Quality

At some point in residency, we all learn that time management and multitasking are vital to ward efficiency; however, it is important to note that efficiency as a hospitalist is as much about providing high quality clinical care as it is about maximizing resources, reducing waste, and avoiding redundancy in the process.

This article examines the pre-rounding, rounding, and follow-up phases of a hospitalist’s typical workday and provides suggestions to help streamline your work—and enhance both personal and system efficiency.

Pre-Rounding

While most would agree that preparing for rounds is essential to making them effective, longer patient lists may lead to hours of pre-rounding. Often, by the time you get to the “rounding stage,” things change. To make this a more productive exercise, we recommend “focused pre-rounding,” which allows you to organize your efforts as follows:

• For overnight admissions, skim through such data as presenting complaint, relevant past medical history, exam, labs, and radiology, looking for any critical values or findings that may need immediate attention. As you prioritize your order of rounding, you are also familiarizing yourself with the cases, which will reassure your new patients.
• For patients who are already on service, do a quick review of any acute overnight events or important management needs. For example, you may have to follow up on a CT head for a patient who fell overnight or check fasting blood sugars to modify a diabetic ketoacidosis patient’s morning insulin dose. These are time-sensitive issues that may need your attention before you actually lay eyes on the patient.
• Prioritize visits and learn to manage patient expectations. Organize your patient visits based on the data gathered from pre-rounding. Seeing potential discharges first helps the hospital open up beds early and facilitates patient throughput. As appealing as early discharge is to any hospital administrator, those working in a teaching setting might argue that first priority should go to night float admissions that have not been “staffed” by an attending yet.

Barring urgent patient care issues, we would recommend that patients who are ready for discharge pending a face-to-face visit or a morning lab should be seen first. You can attend to the new admissions next. In contrast, there is no rush to see potential discharges undergoing a procedure such as an esophagogastroduodenoscopy or stress test. Furthermore, if your decision-making hinges on these test results, timing your visit so that it occurs after the procedure makes your rounding even more efficient. In these situations, informing the patient the evening prior to rounding that you will be visiting them late the next day is not only professionally courteous, but also goes a long way in managing their expectations and enhancing patient satisfaction.

Rounding (The Patient Encounter)

Be professional. Introduce yourself and, if necessary, explain your role as a hospitalist. Sit down when possible. Studies have shown that just the act of sitting makes patients feel that you are communicating better and spending more time with them. If you normally walk or talk quickly, try to slow down temporarily while in the room. The art is for you to be cognizant of the time while avoiding the appearance of impatience.

Engage the patient and/or family. Interact with patients in a way that makes them feel included in their care. For example, show patients X-rays or use diagrams to explain their disease pathophysiology or any upcoming procedures. We feel that even the less educated patient will have a better understanding of her illness when it’s less abstract and more visually defined.

Set reasonable expectations. The patient or family may have many questions during rounds. If time does not permit, especially when you are rounding with housestaff, it is more efficient to say, “We need to move on for now, but one of us will return later to discuss all of this in more depth.”

For particularly demanding patients and families, manage expectations by communicating honestly about your other patient care responsibilities, while still acknowledging their needs. In these situations, setting up a family meeting to discuss plans of care early in the hospital course can be very productive.

Integrate inter-professional care when possible: Rounding with a care coordinator or the patient’s nurse allows you to share clinical information and plans of care in real time. This can help minimize interruptions and pages later in the day, while enhancing patient safety by limiting communication failures.

Perform tasks “as you go.” Entering orders and calling urgent consults as you round not only provides timely medical care but, by limiting unfinished tasks, also reduces the chances of medical errors.

Post Rounds (Follow-Up Care and Planning)

Start discharge planning on day 1. As you gain experience, predicting patients’ hospital stays and anticipating their discharge needs becomes part of your hospitalist “sixth sense.” Obtaining timely therapy, social work, and case management consults is fundamental to your efficiency as a hospitalist. It is also prudent to keep patients and their families updated on discharge plans.

Delegate responsibilities when possible. Efficiency can be fueled by sharing your workload, especially non-clinical tasks such as obtaining occupational safety and health records, completing SNF forms, or scheduling follow-up appointments. Potential resources include ward secretaries, nurses, or, for more clinical tasks, housestaff, nurse practitioners, or physician assistants. The availability of this support varies substantially between institutions. Still, your goal should be to advocate for a collaborative work environment where support staff are expected to contribute to team efficiency and, by corollary, patient satisfaction.

Document succinctly and in a timely manner. Your notes should reflect the patient’s clinical progress and your thought process. You don’t need to import every detail that can be found elsewhere in the EHR, and you should refrain from long, cut and pasted notes that are often meaningless “note bloat.” Likewise, discharge summaries should be high quality informative documents that list key elements, including discharge diagnoses, discharge medications, follow-up appointments, procedures, and a brief hospital course. These are best done in real time or even the day before, when the case is fresh in your memory. Spending an extra 15 - 30 minutes on this important task is well worth it. Do not let records pile up!

“Run the list.” Among the million other things you’re doing all day, this quick end-of-the-day review of your patient list helps you prepare for the next day. It’s an opportunity to ready things for potential next day discharges, discontinue redundant lab testing, remove unnecessary Foley catheters and lines, and identify any medication order errors.

In Sum

Many personal habits can improve the quality and efficiency of patient care, and hospitalist efficiency is intimately related to system performance. As hospitalists, each one of us can enhance the system, whether we do so by facilitating patient throughput, improving communication, or utilizing resources in a cost-conscious manner. Volunteering to serve on information technology or quality assurance committees is also a “big picture” way of contributing. It is our hope that the tips in this article will have a qualitative impact on both your work habits and your organization’s performance, thereby improving patient care and, ultimately, your own career satisfaction.

Dr. Chandra is assistant professor of medicine at Case Western Reserve University and chief of the division of general internal medicine, University Hospitals Case Medical Center in Cleveland, Ohio. Dr. Donahue is assistant professor of medicine at the University of Massachusetts Medical School in Worcester. Dr. Smith is a hospitalist at Aurora Medical Center in Summit, Wis.

At some point in residency, we all learn that time management and multitasking are vital to ward efficiency; however, it is important to note that efficiency as a hospitalist is as much about providing high quality clinical care as it is about maximizing resources, reducing waste, and avoiding redundancy in the process.

This article examines the pre-rounding, rounding, and follow-up phases of a hospitalist’s typical workday and provides suggestions to help streamline your work—and enhance both personal and system efficiency.

Pre-Rounding

While most would agree that preparing for rounds is essential to making them effective, longer patient lists may lead to hours of pre-rounding. Often, by the time you get to the “rounding stage,” things change. To make this a more productive exercise, we recommend “focused pre-rounding,” which allows you to organize your efforts as follows:

• For overnight admissions, skim through such data as presenting complaint, relevant past medical history, exam, labs, and radiology, looking for any critical values or findings that may need immediate attention. As you prioritize your order of rounding, you are also familiarizing yourself with the cases, which will reassure your new patients.
• For patients who are already on service, do a quick review of any acute overnight events or important management needs. For example, you may have to follow up on a CT head for a patient who fell overnight or check fasting blood sugars to modify a diabetic ketoacidosis patient’s morning insulin dose. These are time-sensitive issues that may need your attention before you actually lay eyes on the patient.
• Prioritize visits and learn to manage patient expectations. Organize your patient visits based on the data gathered from pre-rounding. Seeing potential discharges first helps the hospital open up beds early and facilitates patient throughput. As appealing as early discharge is to any hospital administrator, those working in a teaching setting might argue that first priority should go to night float admissions that have not been “staffed” by an attending yet.

Barring urgent patient care issues, we would recommend that patients who are ready for discharge pending a face-to-face visit or a morning lab should be seen first. You can attend to the new admissions next. In contrast, there is no rush to see potential discharges undergoing a procedure such as an esophagogastroduodenoscopy or stress test. Furthermore, if your decision-making hinges on these test results, timing your visit so that it occurs after the procedure makes your rounding even more efficient. In these situations, informing the patient the evening prior to rounding that you will be visiting them late the next day is not only professionally courteous, but also goes a long way in managing their expectations and enhancing patient satisfaction.

Rounding (The Patient Encounter)

Be professional. Introduce yourself and, if necessary, explain your role as a hospitalist. Sit down when possible. Studies have shown that just the act of sitting makes patients feel that you are communicating better and spending more time with them. If you normally walk or talk quickly, try to slow down temporarily while in the room. The art is for you to be cognizant of the time while avoiding the appearance of impatience.

Engage the patient and/or family. Interact with patients in a way that makes them feel included in their care. For example, show patients X-rays or use diagrams to explain their disease pathophysiology or any upcoming procedures. We feel that even the less educated patient will have a better understanding of her illness when it’s less abstract and more visually defined.

Set reasonable expectations. The patient or family may have many questions during rounds. If time does not permit, especially when you are rounding with housestaff, it is more efficient to say, “We need to move on for now, but one of us will return later to discuss all of this in more depth.”

For particularly demanding patients and families, manage expectations by communicating honestly about your other patient care responsibilities, while still acknowledging their needs. In these situations, setting up a family meeting to discuss plans of care early in the hospital course can be very productive.

Integrate inter-professional care when possible: Rounding with a care coordinator or the patient’s nurse allows you to share clinical information and plans of care in real time. This can help minimize interruptions and pages later in the day, while enhancing patient safety by limiting communication failures.

Perform tasks “as you go.” Entering orders and calling urgent consults as you round not only provides timely medical care but, by limiting unfinished tasks, also reduces the chances of medical errors.

Post Rounds (Follow-Up Care and Planning)

Start discharge planning on day 1. As you gain experience, predicting patients’ hospital stays and anticipating their discharge needs becomes part of your hospitalist “sixth sense.” Obtaining timely therapy, social work, and case management consults is fundamental to your efficiency as a hospitalist. It is also prudent to keep patients and their families updated on discharge plans.

Delegate responsibilities when possible. Efficiency can be fueled by sharing your workload, especially non-clinical tasks such as obtaining occupational safety and health records, completing SNF forms, or scheduling follow-up appointments. Potential resources include ward secretaries, nurses, or, for more clinical tasks, housestaff, nurse practitioners, or physician assistants. The availability of this support varies substantially between institutions. Still, your goal should be to advocate for a collaborative work environment where support staff are expected to contribute to team efficiency and, by corollary, patient satisfaction.

