic has been both a difficult experience and a rewarding one. “I think of the people I first admitted. If they had shown up even a month later, would they still be with us?” He believes that his group and his field are going to get to a place where they have solid treatment plans for how to provide optimal care and how to protect providers from exposure.
One of the first COVID-19 patients in Fargo had dementia and was very distressed. “She had no idea why nobody was visiting or why we wouldn’t let her out of her room,” Dr. Pribula said. “Instead of reaching for sedatives, one of our nurses went into the room and talked with her, prayed a rosary, and played two hands of cards with her and didn’t have to sedate her. That’s what people need when they’re alone and scared. It wasn’t a medical fix but a human fix.”
A version of this article originally appeared on Medscape.com.
Christopher Pribula, MD, a hospitalist at Sanford Broadway Medical Center in Fargo, N.D., didn’t anticipate becoming his hospital’s resident expert on COVID-19. Having just returned from vacation in March, he agreed to cover for a colleague on what would become the special care unit. “When our hospital medicine group decided that it would be the COVID unit, I just ran with it,” he said. Dr. Pribula spent the next 18 days doing 8- to 14-hour shifts and learning as much as he could as the hospital – and the nation – wrestled with the pandemic.
“Because I was the first hospitalist, along with our infectious disease specialist, Dr. Avish Nagpal, to really engage with the virus, people came to me with their questions,” Dr. Pribula said. Working to establish protocols for the care of COVID-19 patients involved a lot of planning, from nursing protocols to discharge planning.
Dr. Pribula was part of the hospital’s incident command structure, thought about how the system could scale up for a potential surge, and worked with the North Dakota Medical Association to reach out to outlying medical centers on safety and infection control. He even drew on his prior work experience as a medical technologist doing negative-pressure containment in a cell-processing facility to help create the hospital’s negative-pressure unit in an old ICU.
“We did a lot of communication from the start. To a certain extent we were making it up as we went along, but we sat down and huddled as a team every day at 9 and 4,” he explained. “We started out with observation and retrospective research, and learned piece by piece. But that’s how science works.”
Hospitalists across the country have played leading roles in their hospitals’ and health systems’ response to the pandemic, and not just because they are on the front lines providing patient care. Their job as doctors who work full-time in the hospital makes them natural leaders in improving clinical quality and hospital administrative protocols as well as studying the latest information and educating their colleagues. Responding to the pandemic has required lots of planning, careful attention to schedules and assignments and staff stress, and working with other departments in the hospital and groups in the community, including public health authorities.
Where is hospital treatment for COVID-19 at today?
As knowledge has grown, Dr. Pribula said, COVID-19 treatment in the hospital has come to incorporate remdesivir, a broad-spectrum antiviral; dexamethasone, a common steroid medication; and convalescent plasma, blood products from people who have recovered from the illness. “We went from no steroids to giving steroids. We went from putting patients on ventilators to avoid acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) initially to now working to avoid intubation at all costs,” he said.
“What we found is that we need to pressure-support these patients. We do proning and CPAP while we let the lungs heal. By the time they arrive at the hospital, more often than not they’re on the backside of the viral load. But now we’re dealing with the body’s inflammatory response.”
Navneet Attri, MD, a hospitalist at Sutter Santa Rosa Regional Hospital in Santa Rosa, Calif., 50 miles north of San Francisco, experienced fears and uncertainties working at a hospital that treated early COVID patients from the Grand Princess cruise ship. Early on, she wrote a post describing her experience for The Hospitalist Leader, the Society of Hospital Medicine’s blog page.
Dr. Attri said she has gone through the gamut of emotions while caring for COVID-19 patients, addressing their fears and trying to support family members who aren’t allowed to enter the hospital to be at their loved one’s side. Sometimes, patient after patient with COVID-19 becomes almost too much. But seeing a lot of them in the intervening 6 months has increased her confidence level.
Understanding of how the disease is spread has continued to evolve, with a recent return to focusing on airborne transmission, she said. Frontline workers need N95 masks and eye shields, even if all of that PPE feels like a burden. Dr. Attri said she hardly notices the PPE anymore. “Putting it on is just a habit.”
She sits on Sonoma County’s COVID-19 surge planning group, which has representatives from the three local hospitals, the public health department, and other community agencies. “I report back to my hospitalist group about the situation in the community. Because our facilities were well prepared, our hospitals have not been overwhelmed,” she said.