Document succinctly and in a timely manner. Your notes should reflect the patient’s clinical progress and your thought process. You don’t need to import every detail that can be found elsewhere in the EHR, and you should refrain from long, cut and pasted notes that are often meaningless “note bloat.” Likewise, discharge summaries should be high quality informative documents that list key elements, including discharge diagnoses, discharge medications, follow-up appointments, procedures, and a brief hospital course. These are best done in real time or even the day before, when the case is fresh in your memory. Spending an extra 15 - 30 minutes on this important task is well worth it. Do not let records pile up!

“Run the list.” Among the million other things you’re doing all day, this quick end-of-the-day review of your patient list helps you prepare for the next day. It’s an opportunity to ready things for potential next day discharges, discontinue redundant lab testing, remove unnecessary Foley catheters and lines, and identify any medication order errors.

In Sum

Many personal habits can improve the quality and efficiency of patient care, and hospitalist efficiency is intimately related to system performance. As hospitalists, each one of us can enhance the system, whether we do so by facilitating patient throughput, improving communication, or utilizing resources in a cost-conscious manner. Volunteering to serve on information technology or quality assurance committees is also a “big picture” way of contributing. It is our hope that the tips in this article will have a qualitative impact on both your work habits and your organization’s performance, thereby improving patient care and, ultimately, your own career satisfaction.

Dr. Chandra is assistant professor of medicine at Case Western Reserve University and chief of the division of general internal medicine, University Hospitals Case Medical Center in Cleveland, Ohio. Dr. Donahue is assistant professor of medicine at the University of Massachusetts Medical School in Worcester. Dr. Smith is a hospitalist at Aurora Medical Center in Summit, Wis.

At some point in residency, we all learn that time management and multitasking are vital to ward efficiency; however, it is important to note that efficiency as a hospitalist is as much about providing high quality clinical care as it is about maximizing resources, reducing waste, and avoiding redundancy in the process.

This article examines the pre-rounding, rounding, and follow-up phases of a hospitalist’s typical workday and provides suggestions to help streamline your work—and enhance both personal and system efficiency.

Pre-Rounding

While most would agree that preparing for rounds is essential to making them effective, longer patient lists may lead to hours of pre-rounding. Often, by the time you get to the “rounding stage,” things change. To make this a more productive exercise, we recommend “focused pre-rounding,” which allows you to organize your efforts as follows:

• For overnight admissions, skim through such data as presenting complaint, relevant past medical history, exam, labs, and radiology, looking for any critical values or findings that may need immediate attention. As you prioritize your order of rounding, you are also familiarizing yourself with the cases, which will reassure your new patients.
• For patients who are already on service, do a quick review of any acute overnight events or important management needs. For example, you may have to follow up on a CT head for a patient who fell overnight or check fasting blood sugars to modify a diabetic ketoacidosis patient’s morning insulin dose. These are time-sensitive issues that may need your attention before you actually lay eyes on the patient.
• Prioritize visits and learn to manage patient expectations. Organize your patient visits based on the data gathered from pre-rounding. Seeing potential discharges first helps the hospital open up beds early and facilitates patient throughput. As appealing as early discharge is to any hospital administrator, those working in a teaching setting might argue that first priority should go to night float admissions that have not been “staffed” by an attending yet.

Barring urgent patient care issues, we would recommend that patients who are ready for discharge pending a face-to-face visit or a morning lab should be seen first. You can attend to the new admissions next. In contrast, there is no rush to see potential discharges undergoing a procedure such as an esophagogastroduodenoscopy or stress test. Furthermore, if your decision-making hinges on these test results, timing your visit so that it occurs after the procedure makes your rounding even more efficient. In these situations, informing the patient the evening prior to rounding that you will be visiting them late the next day is not only professionally courteous, but also goes a long way in managing their expectations and enhancing patient satisfaction.

Rounding (The Patient Encounter)

Be professional. Introduce yourself and, if necessary, explain your role as a hospitalist. Sit down when possible. Studies have shown that just the act of sitting makes patients feel that you are communicating better and spending more time with them. If you normally walk or talk quickly, try to slow down temporarily while in the room. The art is for you to be cognizant of the time while avoiding the appearance of impatience.

Engage the patient and/or family. Interact with patients in a way that makes them feel included in their care. For example, show patients X-rays or use diagrams to explain their disease pathophysiology or any upcoming procedures. We feel that even the less educated patient will have a better understanding of her illness when it’s less abstract and more visually defined.

Set reasonable expectations. The patient or family may have many questions during rounds. If time does not permit, especially when you are rounding with housestaff, it is more efficient to say, “We need to move on for now, but one of us will return later to discuss all of this in more depth.”

For particularly demanding patients and families, manage expectations by communicating honestly about your other patient care responsibilities, while still acknowledging their needs. In these situations, setting up a family meeting to discuss plans of care early in the hospital course can be very productive.

Integrate inter-professional care when possible: Rounding with a care coordinator or the patient’s nurse allows you to share clinical information and plans of care in real time. This can help minimize interruptions and pages later in the day, while enhancing patient safety by limiting communication failures.

Perform tasks “as you go.” Entering orders and calling urgent consults as you round not only provides timely medical care but, by limiting unfinished tasks, also reduces the chances of medical errors.

Post Rounds (Follow-Up Care and Planning)

Start discharge planning on day 1. As you gain experience, predicting patients’ hospital stays and anticipating their discharge needs becomes part of your hospitalist “sixth sense.” Obtaining timely therapy, social work, and case management consults is fundamental to your efficiency as a hospitalist. It is also prudent to keep patients and their families updated on discharge plans.

Delegate responsibilities when possible. Efficiency can be fueled by sharing your workload, especially non-clinical tasks such as obtaining occupational safety and health records, completing SNF forms, or scheduling follow-up appointments. Potential resources include ward secretaries, nurses, or, for more clinical tasks, housestaff, nurse practitioners, or physician assistants. The availability of this support varies substantially between institutions. Still, your goal should be to advocate for a collaborative work environment where support staff are expected to contribute to team efficiency and, by corollary, patient satisfaction.

Document succinctly and in a timely manner. Your notes should reflect the patient’s clinical progress and your thought process. You don’t need to import every detail that can be found elsewhere in the EHR, and you should refrain from long, cut and pasted notes that are often meaningless “note bloat.” Likewise, discharge summaries should be high quality informative documents that list key elements, including discharge diagnoses, discharge medications, follow-up appointments, procedures, and a brief hospital course. These are best done in real time or even the day before, when the case is fresh in your memory. Spending an extra 15 - 30 minutes on this important task is well worth it. Do not let records pile up!

“Run the list.” Among the million other things you’re doing all day, this quick end-of-the-day review of your patient list helps you prepare for the next day. It’s an opportunity to ready things for potential next day discharges, discontinue redundant lab testing, remove unnecessary Foley catheters and lines, and identify any medication order errors.

In Sum

Many personal habits can improve the quality and efficiency of patient care, and hospitalist efficiency is intimately related to system performance. As hospitalists, each one of us can enhance the system, whether we do so by facilitating patient throughput, improving communication, or utilizing resources in a cost-conscious manner. Volunteering to serve on information technology or quality assurance committees is also a “big picture” way of contributing. It is our hope that the tips in this article will have a qualitative impact on both your work habits and your organization’s performance, thereby improving patient care and, ultimately, your own career satisfaction.

Dr. Chandra is assistant professor of medicine at Case Western Reserve University and chief of the division of general internal medicine, University Hospitals Case Medical Center in Cleveland, Ohio. Dr. Donahue is assistant professor of medicine at the University of Massachusetts Medical School in Worcester. Dr. Smith is a hospitalist at Aurora Medical Center in Summit, Wis.

Dear Ms. Bernstein:

I’m writing this letter to let you know about some of the things happening in hospital medicine, to ensure we are always improving the care we provide.

While we talked on New Year’s Eve, you reluctantly told me that you and many of your friends were not happy with the move toward hospital care being provided by hospitalists, rather than the PCP you know. I didn’t respond because we were having a nice lunch and I didn’t want to distract you from praising my kids and talking about your grandbaby and her sibling on the way. So I thought I’d respond by writing this open letter to you on the chance it might also be thought provoking for some of my hospitalist colleagues.

I think your reluctance to share with me the unflattering opinion you and many of your friends have of the hospitalist model of care stemmed from a desire not to offend me rather than any uncertainty in your conclusion. It isn’t difficult to find others, both healthcare providers and consumers, who share your opinion.

As I’ve told you before, outside of my own parents, you and Mr. B. are among the people who had the most influence on my upbringing, and your opinion still matters to me. So I’m writing this hoping to change your view, at least a little.

Updated Numbers of Hospitalists

Our field is now larger than many other specialties, and we are experiencing ever-increasing pressure to “get it right.” A 2012 survey of hospitals conducted by the American Hospital Association found more than 38,000 doctors who identify themselves as hospitalists. This number has been increasing rapidly for more than a decade. The Society of Hospital Medicine (SHM) estimates that the number has grown to more than 44,000 in 2014, and that there are hospitalists in 72% of U.S. hospitals—90% at hospitals with over 200 beds. In 1996, there were fewer than 1,000 hospitalists.

The rapid growth in our field has brought challenges, and we’re lucky to have attracted many dedicated and talented people who are helping all of us make strides to do better, both by providing better technical care (e.g. ensuring careful assessments and ordering the best tests and treatments) and by doing so in a way that ensures patients and their families are highly satisfied.

Tools to Support Ongoing Improvements in Hospitalist Practice

There are many outlets hospitalists can turn to for education on essentially any aspect of their practice. Several years ago, the SHM published “The Core Competencies in Hospital Medicine: A Framework for Curriculum Development,” a publication that continues to be valuable in guiding hospitalists’ professional scope of clinical skills as well as educational curricula for training programs and continuing education. SHM and other organizations generate a great deal of educational content for hospitalists, which is available in many forms, including in-person conferences, webinars, and written materials. And there are several scientific journals that have significant content for hospitalists, including SHM’s own Journal of Hospital Medicine.

Our field encourages and recognizes ongoing commitment to hospitalists’ growth and development in a number of ways. When it is time for a doctor to renew his/her board certification, the American Board of Internal Medicine (ABIM) offers the option to pursue “Focused Practice in Hospital Medicine.” And SHM’s designation of Fellow, Senior Fellow and Master in Hospital Medicine recognizes those who have “demonstrated a commitment to hospital medicine, system change, and quality improvement principles.” Many in our field have achieved one or both of these distinctions, and countless others are pursuing them now.

Through its foundation, the ABIM developed a campaign known as “Choosing Wisely” to “promote conversations between physicians and patients by helping patients choose care that is: supported by evidence, not duplicative of other tests or procedures already received, free from harm, and truly necessary.” SHM joined in this effort by developing separate criteria for hospitalists who care for adults or children.

New Tool Encourages High Performance

In February, an SHM workgroup published “The Key Principles and Characteristics of an Effective Hospital Medicine Group: An Assessment Guide for Hospitals and Hospitalists,” a document meant to serve as a road map for hospitalist groups to follow to improve their performance. I’m particularly interested in this, since I have spent much of my career thinking about and working with hospitalist groups to improve the way they perform, and I helped develop the characteristics and co-authored the document. But the real value of the document comes from the input of hundreds of people within and outside of SHM who provided thoughtful advice and feedback to identify those attributes of hospitalist groups that are most likely to ensure success.

The document describes 47 characteristics grouped into 10 different categories (“principles”). Some of the principles that you as a patient might be most interested in are ones specifying that a hospitalist group:

— Implements a practice model that is patient- and family-centered, is team-based, and emphasizes care coordination and effective communication.

— Supports care coordination across care settings; and

— Plays a leadership role in addressing key clinical issues in the hospital and/or health system: teaching, quality, safety, efficiency, and the patient/family experience.

Current State of Hospital Medicine

If you’ve had a less than satisfactory experience with care by a hospitalist, the things I’ve described here might not improve your opinion of hospitalists, or that of your friends. But maybe you can take some measure of comfort in knowing that our field as a whole is working hard to continuously improve all aspects of what we do. We’re serious about being good at what we do.

And, since this is published in a magazine read by hospitalists, maybe some of them will be reminded of the many ways our field encourages, supports, and recognizes their professional development.

Dr. Nelson has been a practicing hospitalist since 1988. He is co-founder and past president of SHM, and principal in Nelson Flores Hospital Medicine Consultants. He is co-director for SHM’s “Best Practices in Managing a Hospital Medicine Program” course. Write to him at [email protected].

Dear Ms. Bernstein:

I’m writing this letter to let you know about some of the things happening in hospital medicine, to ensure we are always improving the care we provide.

While we talked on New Year’s Eve, you reluctantly told me that you and many of your friends were not happy with the move toward hospital care being provided by hospitalists, rather than the PCP you know. I didn’t respond because we were having a nice lunch and I didn’t want to distract you from praising my kids and talking about your grandbaby and her sibling on the way. So I thought I’d respond by writing this open letter to you on the chance it might also be thought provoking for some of my hospitalist colleagues.

I think your reluctance to share with me the unflattering opinion you and many of your friends have of the hospitalist model of care stemmed from a desire not to offend me rather than any uncertainty in your conclusion. It isn’t difficult to find others, both healthcare providers and consumers, who share your opinion.

As I’ve told you before, outside of my own parents, you and Mr. B. are among the people who had the most influence on my upbringing, and your opinion still matters to me. So I’m writing this hoping to change your view, at least a little.

Updated Numbers of Hospitalists

Our field is now larger than many other specialties, and we are experiencing ever-increasing pressure to “get it right.” A 2012 survey of hospitals conducted by the American Hospital Association found more than 38,000 doctors who identify themselves as hospitalists. This number has been increasing rapidly for more than a decade. The Society of Hospital Medicine (SHM) estimates that the number has grown to more than 44,000 in 2014, and that there are hospitalists in 72% of U.S. hospitals—90% at hospitals with over 200 beds. In 1996, there were fewer than 1,000 hospitalists.

The rapid growth in our field has brought challenges, and we’re lucky to have attracted many dedicated and talented people who are helping all of us make strides to do better, both by providing better technical care (e.g. ensuring careful assessments and ordering the best tests and treatments) and by doing so in a way that ensures patients and their families are highly satisfied.

Tools to Support Ongoing Improvements in Hospitalist Practice

There are many outlets hospitalists can turn to for education on essentially any aspect of their practice. Several years ago, the SHM published “The Core Competencies in Hospital Medicine: A Framework for Curriculum Development,” a publication that continues to be valuable in guiding hospitalists’ professional scope of clinical skills as well as educational curricula for training programs and continuing education. SHM and other organizations generate a great deal of educational content for hospitalists, which is available in many forms, including in-person conferences, webinars, and written materials. And there are several scientific journals that have significant content for hospitalists, including SHM’s own Journal of Hospital Medicine.

Our field encourages and recognizes ongoing commitment to hospitalists’ growth and development in a number of ways. When it is time for a doctor to renew his/her board certification, the American Board of Internal Medicine (ABIM) offers the option to pursue “Focused Practice in Hospital Medicine.” And SHM’s designation of Fellow, Senior Fellow and Master in Hospital Medicine recognizes those who have “demonstrated a commitment to hospital medicine, system change, and quality improvement principles.” Many in our field have achieved one or both of these distinctions, and countless others are pursuing them now.

Through its foundation, the ABIM developed a campaign known as “Choosing Wisely” to “promote conversations between physicians and patients by helping patients choose care that is: supported by evidence, not duplicative of other tests or procedures already received, free from harm, and truly necessary.” SHM joined in this effort by developing separate criteria for hospitalists who care for adults or children.

New Tool Encourages High Performance

In February, an SHM workgroup published “The Key Principles and Characteristics of an Effective Hospital Medicine Group: An Assessment Guide for Hospitals and Hospitalists,” a document meant to serve as a road map for hospitalist groups to follow to improve their performance. I’m particularly interested in this, since I have spent much of my career thinking about and working with hospitalist groups to improve the way they perform, and I helped develop the characteristics and co-authored the document. But the real value of the document comes from the input of hundreds of people within and outside of SHM who provided thoughtful advice and feedback to identify those attributes of hospitalist groups that are most likely to ensure success.

The document describes 47 characteristics grouped into 10 different categories (“principles”). Some of the principles that you as a patient might be most interested in are ones specifying that a hospitalist group:

— Implements a practice model that is patient- and family-centered, is team-based, and emphasizes care coordination and effective communication.

— Supports care coordination across care settings; and

— Plays a leadership role in addressing key clinical issues in the hospital and/or health system: teaching, quality, safety, efficiency, and the patient/family experience.

Current State of Hospital Medicine

If you’ve had a less than satisfactory experience with care by a hospitalist, the things I’ve described here might not improve your opinion of hospitalists, or that of your friends. But maybe you can take some measure of comfort in knowing that our field as a whole is working hard to continuously improve all aspects of what we do. We’re serious about being good at what we do.

And, since this is published in a magazine read by hospitalists, maybe some of them will be reminded of the many ways our field encourages, supports, and recognizes their professional development.

Dr. Nelson has been a practicing hospitalist since 1988. He is co-founder and past president of SHM, and principal in Nelson Flores Hospital Medicine Consultants. He is co-director for SHM’s “Best Practices in Managing a Hospital Medicine Program” course. Write to him at [email protected].

Dear Ms. Bernstein:

I’m writing this letter to let you know about some of the things happening in hospital medicine, to ensure we are always improving the care we provide.

While we talked on New Year’s Eve, you reluctantly told me that you and many of your friends were not happy with the move toward hospital care being provided by hospitalists, rather than the PCP you know. I didn’t respond because we were having a nice lunch and I didn’t want to distract you from praising my kids and talking about your grandbaby and her sibling on the way. So I thought I’d respond by writing this open letter to you on the chance it might also be thought provoking for some of my hospitalist colleagues.

I think your reluctance to share with me the unflattering opinion you and many of your friends have of the hospitalist model of care stemmed from a desire not to offend me rather than any uncertainty in your conclusion. It isn’t difficult to find others, both healthcare providers and consumers, who share your opinion.

As I’ve told you before, outside of my own parents, you and Mr. B. are among the people who had the most influence on my upbringing, and your opinion still matters to me. So I’m writing this hoping to change your view, at least a little.

Updated Numbers of Hospitalists

Our field is now larger than many other specialties, and we are experiencing ever-increasing pressure to “get it right.” A 2012 survey of hospitals conducted by the American Hospital Association found more than 38,000 doctors who identify themselves as hospitalists. This number has been increasing rapidly for more than a decade. The Society of Hospital Medicine (SHM) estimates that the number has grown to more than 44,000 in 2014, and that there are hospitalists in 72% of U.S. hospitals—90% at hospitals with over 200 beds. In 1996, there were fewer than 1,000 hospitalists.

The rapid growth in our field has brought challenges, and we’re lucky to have attracted many dedicated and talented people who are helping all of us make strides to do better, both by providing better technical care (e.g. ensuring careful assessments and ordering the best tests and treatments) and by doing so in a way that ensures patients and their families are highly satisfied.

Tools to Support Ongoing Improvements in Hospitalist Practice

There are many outlets hospitalists can turn to for education on essentially any aspect of their practice. Several years ago, the SHM published “The Core Competencies in Hospital Medicine: A Framework for Curriculum Development,” a publication that continues to be valuable in guiding hospitalists’ professional scope of clinical skills as well as educational curricula for training programs and continuing education. SHM and other organizations generate a great deal of educational content for hospitalists, which is available in many forms, including in-person conferences, webinars, and written materials. And there are several scientific journals that have significant content for hospitalists, including SHM’s own Journal of Hospital Medicine.

Our field encourages and recognizes ongoing commitment to hospitalists’ growth and development in a number of ways. When it is time for a doctor to renew his/her board certification, the American Board of Internal Medicine (ABIM) offers the option to pursue “Focused Practice in Hospital Medicine.” And SHM’s designation of Fellow, Senior Fellow and Master in Hospital Medicine recognizes those who have “demonstrated a commitment to hospital medicine, system change, and quality improvement principles.” Many in our field have achieved one or both of these distinctions, and countless others are pursuing them now.