The importance of teamwork
Sunil Shah, MD, a hospitalist with Northwell Health’s Southside Hospital in Bay Shore, N.Y., is part of the massive hospital medicine team, including reassigned specialists and volunteers from across the country, deployed at Northwell hospitals in Greater New York City and Long Island during the COVID-19 surge. Northwell probably has cared for more COVID-19 patients than any other health system in the country, and at the height of the surge the intensity of hospital care was like nothing he’s ever seen. But he also expressed gratitude that doctors from other parts of the country were willing to come and help out.
Southside Hospital went almost overnight from a 200-bed acute facility to a full, 350-bed, regional COVID-19–only hospital. “On busy days, our entire hospital was like a floating ICU,” he said. “You’d hear ‘rapid response’ or ‘code blue’ over the intercom every few seconds. Normally we’d have a designated rapid response person for the day, but with COVID, everybody stepped in to help – whoever was closest,” he said.
Majid Sheikh, MD, a hospitalist at Emory University Hospital in Atlanta, also became a go-to COVID-19 expert for his group. “I didn’t specifically volunteer, but my partner and I had the first cases, and the leadership group was happy to have us there,” he explained.
“One interesting thing I learned was the concept of the ‘happy’ hypoxemic patient, who is having a significant drop in oxygen saturation without developing any obvious signs of respiratory distress,” he said. “We’d be checking the accuracy of the reading and trying to figure out if it was real.” Emory was also one of the leaders in studying anticoagulant treatments for COVID-19 patients.
“Six months later I would say we’re definitely getting better outcomes on the floor, and our COVID patients aren’t landing in the ICU as easily,” Dr. Sheikh said. “It was scary at first, and doubly scary when doctors sometimes don’t feel they can say, ‘Hey, I’m scared too,’ or ‘By the way, I really don’t know what I’m doing.’ So, we’d be trying to reassure the patients when the information was coming to us in fragments.”
But he also believes that the pandemic has afforded hospitalists the opportunity to be the clinical detectives they were trained to be, sifting through clues. “I had to think more and really pay attention clinically in a much different way. You could say it was exciting and scary at the same time,” he said.
A human fix in the hospital
Dr. Pribula agreed that the pandemic has been both a difficult experience and a rewarding one. “I think of the people I first admitted. If they had shown up even a month later, would they still be with us?” He believes that his group and his field are going to get to a place where they have solid treatment plans for how to provide optimal care and how to protect providers from exposure.
One of the first COVID-19 patients in Fargo had dementia and was very distressed. “She had no idea why nobody was visiting or why we wouldn’t let her out of her room,” Dr. Pribula said. “Instead of reaching for sedatives, one of our nurses went into the room and talked with her, prayed a rosary, and played two hands of cards with her and didn’t have to sedate her. That’s what people need when they’re alone and scared. It wasn’t a medical fix but a human fix.”
A version of this article originally appeared on Medscape.com.
Christopher Pribula, MD, a hospitalist at Sanford Broadway Medical Center in Fargo, N.D., didn’t anticipate becoming his hospital’s resident expert on COVID-19. Having just returned from vacation in March, he agreed to cover for a colleague on what would become the special care unit. “When our hospital medicine group decided that it would be the COVID unit, I just ran with it,” he said. Dr. Pribula spent the next 18 days doing 8- to 14-hour shifts and learning as much as he could as the hospital – and the nation – wrestled with the pandemic.
“Because I was the first hospitalist, along with our infectious disease specialist, Dr. Avish Nagpal, to really engage with the virus, people came to me with their questions,” Dr. Pribula said. Working to establish protocols for the care of COVID-19 patients involved a lot of planning, from nursing protocols to discharge planning.
Dr. Pribula was part of the hospital’s incident command structure, thought about how the system could scale up for a potential surge, and worked with the North Dakota Medical Association to reach out to outlying medical centers on safety and infection control. He even drew on his prior work experience as a medical technologist doing negative-pressure containment in a cell-processing facility to help create the hospital’s negative-pressure unit in an old ICU.
“We did a lot of communication from the start. To a certain extent we were making it up as we went along, but we sat down and huddled as a team every day at 9 and 4,” he explained. “We started out with observation and retrospective research, and learned piece by piece. But that’s how science works.”
Hospitalists across the country have played leading roles in their hospitals’ and health systems’ response to the pandemic, and not just because they are on the front lines providing patient care. Their job as doctors who work full-time in the hospital makes them natural leaders in improving clinical quality and hospital administrative protocols as well as studying the latest information and educating their colleagues. Responding to the pandemic has required lots of planning, careful attention to schedules and assignments and staff stress, and working with other departments in the hospital and groups in the community, including public health authorities.
Where is hospital treatment for COVID-19 at today?