Through its foundation, the ABIM developed a campaign known as “Choosing Wisely” to “promote conversations between physicians and patients by helping patients choose care that is: supported by evidence, not duplicative of other tests or procedures already received, free from harm, and truly necessary.” SHM joined in this effort by developing separate criteria for hospitalists who care for adults or children.

New Tool Encourages High Performance

In February, an SHM workgroup published “The Key Principles and Characteristics of an Effective Hospital Medicine Group: An Assessment Guide for Hospitals and Hospitalists,” a document meant to serve as a road map for hospitalist groups to follow to improve their performance. I’m particularly interested in this, since I have spent much of my career thinking about and working with hospitalist groups to improve the way they perform, and I helped develop the characteristics and co-authored the document. But the real value of the document comes from the input of hundreds of people within and outside of SHM who provided thoughtful advice and feedback to identify those attributes of hospitalist groups that are most likely to ensure success.

The document describes 47 characteristics grouped into 10 different categories (“principles”). Some of the principles that you as a patient might be most interested in are ones specifying that a hospitalist group:

— Implements a practice model that is patient- and family-centered, is team-based, and emphasizes care coordination and effective communication.

— Supports care coordination across care settings; and

— Plays a leadership role in addressing key clinical issues in the hospital and/or health system: teaching, quality, safety, efficiency, and the patient/family experience.

Current State of Hospital Medicine

If you’ve had a less than satisfactory experience with care by a hospitalist, the things I’ve described here might not improve your opinion of hospitalists, or that of your friends. But maybe you can take some measure of comfort in knowing that our field as a whole is working hard to continuously improve all aspects of what we do. We’re serious about being good at what we do.

And, since this is published in a magazine read by hospitalists, maybe some of them will be reminded of the many ways our field encourages, supports, and recognizes their professional development.

Dr. Nelson has been a practicing hospitalist since 1988. He is co-founder and past president of SHM, and principal in Nelson Flores Hospital Medicine Consultants. He is co-director for SHM’s “Best Practices in Managing a Hospital Medicine Program” course. Write to him at [email protected].

There has been a fair amount of media coverage lately about “medical deserts.”¹ What exactly is a medical desert, and how big of a problem do they pose for hospital medicine? Wikipedia defines a desert as “a barren area of land where little precipitation occurs and consequently living conditions are hostile for plant and animal life.”² There are definitely areas in the U.S., both urban and rural, lacking adequate emergency and inpatient medical care.

Based on the latest American Hospital Association (AHA) statistics, there are still >5,700 registered hospitals in the U.S. with almost one million staffed beds combined, which accommodate >36 million admissions every year.³ However, of all U.S. hospitals, only about 35% are located in rural areas, and these tend to be the ones most likely affected by declining reimbursements and tight operating margins.¹

Here is some evidence:

— A recent study in the Annals of Emergency Medicine found that only half of the population in the state of Pennsylvania had access to appropriate care within 60 minutes for four time-sensitive conditions (i.e., STEMI, stroke, septic shock, and cardiac arrest).⁴

— Another study from the Office of Rural Health Policy estimates that approximately 20% of all residential areas do not have rapid access to an acute care medical facility.¹

— A recent online story about medical deserts described the devastating case of an 18-month-old girl who died of asphyxiation when a grape became lodged in her throat; their local county’s only hospital with an emergency room had closed months earlier, leaving the closest ED more than 20 miles away.¹ This particular hospital, Shelby Regional Medical Center, was a 54-bed hospital in Center, Texas, which suddenly closed in July 2013 amid allegations of fraud from CMS. In addition, a nearby 49-bed Texas hospital (Renaissance Hospital Groves), owned and operated by the same company, had closed in May 2013.

But the list of hospital closures in the past year goes on:

• Lakeside Memorial Hospital in Brockport, N.Y. (61-bed hospital);
• Earl K. Long Medical Center in Baton Rouge, La. (116-bed hospital);
• Stewart-Webster Hospital in Richland, Ga. (25-bed, critical access hospital);
• Calhoun Memorial Hospital in Arlington, Ga. (85-bed hospital);
• Charlton Memorial Hospital in Folkston, Ga. (25-bed hospital);
• The Los Angeles-based Pacific Health Corporation closed all four of its hospitals in California: Anaheim General Hospital (142 beds), Bellflower Medical Center (142 beds), Los Angeles Metropolitan Medical Center (212 beds), and Newport Specialty Hospital (177 beds).

As the CEO of Calhoun Memorial Hospital stated at the closure of his hospital: “It’s a sad day for the community it’s just a sign of the times.”⁵

Staff, Service Reductions

These hospital closures do not even start to address the nearly ubiquitous reductions in staff and services that many hospitals are resorting to, including workforce reductions experienced by many high-profile academic medical centers like Wake Forest, Denver Health, Emory Health, and Vanderbilt University Medical Centers. According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, hospitals cut 4,400 jobs in July 2013 alone, while the U.S. overall added 162,000 jobs.¹

These acute medical care deserts are primarily a result of declining reimbursements from Medicare and Medicaid, combined with a lack of newly insured Americans, a group that was expected to increase at a much faster pace than it has. The introduction of high-dollar withholds tethered to pay-for-performance programs, such as value-based purchasing and readmission reduction penalties, has also contributed to the financial instability in some hospitals.

In addition, the reduction in disproportionate share hospital (DSH) payments has occurred long before any substantial increase in funded patients through the Affordable Care Act health exchanges. Particularly hard-hit are hospitals in the states that have still elected not to expand Medicaid (primarily in the Southeast and Midwest). And forecasters have every reason to believe that these medical deserts will expand, unless limping hospitals are merged and/or acquired by larger hospital systems.

Should You Be Concerned?

These statistics probably should raise some concern for hospitalists and hospital medicine groups, as the number of hospital-employed physicians is already relatively high (26% according to a recent survey) and rises every year, including an increase of 6% from 2012 to 2013 alone.⁶ In order to survive in these tenuous conditions, healthcare systems, including hospitalists, will have to be much more involved in the “spectrum of care,” including population health, as opposed to only being involved in discrete acute care episodes. There undoubtedly will be a heavy reliance on telemedicine, seamless electronic medical records, and alternative treatment settings to bridge the gap between medical oases and medical deserts. All of these acute medical care extensions will very likely involve hospitalists.

For the most part, as long as the specialty of hospital medicine keeps its ear to the ground on what is coming, ensuring that we can all be flexible and responsive in meeting the needs of the population we serve, our specialty will be prepped and ready for the “sign of the times.” That way, even when medical deserts do appear, they are not “hostile for life” but are reasonably connected to a suitable oasis.

Dr. Scheurer is a hospitalist and chief quality officer at the Medical University of South Carolina in Charleston. She is physician editor of The Hospitalist. Email her at [email protected].

References

1. Williams JP. What happens when a town’s only hospital shuts down? U.S. News and World Report online. November 8, 2013. Available at: http://health.usnews.com/health-news/hospital-of-tomorrow/articles/2013/11/08/what-happens-when-the-only-hospital-closes. Accessed March 5, 2014.
2. Wikipedia. Desert. Available at: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Desert. Accessed March 5, 2014.
3. American Hospital Association. Fast facts on U.S. hospitals. Available at: http://www.aha.org/research/rc/stat-studies/fast-facts.shtml. Accessed March 5, 2014.
4. Salhi RA, Edwards JM, Gaieski DF, Band RA, Abella BS, Carr BG. Access to Care for patients with time-sensitive conditions in Pennsylvania [published online ahead of print December 21, 2013]. Ann Emerg Med.
5. Parks JM. Calhoun Memorial Hospital shuts down. Albany Herald online. February 4, 2013. Available at: http://www.albanyherald.com/news/2013/feb/04/calhoun-memorial-hospital-shuts-down. Accessed March 5, 2014.
6. Vaidya A. Survey: number of hospital-employed physicians up 6%. Becker’s Hospital Review online. June 18, 2013. Available at: http://www.beckershospitalreview.com/hospital-physician-relationships/survey-number-of-hospital-employed-physicians-up-6.html. Accessed March 5, 2014.

There has been a fair amount of media coverage lately about “medical deserts.”¹ What exactly is a medical desert, and how big of a problem do they pose for hospital medicine? Wikipedia defines a desert as “a barren area of land where little precipitation occurs and consequently living conditions are hostile for plant and animal life.”² There are definitely areas in the U.S., both urban and rural, lacking adequate emergency and inpatient medical care.

Based on the latest American Hospital Association (AHA) statistics, there are still >5,700 registered hospitals in the U.S. with almost one million staffed beds combined, which accommodate >36 million admissions every year.³ However, of all U.S. hospitals, only about 35% are located in rural areas, and these tend to be the ones most likely affected by declining reimbursements and tight operating margins.¹

Here is some evidence:

— A recent study in the Annals of Emergency Medicine found that only half of the population in the state of Pennsylvania had access to appropriate care within 60 minutes for four time-sensitive conditions (i.e., STEMI, stroke, septic shock, and cardiac arrest).⁴

— Another study from the Office of Rural Health Policy estimates that approximately 20% of all residential areas do not have rapid access to an acute care medical facility.¹

— A recent online story about medical deserts described the devastating case of an 18-month-old girl who died of asphyxiation when a grape became lodged in her throat; their local county’s only hospital with an emergency room had closed months earlier, leaving the closest ED more than 20 miles away.¹ This particular hospital, Shelby Regional Medical Center, was a 54-bed hospital in Center, Texas, which suddenly closed in July 2013 amid allegations of fraud from CMS. In addition, a nearby 49-bed Texas hospital (Renaissance Hospital Groves), owned and operated by the same company, had closed in May 2013.

But the list of hospital closures in the past year goes on:

• Lakeside Memorial Hospital in Brockport, N.Y. (61-bed hospital);
• Earl K. Long Medical Center in Baton Rouge, La. (116-bed hospital);
• Stewart-Webster Hospital in Richland, Ga. (25-bed, critical access hospital);
• Calhoun Memorial Hospital in Arlington, Ga. (85-bed hospital);
• Charlton Memorial Hospital in Folkston, Ga. (25-bed hospital);
• The Los Angeles-based Pacific Health Corporation closed all four of its hospitals in California: Anaheim General Hospital (142 beds), Bellflower Medical Center (142 beds), Los Angeles Metropolitan Medical Center (212 beds), and Newport Specialty Hospital (177 beds).

As the CEO of Calhoun Memorial Hospital stated at the closure of his hospital: “It’s a sad day for the community it’s just a sign of the times.”⁵

Staff, Service Reductions

These hospital closures do not even start to address the nearly ubiquitous reductions in staff and services that many hospitals are resorting to, including workforce reductions experienced by many high-profile academic medical centers like Wake Forest, Denver Health, Emory Health, and Vanderbilt University Medical Centers. According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, hospitals cut 4,400 jobs in July 2013 alone, while the U.S. overall added 162,000 jobs.¹

These acute medical care deserts are primarily a result of declining reimbursements from Medicare and Medicaid, combined with a lack of newly insured Americans, a group that was expected to increase at a much faster pace than it has. The introduction of high-dollar withholds tethered to pay-for-performance programs, such as value-based purchasing and readmission reduction penalties, has also contributed to the financial instability in some hospitals.

In addition, the reduction in disproportionate share hospital (DSH) payments has occurred long before any substantial increase in funded patients through the Affordable Care Act health exchanges. Particularly hard-hit are hospitals in the states that have still elected not to expand Medicaid (primarily in the Southeast and Midwest). And forecasters have every reason to believe that these medical deserts will expand, unless limping hospitals are merged and/or acquired by larger hospital systems.

Should You Be Concerned?

These statistics probably should raise some concern for hospitalists and hospital medicine groups, as the number of hospital-employed physicians is already relatively high (26% according to a recent survey) and rises every year, including an increase of 6% from 2012 to 2013 alone.⁶ In order to survive in these tenuous conditions, healthcare systems, including hospitalists, will have to be much more involved in the “spectrum of care,” including population health, as opposed to only being involved in discrete acute care episodes. There undoubtedly will be a heavy reliance on telemedicine, seamless electronic medical records, and alternative treatment settings to bridge the gap between medical oases and medical deserts. All of these acute medical care extensions will very likely involve hospitalists.

For the most part, as long as the specialty of hospital medicine keeps its ear to the ground on what is coming, ensuring that we can all be flexible and responsive in meeting the needs of the population we serve, our specialty will be prepped and ready for the “sign of the times.” That way, even when medical deserts do appear, they are not “hostile for life” but are reasonably connected to a suitable oasis.

Dr. Scheurer is a hospitalist and chief quality officer at the Medical University of South Carolina in Charleston. She is physician editor of The Hospitalist. Email her at [email protected].

References

1. Williams JP. What happens when a town’s only hospital shuts down? U.S. News and World Report online. November 8, 2013. Available at: http://health.usnews.com/health-news/hospital-of-tomorrow/articles/2013/11/08/what-happens-when-the-only-hospital-closes. Accessed March 5, 2014.
2. Wikipedia. Desert. Available at: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Desert. Accessed March 5, 2014.
3. American Hospital Association. Fast facts on U.S. hospitals. Available at: http://www.aha.org/research/rc/stat-studies/fast-facts.shtml. Accessed March 5, 2014.
4. Salhi RA, Edwards JM, Gaieski DF, Band RA, Abella BS, Carr BG. Access to Care for patients with time-sensitive conditions in Pennsylvania [published online ahead of print December 21, 2013]. Ann Emerg Med.
5. Parks JM. Calhoun Memorial Hospital shuts down. Albany Herald online. February 4, 2013. Available at: http://www.albanyherald.com/news/2013/feb/04/calhoun-memorial-hospital-shuts-down. Accessed March 5, 2014.
6. Vaidya A. Survey: number of hospital-employed physicians up 6%. Becker’s Hospital Review online. June 18, 2013. Available at: http://www.beckershospitalreview.com/hospital-physician-relationships/survey-number-of-hospital-employed-physicians-up-6.html. Accessed March 5, 2014.

There has been a fair amount of media coverage lately about “medical deserts.”¹ What exactly is a medical desert, and how big of a problem do they pose for hospital medicine? Wikipedia defines a desert as “a barren area of land where little precipitation occurs and consequently living conditions are hostile for plant and animal life.”² There are definitely areas in the U.S., both urban and rural, lacking adequate emergency and inpatient medical care.

Based on the latest American Hospital Association (AHA) statistics, there are still >5,700 registered hospitals in the U.S. with almost one million staffed beds combined, which accommodate >36 million admissions every year.³ However, of all U.S. hospitals, only about 35% are located in rural areas, and these tend to be the ones most likely affected by declining reimbursements and tight operating margins.¹

Here is some evidence:

— A recent study in the Annals of Emergency Medicine found that only half of the population in the state of Pennsylvania had access to appropriate care within 60 minutes for four time-sensitive conditions (i.e., STEMI, stroke, septic shock, and cardiac arrest).⁴

— Another study from the Office of Rural Health Policy estimates that approximately 20% of all residential areas do not have rapid access to an acute care medical facility.¹

— A recent online story about medical deserts described the devastating case of an 18-month-old girl who died of asphyxiation when a grape became lodged in her throat; their local county’s only hospital with an emergency room had closed months earlier, leaving the closest ED more than 20 miles away.¹ This particular hospital, Shelby Regional Medical Center, was a 54-bed hospital in Center, Texas, which suddenly closed in July 2013 amid allegations of fraud from CMS. In addition, a nearby 49-bed Texas hospital (Renaissance Hospital Groves), owned and operated by the same company, had closed in May 2013.

But the list of hospital closures in the past year goes on:

• Lakeside Memorial Hospital in Brockport, N.Y. (61-bed hospital);
• Earl K. Long Medical Center in Baton Rouge, La. (116-bed hospital);
• Stewart-Webster Hospital in Richland, Ga. (25-bed, critical access hospital);
• Calhoun Memorial Hospital in Arlington, Ga. (85-bed hospital);
• Charlton Memorial Hospital in Folkston, Ga. (25-bed hospital);
• The Los Angeles-based Pacific Health Corporation closed all four of its hospitals in California: Anaheim General Hospital (142 beds), Bellflower Medical Center (142 beds), Los Angeles Metropolitan Medical Center (212 beds), and Newport Specialty Hospital (177 beds).

As the CEO of Calhoun Memorial Hospital stated at the closure of his hospital: “It’s a sad day for the community it’s just a sign of the times.”⁵

Staff, Service Reductions

These hospital closures do not even start to address the nearly ubiquitous reductions in staff and services that many hospitals are resorting to, including workforce reductions experienced by many high-profile academic medical centers like Wake Forest, Denver Health, Emory Health, and Vanderbilt University Medical Centers. According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, hospitals cut 4,400 jobs in July 2013 alone, while the U.S. overall added 162,000 jobs.¹

These acute medical care deserts are primarily a result of declining reimbursements from Medicare and Medicaid, combined with a lack of newly insured Americans, a group that was expected to increase at a much faster pace than it has. The introduction of high-dollar withholds tethered to pay-for-performance programs, such as value-based purchasing and readmission reduction penalties, has also contributed to the financial instability in some hospitals.

In addition, the reduction in disproportionate share hospital (DSH) payments has occurred long before any substantial increase in funded patients through the Affordable Care Act health exchanges. Particularly hard-hit are hospitals in the states that have still elected not to expand Medicaid (primarily in the Southeast and Midwest). And forecasters have every reason to believe that these medical deserts will expand, unless limping hospitals are merged and/or acquired by larger hospital systems.

Should You Be Concerned?

These statistics probably should raise some concern for hospitalists and hospital medicine groups, as the number of hospital-employed physicians is already relatively high (26% according to a recent survey) and rises every year, including an increase of 6% from 2012 to 2013 alone.⁶ In order to survive in these tenuous conditions, healthcare systems, including hospitalists, will have to be much more involved in the “spectrum of care,” including population health, as opposed to only being involved in discrete acute care episodes. There undoubtedly will be a heavy reliance on telemedicine, seamless electronic medical records, and alternative treatment settings to bridge the gap between medical oases and medical deserts. All of these acute medical care extensions will very likely involve hospitalists.

For the most part, as long as the specialty of hospital medicine keeps its ear to the ground on what is coming, ensuring that we can all be flexible and responsive in meeting the needs of the population we serve, our specialty will be prepped and ready for the “sign of the times.” That way, even when medical deserts do appear, they are not “hostile for life” but are reasonably connected to a suitable oasis.

Dr. Scheurer is a hospitalist and chief quality officer at the Medical University of South Carolina in Charleston. She is physician editor of The Hospitalist. Email her at [email protected].

References

1. Williams JP. What happens when a town’s only hospital shuts down? U.S. News and World Report online. November 8, 2013. Available at: http://health.usnews.com/health-news/hospital-of-tomorrow/articles/2013/11/08/what-happens-when-the-only-hospital-closes. Accessed March 5, 2014.
2. Wikipedia. Desert. Available at: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Desert. Accessed March 5, 2014.
3. American Hospital Association. Fast facts on U.S. hospitals. Available at: http://www.aha.org/research/rc/stat-studies/fast-facts.shtml. Accessed March 5, 2014.
4. Salhi RA, Edwards JM, Gaieski DF, Band RA, Abella BS, Carr BG. Access to Care for patients with time-sensitive conditions in Pennsylvania [published online ahead of print December 21, 2013]. Ann Emerg Med.
5. Parks JM. Calhoun Memorial Hospital shuts down. Albany Herald online. February 4, 2013. Available at: http://www.albanyherald.com/news/2013/feb/04/calhoun-memorial-hospital-shuts-down. Accessed March 5, 2014.
6. Vaidya A. Survey: number of hospital-employed physicians up 6%. Becker’s Hospital Review online. June 18, 2013. Available at: http://www.beckershospitalreview.com/hospital-physician-relationships/survey-number-of-hospital-employed-physicians-up-6.html. Accessed March 5, 2014.

Quality improvement education is no longer just an elective for trainees, which is why medical educators need the best possible knowledge and tools for teaching quality and safety. SHM and the Alliance for Academic Internal Medicine (AAIM) have teamed up to present the Quality and Safety Educators Academy, to be held May 1-3 in Tempe, Ariz.