As knowledge has grown, Dr. Pribula said, COVID-19 treatment in the hospital has come to incorporate remdesivir, a broad-spectrum antiviral; dexamethasone, a common steroid medication; and convalescent plasma, blood products from people who have recovered from the illness. “We went from no steroids to giving steroids. We went from putting patients on ventilators to avoid acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) initially to now working to avoid intubation at all costs,” he said.
“What we found is that we need to pressure-support these patients. We do proning and CPAP while we let the lungs heal. By the time they arrive at the hospital, more often than not they’re on the backside of the viral load. But now we’re dealing with the body’s inflammatory response.”
Navneet Attri, MD, a hospitalist at Sutter Santa Rosa Regional Hospital in Santa Rosa, Calif., 50 miles north of San Francisco, experienced fears and uncertainties working at a hospital that treated early COVID patients from the Grand Princess cruise ship. Early on, she wrote a post describing her experience for The Hospitalist Leader, the Society of Hospital Medicine’s blog page.
Dr. Attri said she has gone through the gamut of emotions while caring for COVID-19 patients, addressing their fears and trying to support family members who aren’t allowed to enter the hospital to be at their loved one’s side. Sometimes, patient after patient with COVID-19 becomes almost too much. But seeing a lot of them in the intervening 6 months has increased her confidence level.
Understanding of how the disease is spread has continued to evolve, with a recent return to focusing on airborne transmission, she said. Frontline workers need N95 masks and eye shields, even if all of that PPE feels like a burden. Dr. Attri said she hardly notices the PPE anymore. “Putting it on is just a habit.”
She sits on Sonoma County’s COVID-19 surge planning group, which has representatives from the three local hospitals, the public health department, and other community agencies. “I report back to my hospitalist group about the situation in the community. Because our facilities were well prepared, our hospitals have not been overwhelmed,” she said.
The importance of teamwork
Sunil Shah, MD, a hospitalist with Northwell Health’s Southside Hospital in Bay Shore, N.Y., is part of the massive hospital medicine team, including reassigned specialists and volunteers from across the country, deployed at Northwell hospitals in Greater New York City and Long Island during the COVID-19 surge. Northwell probably has cared for more COVID-19 patients than any other health system in the country, and at the height of the surge the intensity of hospital care was like nothing he’s ever seen. But he also expressed gratitude that doctors from other parts of the country were willing to come and help out.
Southside Hospital went almost overnight from a 200-bed acute facility to a full, 350-bed, regional COVID-19–only hospital. “On busy days, our entire hospital was like a floating ICU,” he said. “You’d hear ‘rapid response’ or ‘code blue’ over the intercom every few seconds. Normally we’d have a designated rapid response person for the day, but with COVID, everybody stepped in to help – whoever was closest,” he said.
Majid Sheikh, MD, a hospitalist at Emory University Hospital in Atlanta, also became a go-to COVID-19 expert for his group. “I didn’t specifically volunteer, but my partner and I had the first cases, and the leadership group was happy to have us there,” he explained.
“One interesting thing I learned was the concept of the ‘happy’ hypoxemic patient, who is having a significant drop in oxygen saturation without developing any obvious signs of respiratory distress,” he said. “We’d be checking the accuracy of the reading and trying to figure out if it was real.” Emory was also one of the leaders in studying anticoagulant treatments for COVID-19 patients.
“Six months later I would say we’re definitely getting better outcomes on the floor, and our COVID patients aren’t landing in the ICU as easily,” Dr. Sheikh said. “It was scary at first, and doubly scary when doctors sometimes don’t feel they can say, ‘Hey, I’m scared too,’ or ‘By the way, I really don’t know what I’m doing.’ So, we’d be trying to reassure the patients when the information was coming to us in fragments.”
But he also believes that the pandemic has afforded hospitalists the opportunity to be the clinical detectives they were trained to be, sifting through clues. “I had to think more and really pay attention clinically in a much different way. You could say it was exciting and scary at the same time,” he said.
A human fix in the hospital
Dr. Pribula agreed that the pandemic has been both a difficult experience and a rewarding one. “I think of the people I first admitted. If they had shown up even a month later, would they still be with us?” He believes that his group and his field are going to get to a place where they have solid treatment plans for how to provide optimal care and how to protect providers from exposure.
One of the first COVID-19 patients in Fargo had dementia and was very distressed. “She had no idea why nobody was visiting or why we wouldn’t let her out of her room,” Dr. Pribula said. “Instead of reaching for sedatives, one of our nurses went into the room and talked with her, prayed a rosary, and played two hands of cards with her and didn’t have to sedate her. That’s what people need when they’re alone and scared. It wasn’t a medical fix but a human fix.”
A version of this article originally appeared on Medscape.com.