There is still time to register. For more information, visit www.hospitalmedicine.org/qsea.

Quality improvement education is no longer just an elective for trainees, which is why medical educators need the best possible knowledge and tools for teaching quality and safety. SHM and the Alliance for Academic Internal Medicine (AAIM) have teamed up to present the Quality and Safety Educators Academy, to be held May 1-3 in Tempe, Ariz.

There is still time to register. For more information, visit www.hospitalmedicine.org/qsea.

Quality improvement education is no longer just an elective for trainees, which is why medical educators need the best possible knowledge and tools for teaching quality and safety. SHM and the Alliance for Academic Internal Medicine (AAIM) have teamed up to present the Quality and Safety Educators Academy, to be held May 1-3 in Tempe, Ariz.

There is still time to register. For more information, visit www.hospitalmedicine.org/qsea.

Many potential Project BOOST candidate sites apply, but not all are accepted into the program. What makes for a successful application? Ask one of the founding members of Project BOOST and a current mentor, Dr. Jeffrey Greenwald.

• A strong letter of support. Qualified candidates can demonstrate that the hospital’s leadership is already behind their interest to reduce readmission rates through a program like Project BOOST.
• Demonstrate the existing support of the team. Good applications show that it’s not just a good idea to a few people. Good Project BOOST candidates can illustrate that their hospital has an “institutional prioritization for transitions of care.”
• An honest assessment on organizing change. Project BOOST has helped high-performing sites and beginners alike, but a thoughtful assessment of your site’s prior experience in organizing change and process improvement helps program leaders better understand your needs.

Apply Now Project BOOST is accepting applications now through August 30. Visit www.hospitalmedicine.org/projectboost.

Many potential Project BOOST candidate sites apply, but not all are accepted into the program. What makes for a successful application? Ask one of the founding members of Project BOOST and a current mentor, Dr. Jeffrey Greenwald.

• A strong letter of support. Qualified candidates can demonstrate that the hospital’s leadership is already behind their interest to reduce readmission rates through a program like Project BOOST.
• Demonstrate the existing support of the team. Good applications show that it’s not just a good idea to a few people. Good Project BOOST candidates can illustrate that their hospital has an “institutional prioritization for transitions of care.”
• An honest assessment on organizing change. Project BOOST has helped high-performing sites and beginners alike, but a thoughtful assessment of your site’s prior experience in organizing change and process improvement helps program leaders better understand your needs.

Apply Now Project BOOST is accepting applications now through August 30. Visit www.hospitalmedicine.org/projectboost.

Many potential Project BOOST candidate sites apply, but not all are accepted into the program. What makes for a successful application? Ask one of the founding members of Project BOOST and a current mentor, Dr. Jeffrey Greenwald.

• A strong letter of support. Qualified candidates can demonstrate that the hospital’s leadership is already behind their interest to reduce readmission rates through a program like Project BOOST.
• Demonstrate the existing support of the team. Good applications show that it’s not just a good idea to a few people. Good Project BOOST candidates can illustrate that their hospital has an “institutional prioritization for transitions of care.”
• An honest assessment on organizing change. Project BOOST has helped high-performing sites and beginners alike, but a thoughtful assessment of your site’s prior experience in organizing change and process improvement helps program leaders better understand your needs.

Apply Now Project BOOST is accepting applications now through August 30. Visit www.hospitalmedicine.org/projectboost.

Change doesn’t always come easily to hospitals, but once a catalyst comes along, one positive change can set the stage for the next one—and the one after that. At least that’s the lesson from Houston Methodist Hospital (HMH) and their work with SHM’s Project BOOST, a yearlong, mentored implementation program designed to help hospitals nationwide reduce readmission rates.

As the saying goes, every journey begins with a single step. For hospitals ready to start their journey to reduce readmissions rates and tackle other quality improvement challenges, the first step is the application to Project BOOST, which is due at the end of August. Details on the application and fees are available at www.hospitalmedicine.org/boost.

At Houston Methodist Hospital—a hospital U.S. News & World Report ranked one of “America’s Best Hospitals” in a dozen specialties and designated as a magnet hospital for excellence in nursing—taking that first step toward reducing readmissions by applying to Project BOOST has been well worth it.

“I recommend Project BOOST enthusiastically and unequivocally. If implemented efficiently, it could result in a ‘win-win’ situation for patients, the hospital, and the healthcare providers,” says Manasi Kekan, MD, MS, FACP, who serves as HMH’s medical director. “As a hospitalist, at times, I have found it challenging to ration my times between patient contact and documentation to meet the goals set by the healthcare industry. Being involved in BOOST and watching tangible improvements for my patients has provided me with immense personal and professional gratification!”

In fact, Dr. Kekan and her team have been so pleased with the results, both quantitative and qualitative, from their participation in Project BOOST that they enrolled twice: first in 2012 and again in 2013. She cites the program’s adaptability “that would help us develop a higher quality discharge process for our patients.”

Like many fruitful journeys, though, this one did not find Dr. Kekan and the caregivers at HMH alone: They had a guide who made all the difference.

Change implementation can be difficult, says Houston Methodist’s Janice Finder, RN, MSN. “Everyone knows how they want to design the house, so to speak,” she says, “but if you have someone who has done it before and can lead and direct, it goes much smoother.”

That was the true value of their Project BOOST mentor, Jeffrey Greenwald, MD, SFHM, one of the founding developers of Project BOOST.

“Dr. Greenwald gave us great mentorship and guidance,” Finder says. “The guidance about leadership is essential. If you do not have full support and a person who has ‘been there, done that,’ it is hard to envision.”

From his perspective, Dr. Greenwald saw that HMH had many of the critical elements in place to be successful.

“They had a good set of experiences already. They had the will and leadership and skill on the ground in process improvement,” he says, calling HMH an “incredibly well-oiled machine” with buy-in from the kind of inter-professional team that can make Project BOOST a success.

Overall, Dr. Greenwald calls HMH a “good example of a hospital that has married Project BOOST with the hospital’s existing priorities.”

Other Project BOOST sites start at different levels, in terms of basic interventions and process improvement, Dr. Greenwald explains. Many are able to address more advanced challenges, like how to implement change across broader areas in the hospital, working with leadership, addressing political issues, and improving waning interest in groups.

Dr. Greenwald’s interest in mentorship of Project BOOST sites stems from his own experiences early on—and the need for mentors in quality improvement projects.

“I wish I would have had someone like that when I got started,” says Dr. Greenwald, who tries to fill that role for others now. “Hopefully, each group moves down the path of making sure they have the right stakeholders, the right communications styles and skills in how to look at data and work with front-end staff.”

While Project BOOST focuses teams on reducing readmissions rates, Dr. Kekan has found that the skills learned from Project BOOST have created a blueprint that is applicable to many other team-based challenges in the hospital.

“We describe BOOST as a patient-centric quality initiative that mainly helps improve care transitions and encourages patients to stay informed about their health, which, in turn, helps reduce readmissions,” she says. “BOOST can be used as a framework to enhance other disease-specific discharge initiatives, like CHF [congestive heart failure] and delirium.”

Still, the core elements of reducing readmission rates and making a qualitative impact on her, her team, and the hospital resonate the most with Dr. Kekan.

“Providing a good transition plan to our patients provides satisfaction like none other.”

Brendon Shank is SHM’s associate vice president of communications.

Change doesn’t always come easily to hospitals, but once a catalyst comes along, one positive change can set the stage for the next one—and the one after that. At least that’s the lesson from Houston Methodist Hospital (HMH) and their work with SHM’s Project BOOST, a yearlong, mentored implementation program designed to help hospitals nationwide reduce readmission rates.

As the saying goes, every journey begins with a single step. For hospitals ready to start their journey to reduce readmissions rates and tackle other quality improvement challenges, the first step is the application to Project BOOST, which is due at the end of August. Details on the application and fees are available at www.hospitalmedicine.org/boost.

At Houston Methodist Hospital—a hospital U.S. News & World Report ranked one of “America’s Best Hospitals” in a dozen specialties and designated as a magnet hospital for excellence in nursing—taking that first step toward reducing readmissions by applying to Project BOOST has been well worth it.

“I recommend Project BOOST enthusiastically and unequivocally. If implemented efficiently, it could result in a ‘win-win’ situation for patients, the hospital, and the healthcare providers,” says Manasi Kekan, MD, MS, FACP, who serves as HMH’s medical director. “As a hospitalist, at times, I have found it challenging to ration my times between patient contact and documentation to meet the goals set by the healthcare industry. Being involved in BOOST and watching tangible improvements for my patients has provided me with immense personal and professional gratification!”

In fact, Dr. Kekan and her team have been so pleased with the results, both quantitative and qualitative, from their participation in Project BOOST that they enrolled twice: first in 2012 and again in 2013. She cites the program’s adaptability “that would help us develop a higher quality discharge process for our patients.”

Like many fruitful journeys, though, this one did not find Dr. Kekan and the caregivers at HMH alone: They had a guide who made all the difference.

Change implementation can be difficult, says Houston Methodist’s Janice Finder, RN, MSN. “Everyone knows how they want to design the house, so to speak,” she says, “but if you have someone who has done it before and can lead and direct, it goes much smoother.”

That was the true value of their Project BOOST mentor, Jeffrey Greenwald, MD, SFHM, one of the founding developers of Project BOOST.

“Dr. Greenwald gave us great mentorship and guidance,” Finder says. “The guidance about leadership is essential. If you do not have full support and a person who has ‘been there, done that,’ it is hard to envision.”

From his perspective, Dr. Greenwald saw that HMH had many of the critical elements in place to be successful.

“They had a good set of experiences already. They had the will and leadership and skill on the ground in process improvement,” he says, calling HMH an “incredibly well-oiled machine” with buy-in from the kind of inter-professional team that can make Project BOOST a success.

Overall, Dr. Greenwald calls HMH a “good example of a hospital that has married Project BOOST with the hospital’s existing priorities.”

Other Project BOOST sites start at different levels, in terms of basic interventions and process improvement, Dr. Greenwald explains. Many are able to address more advanced challenges, like how to implement change across broader areas in the hospital, working with leadership, addressing political issues, and improving waning interest in groups.

Dr. Greenwald’s interest in mentorship of Project BOOST sites stems from his own experiences early on—and the need for mentors in quality improvement projects.

“I wish I would have had someone like that when I got started,” says Dr. Greenwald, who tries to fill that role for others now. “Hopefully, each group moves down the path of making sure they have the right stakeholders, the right communications styles and skills in how to look at data and work with front-end staff.”

While Project BOOST focuses teams on reducing readmissions rates, Dr. Kekan has found that the skills learned from Project BOOST have created a blueprint that is applicable to many other team-based challenges in the hospital.

“We describe BOOST as a patient-centric quality initiative that mainly helps improve care transitions and encourages patients to stay informed about their health, which, in turn, helps reduce readmissions,” she says. “BOOST can be used as a framework to enhance other disease-specific discharge initiatives, like CHF [congestive heart failure] and delirium.”

Still, the core elements of reducing readmission rates and making a qualitative impact on her, her team, and the hospital resonate the most with Dr. Kekan.

“Providing a good transition plan to our patients provides satisfaction like none other.”

Brendon Shank is SHM’s associate vice president of communications.

Change doesn’t always come easily to hospitals, but once a catalyst comes along, one positive change can set the stage for the next one—and the one after that. At least that’s the lesson from Houston Methodist Hospital (HMH) and their work with SHM’s Project BOOST, a yearlong, mentored implementation program designed to help hospitals nationwide reduce readmission rates.

As the saying goes, every journey begins with a single step. For hospitals ready to start their journey to reduce readmissions rates and tackle other quality improvement challenges, the first step is the application to Project BOOST, which is due at the end of August. Details on the application and fees are available at www.hospitalmedicine.org/boost.

At Houston Methodist Hospital—a hospital U.S. News & World Report ranked one of “America’s Best Hospitals” in a dozen specialties and designated as a magnet hospital for excellence in nursing—taking that first step toward reducing readmissions by applying to Project BOOST has been well worth it.

“I recommend Project BOOST enthusiastically and unequivocally. If implemented efficiently, it could result in a ‘win-win’ situation for patients, the hospital, and the healthcare providers,” says Manasi Kekan, MD, MS, FACP, who serves as HMH’s medical director. “As a hospitalist, at times, I have found it challenging to ration my times between patient contact and documentation to meet the goals set by the healthcare industry. Being involved in BOOST and watching tangible improvements for my patients has provided me with immense personal and professional gratification!”

In fact, Dr. Kekan and her team have been so pleased with the results, both quantitative and qualitative, from their participation in Project BOOST that they enrolled twice: first in 2012 and again in 2013. She cites the program’s adaptability “that would help us develop a higher quality discharge process for our patients.”

Like many fruitful journeys, though, this one did not find Dr. Kekan and the caregivers at HMH alone: They had a guide who made all the difference.

Change implementation can be difficult, says Houston Methodist’s Janice Finder, RN, MSN. “Everyone knows how they want to design the house, so to speak,” she says, “but if you have someone who has done it before and can lead and direct, it goes much smoother.”

That was the true value of their Project BOOST mentor, Jeffrey Greenwald, MD, SFHM, one of the founding developers of Project BOOST.

“Dr. Greenwald gave us great mentorship and guidance,” Finder says. “The guidance about leadership is essential. If you do not have full support and a person who has ‘been there, done that,’ it is hard to envision.”

From his perspective, Dr. Greenwald saw that HMH had many of the critical elements in place to be successful.

“They had a good set of experiences already. They had the will and leadership and skill on the ground in process improvement,” he says, calling HMH an “incredibly well-oiled machine” with buy-in from the kind of inter-professional team that can make Project BOOST a success.

Overall, Dr. Greenwald calls HMH a “good example of a hospital that has married Project BOOST with the hospital’s existing priorities.”

Other Project BOOST sites start at different levels, in terms of basic interventions and process improvement, Dr. Greenwald explains. Many are able to address more advanced challenges, like how to implement change across broader areas in the hospital, working with leadership, addressing political issues, and improving waning interest in groups.

Dr. Greenwald’s interest in mentorship of Project BOOST sites stems from his own experiences early on—and the need for mentors in quality improvement projects.

“I wish I would have had someone like that when I got started,” says Dr. Greenwald, who tries to fill that role for others now. “Hopefully, each group moves down the path of making sure they have the right stakeholders, the right communications styles and skills in how to look at data and work with front-end staff.”

While Project BOOST focuses teams on reducing readmissions rates, Dr. Kekan has found that the skills learned from Project BOOST have created a blueprint that is applicable to many other team-based challenges in the hospital.

“We describe BOOST as a patient-centric quality initiative that mainly helps improve care transitions and encourages patients to stay informed about their health, which, in turn, helps reduce readmissions,” she says. “BOOST can be used as a framework to enhance other disease-specific discharge initiatives, like CHF [congestive heart failure] and delirium.”

Still, the core elements of reducing readmission rates and making a qualitative impact on her, her team, and the hospital resonate the most with Dr. Kekan.

“Providing a good transition plan to our patients provides satisfaction like none other.”

Brendon Shank is SHM’s associate vice president of communications.

Concern about Copper’s Effectiveness in Preventing Hospital-Acquired Infections

As public knowledge about the benefits of antimicrobial copper touch surfaces in healthcare facilities continues to grow, questions about this tool naturally arise. Can this copper surface really continuously kill up to 83% of bacteria it comes in contact with? Can it really reduce patient infections by more than half? Can this metal really keep people safer? The answer is “yes,” as has been reported in the Journal of Infection Control, in Hospital Epidemiology, and in the Journal of Clinical Microbiology.

In his “Letter to the Editor (“Concern about Copper’s Effectiveness in Preventing Hospital-Acquired Infections,” November 2013), Dr. Rod Duraski voices cautions about human sensitivity to copper—noting that implanted copper-nickel alloy devices have the potential for severe allergic reactions; however, implanted devices are not part of the EPA-approved products list of antimicrobial copper and, therefore, are not being proposed for use in the fight against hospital infections. Although some patients might experience sensitivity to jewelry, zippers, or buttons, if made from nickel-containing copper alloys, these reactions will be the result of prolonged skin contact, and when removed, the sensitivity will dissipate. The touch-surface components proposed in Karen Appold’s story, “Copper,” (September 2013) come into very brief and intermittent contact with the skin. And, sensitivities are not life-threatening; hospital-acquired infections are.

In fact, three of the four major coin denominations (nickel, dime, quarter) are made from copper-nickel alloys. If these metals are suitable for the everyday exposure we all experience with coinage, they are just as safe when it comes to touch surface components in hospitals. In many instances, the benefits of copper outweigh the relative risk of a rash caused by nickel sensitivity.

Like any surface, copper alloys should be cleaned regularly—especially in hospitals. Copper alloys are compatible with all hospital grade cleaners and disinfectants when the cleaners are used according to manufacturer label instructions. But more importantly, the antimicrobial effect of this metal is not inhibited if the surfaces tarnish. In 2005, a study (www.antimicrobialcopper.com/media/69850/infectious_disease.pdf) found tarnish to be a non-issue when researchers tested the bacterial load on three separate copper alloys, all of which had developed tarnish over time. Additionally, manufacturers are offering components made from tarnish-resistant alloys.

—Harold Michels, PhD, senior vice president of technology and technical services, Copper Development Association, Inc.

Correction: April 4, 2014

A version of this article appeared in print in the April 2014 issue of The Hospitalist. Changes have since been made to the online article per the request of the author.

Concern about Copper’s Effectiveness in Preventing Hospital-Acquired Infections

As public knowledge about the benefits of antimicrobial copper touch surfaces in healthcare facilities continues to grow, questions about this tool naturally arise. Can this copper surface really continuously kill up to 83% of bacteria it comes in contact with? Can it really reduce patient infections by more than half? Can this metal really keep people safer? The answer is “yes,” as has been reported in the Journal of Infection Control, in Hospital Epidemiology, and in the Journal of Clinical Microbiology.

In his “Letter to the Editor (“Concern about Copper’s Effectiveness in Preventing Hospital-Acquired Infections,” November 2013), Dr. Rod Duraski voices cautions about human sensitivity to copper—noting that implanted copper-nickel alloy devices have the potential for severe allergic reactions; however, implanted devices are not part of the EPA-approved products list of antimicrobial copper and, therefore, are not being proposed for use in the fight against hospital infections. Although some patients might experience sensitivity to jewelry, zippers, or buttons, if made from nickel-containing copper alloys, these reactions will be the result of prolonged skin contact, and when removed, the sensitivity will dissipate. The touch-surface components proposed in Karen Appold’s story, “Copper,” (September 2013) come into very brief and intermittent contact with the skin. And, sensitivities are not life-threatening; hospital-acquired infections are.

In fact, three of the four major coin denominations (nickel, dime, quarter) are made from copper-nickel alloys. If these metals are suitable for the everyday exposure we all experience with coinage, they are just as safe when it comes to touch surface components in hospitals. In many instances, the benefits of copper outweigh the relative risk of a rash caused by nickel sensitivity.

Like any surface, copper alloys should be cleaned regularly—especially in hospitals. Copper alloys are compatible with all hospital grade cleaners and disinfectants when the cleaners are used according to manufacturer label instructions. But more importantly, the antimicrobial effect of this metal is not inhibited if the surfaces tarnish. In 2005, a study (www.antimicrobialcopper.com/media/69850/infectious_disease.pdf) found tarnish to be a non-issue when researchers tested the bacterial load on three separate copper alloys, all of which had developed tarnish over time. Additionally, manufacturers are offering components made from tarnish-resistant alloys.

—Harold Michels, PhD, senior vice president of technology and technical services, Copper Development Association, Inc.

Correction: April 4, 2014

A version of this article appeared in print in the April 2014 issue of The Hospitalist. Changes have since been made to the online article per the request of the author.

Concern about Copper’s Effectiveness in Preventing Hospital-Acquired Infections

As public knowledge about the benefits of antimicrobial copper touch surfaces in healthcare facilities continues to grow, questions about this tool naturally arise. Can this copper surface really continuously kill up to 83% of bacteria it comes in contact with? Can it really reduce patient infections by more than half? Can this metal really keep people safer? The answer is “yes,” as has been reported in the Journal of Infection Control, in Hospital Epidemiology, and in the Journal of Clinical Microbiology.

In his “Letter to the Editor (“Concern about Copper’s Effectiveness in Preventing Hospital-Acquired Infections,” November 2013), Dr. Rod Duraski voices cautions about human sensitivity to copper—noting that implanted copper-nickel alloy devices have the potential for severe allergic reactions; however, implanted devices are not part of the EPA-approved products list of antimicrobial copper and, therefore, are not being proposed for use in the fight against hospital infections. Although some patients might experience sensitivity to jewelry, zippers, or buttons, if made from nickel-containing copper alloys, these reactions will be the result of prolonged skin contact, and when removed, the sensitivity will dissipate. The touch-surface components proposed in Karen Appold’s story, “Copper,” (September 2013) come into very brief and intermittent contact with the skin. And, sensitivities are not life-threatening; hospital-acquired infections are.

In fact, three of the four major coin denominations (nickel, dime, quarter) are made from copper-nickel alloys. If these metals are suitable for the everyday exposure we all experience with coinage, they are just as safe when it comes to touch surface components in hospitals. In many instances, the benefits of copper outweigh the relative risk of a rash caused by nickel sensitivity.

Like any surface, copper alloys should be cleaned regularly—especially in hospitals. Copper alloys are compatible with all hospital grade cleaners and disinfectants when the cleaners are used according to manufacturer label instructions. But more importantly, the antimicrobial effect of this metal is not inhibited if the surfaces tarnish. In 2005, a study (www.antimicrobialcopper.com/media/69850/infectious_disease.pdf) found tarnish to be a non-issue when researchers tested the bacterial load on three separate copper alloys, all of which had developed tarnish over time. Additionally, manufacturers are offering components made from tarnish-resistant alloys.

—Harold Michels, PhD, senior vice president of technology and technical services, Copper Development Association, Inc.

Correction: April 4, 2014

A version of this article appeared in print in the April 2014 issue of The Hospitalist. Changes have since been made to the online article per the request of the author.

The American Hospital Association’s Health Research and Educational Trust (HRET) recently obtained a grant from the federal Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality to expand CUSP, the Comprehensive Unit-based Safety Program for reducing catheter-associated urinary tract infections (CAUTI) and other healthcare-associated infections, to nursing homes and skilled nursing facilities nationwide.

CUSP has posted a 40% reduction in central line-associated bloodstream infections (CLABSI) in 1,000 participating hospitals by providing education and support and an evidence-based protocol. The grant will be administered by HRET in partnership with others, including the University of Michigan Health System, the Association for Professionals in Infection Control and Epidemiology, and SHM.

Meanwhile, a study published in the American Journal of Infection Control found that rates of catheter-associated urinary tract infections in adult patients given urinary catheter placements dropped nationwide to 5.3% in 2010 from 9.4% in 2001.³ The retrospective analysis of data from the National Hospital Discharge Survey found that CAUTI-related mortality and associated length of hospital stay also declined during the same period.

Larry Beresford is a freelance writer in Alameda, Calif.

The American Hospital Association’s Health Research and Educational Trust (HRET) recently obtained a grant from the federal Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality to expand CUSP, the Comprehensive Unit-based Safety Program for reducing catheter-associated urinary tract infections (CAUTI) and other healthcare-associated infections, to nursing homes and skilled nursing facilities nationwide.

CUSP has posted a 40% reduction in central line-associated bloodstream infections (CLABSI) in 1,000 participating hospitals by providing education and support and an evidence-based protocol. The grant will be administered by HRET in partnership with others, including the University of Michigan Health System, the Association for Professionals in Infection Control and Epidemiology, and SHM.

Meanwhile, a study published in the American Journal of Infection Control found that rates of catheter-associated urinary tract infections in adult patients given urinary catheter placements dropped nationwide to 5.3% in 2010 from 9.4% in 2001.³ The retrospective analysis of data from the National Hospital Discharge Survey found that CAUTI-related mortality and associated length of hospital stay also declined during the same period.

Larry Beresford is a freelance writer in Alameda, Calif.

The American Hospital Association’s Health Research and Educational Trust (HRET) recently obtained a grant from the federal Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality to expand CUSP, the Comprehensive Unit-based Safety Program for reducing catheter-associated urinary tract infections (CAUTI) and other healthcare-associated infections, to nursing homes and skilled nursing facilities nationwide.

CUSP has posted a 40% reduction in central line-associated bloodstream infections (CLABSI) in 1,000 participating hospitals by providing education and support and an evidence-based protocol. The grant will be administered by HRET in partnership with others, including the University of Michigan Health System, the Association for Professionals in Infection Control and Epidemiology, and SHM.

Meanwhile, a study published in the American Journal of Infection Control found that rates of catheter-associated urinary tract infections in adult patients given urinary catheter placements dropped nationwide to 5.3% in 2010 from 9.4% in 2001.³ The retrospective analysis of data from the National Hospital Discharge Survey found that CAUTI-related mortality and associated length of hospital stay also declined during the same period.

Larry Beresford is a freelance writer in Alameda, Calif.

A recent article in the Journal of Internal Medicine draws a strong link between readmission rates and the degree to which patients are activated—possessing the knowledge, skills, and confidence to manage their own health post-discharge.² Co-author Judith Hibbard, DrPh, professor of health policy at the University of Oregon, is the lead inventor of the Patient Activation Measure (PAM), an eight-item tool that assigns patients to one of four levels of activation.

In a sample of 700 patients discharged from Boston Medical Center, those with the lowest levels of activation had 1.75 times the risk of 30-day readmissions, more ED visits, and greater utilization of health services, even after adjusting for severity of illness and demographics.

“Contrary to what some may assume, patients who demonstrate a lower level of activation do not fall into any specific racial, economic, or educational demographic,” Dr. Hibbard says, adding that providers should not expect to be able to reliably judge their patients’ ability to self-manage outside of the hospital. “We know that people who measure low tend to have little confidence in their ability to manage their own health. They feel overwhelmed, show poor problem-solving skills, don’t understand what professionals are telling them, and, as a result, may not pay close attention.”

Dr. Hibbard says higher activation scores reflect greater focus on personal health and the effort to monitor it—with more confidence.

The take-home message for hospitalists, she says, is to understand the importance of their patients’ activation level and to tailor interventions accordingly.

“Those with low activation may need more support,” such as post-discharge home visits instead of just a phone call. Low-activation patients should not be overwhelmed with information but should instead be given just a few prioritized key points, combined with the use of reinforcing communications techniques such as teach-back.

“Someone should sit with them and help negotiate their health behaviors,” she adds. “That’s how they get more activated. It doesn’t have to be a doctor going through these things. But just using the clinical lens to understand your patients is not enough.”

Larry Beresford is a freelance writer in Alameda, Calif.

A recent article in the Journal of Internal Medicine draws a strong link between readmission rates and the degree to which patients are activated—possessing the knowledge, skills, and confidence to manage their own health post-discharge.² Co-author Judith Hibbard, DrPh, professor of health policy at the University of Oregon, is the lead inventor of the Patient Activation Measure (PAM), an eight-item tool that assigns patients to one of four levels of activation.

In a sample of 700 patients discharged from Boston Medical Center, those with the lowest levels of activation had 1.75 times the risk of 30-day readmissions, more ED visits, and greater utilization of health services, even after adjusting for severity of illness and demographics.

“Contrary to what some may assume, patients who demonstrate a lower level of activation do not fall into any specific racial, economic, or educational demographic,” Dr. Hibbard says, adding that providers should not expect to be able to reliably judge their patients’ ability to self-manage outside of the hospital. “We know that people who measure low tend to have little confidence in their ability to manage their own health. They feel overwhelmed, show poor problem-solving skills, don’t understand what professionals are telling them, and, as a result, may not pay close attention.”

Dr. Hibbard says higher activation scores reflect greater focus on personal health and the effort to monitor it—with more confidence.

The take-home message for hospitalists, she says, is to understand the importance of their patients’ activation level and to tailor interventions accordingly.

“Those with low activation may need more support,” such as post-discharge home visits instead of just a phone call. Low-activation patients should not be overwhelmed with information but should instead be given just a few prioritized key points, combined with the use of reinforcing communications techniques such as teach-back.

“Someone should sit with them and help negotiate their health behaviors,” she adds. “That’s how they get more activated. It doesn’t have to be a doctor going through these things. But just using the clinical lens to understand your patients is not enough.”

Larry Beresford is a freelance writer in Alameda, Calif.

A recent article in the Journal of Internal Medicine draws a strong link between readmission rates and the degree to which patients are activated—possessing the knowledge, skills, and confidence to manage their own health post-discharge.² Co-author Judith Hibbard, DrPh, professor of health policy at the University of Oregon, is the lead inventor of the Patient Activation Measure (PAM), an eight-item tool that assigns patients to one of four levels of activation.

In a sample of 700 patients discharged from Boston Medical Center, those with the lowest levels of activation had 1.75 times the risk of 30-day readmissions, more ED visits, and greater utilization of health services, even after adjusting for severity of illness and demographics.

“Contrary to what some may assume, patients who demonstrate a lower level of activation do not fall into any specific racial, economic, or educational demographic,” Dr. Hibbard says, adding that providers should not expect to be able to reliably judge their patients’ ability to self-manage outside of the hospital. “We know that people who measure low tend to have little confidence in their ability to manage their own health. They feel overwhelmed, show poor problem-solving skills, don’t understand what professionals are telling them, and, as a result, may not pay close attention.”

Dr. Hibbard says higher activation scores reflect greater focus on personal health and the effort to monitor it—with more confidence.

The take-home message for hospitalists, she says, is to understand the importance of their patients’ activation level and to tailor interventions accordingly.

“Those with low activation may need more support,” such as post-discharge home visits instead of just a phone call. Low-activation patients should not be overwhelmed with information but should instead be given just a few prioritized key points, combined with the use of reinforcing communications techniques such as teach-back.

“Someone should sit with them and help negotiate their health behaviors,” she adds. “That’s how they get more activated. It doesn’t have to be a doctor going through these things. But just using the clinical lens to understand your patients is not enough.”

Larry Beresford is a freelance writer in Alameda, Calif.