Patient Safety

Smartphone use by hospitalists and other hospital staff is becoming ubiquitous, with a recent survey showing 72% of physicians using these devices at work.¹ At the same time, concerns are being raised about clinical distractions and threats to patient privacy, even while such benefits as rapid access to colleagues, medical references, and patient records are touted.

In a study published in the Journal of Hospital Medicine, Rachel Katz-Sidlow, MD, of the department of pediatrics at Jacobi Medical Center in Bronx, N.Y., and colleagues surveyed residents’ and attendings’ perceptions of the use of smartphones during inpatient rounds, both their own and observed behaviors of colleagues.² Fifty-seven percent of residents and 28% of faculty reported using smartphones during inpatient rounds, while significantly higher percentages observed other team members doing so.

The most common smartphone uses were for patient care, but doctors also use them to read and reply to personal texts and emails, as well as for non-patient-care-related Web searches. The authors observe that smartphones “introduce another source of interruption, multitasking, and distraction into the hospital environment,” with potential negative consequences.

Nineteen percent of residents believed they had missed important clinical information because of smartphone distraction during rounds. After seeing the survey results, Jacobi Medical Center instituted a smartphone policy in February 2012, essentially requiring personal mobile communication devices to be silenced at the start of rounds, except for patient care communication or urgent family matters, Dr. Katz-Sidlow wrote in an email to the The Hospitalist.

Confirmation of the spread of communication technology in the hospital toward smartphones and away from traditional pagers comes from data presented at the American Academy of Pediatrics conference in New Orleans in October by Stephanie Kuhlmann, MD, pediatric hospitalist at the University of Kansas at Wichita.³ Dr. Kuhlmann conducted an electronic survey of pediatric hospitalists, with 60% reporting that they receive work-related text messages. Twelve percent sent more than 10 text messages per shift, while 40% expressed concern about HIPAA violations. Most text messages are not encrypted, and many hospitals have yet to implement appropriately secure programs and policies, Dr. Kuhlmann says.

“Hospitals need to be aware of this trend and need to find a way to secure these text messages,” she adds.

Another recent survey by the Orem, Utah-based firm KLAS Research found that while 70% of clinicians report using smartphones or tablets to look up electronic patient records, they are less likely to input information into the EHR on these devices because of the difficulty of entering data on their small screens.⁴

References

1. Dolan B. 72 percent of US physicians use smartphones. Mobi Health News website. Available at: http://mobihealthnews.com/7505/72-percent-of-us-physicians-use-smartphones/. Accessed Dec. 8, 2012.
2. Katz-Sidlow RJ, Ludwig A, Millers S, Sidlow R. Smartphone use during inpatient attending rounds: prevalence, patterns and potential for distraction. J Hosp Med. 2012;7(8):595-599.
3. Miller NS. Text messages are a growing trend among pediatric hospitalists. Pediatric News Digital Network website. Available at: http://www.pediatricnews.com/news/top-news/single-article/text-messages-are-a-growing-trend-among-pediatric-hospitalists/3dabf7208c75c44d36f368a83221d320.html. Accessed Nov. 1, 2012.
4. Westerlind E. Mobile healthcare applications: can enterprise vendors keep up? KLAS website. Available at: http://www.klasresearch.com/KLASreports. Accessed Dec. 8, 2012.

Smartphone use by hospitalists and other hospital staff is becoming ubiquitous, with a recent survey showing 72% of physicians using these devices at work.¹ At the same time, concerns are being raised about clinical distractions and threats to patient privacy, even while such benefits as rapid access to colleagues, medical references, and patient records are touted.

In a study published in the Journal of Hospital Medicine, Rachel Katz-Sidlow, MD, of the department of pediatrics at Jacobi Medical Center in Bronx, N.Y., and colleagues surveyed residents’ and attendings’ perceptions of the use of smartphones during inpatient rounds, both their own and observed behaviors of colleagues.² Fifty-seven percent of residents and 28% of faculty reported using smartphones during inpatient rounds, while significantly higher percentages observed other team members doing so.

The most common smartphone uses were for patient care, but doctors also use them to read and reply to personal texts and emails, as well as for non-patient-care-related Web searches. The authors observe that smartphones “introduce another source of interruption, multitasking, and distraction into the hospital environment,” with potential negative consequences.

Nineteen percent of residents believed they had missed important clinical information because of smartphone distraction during rounds. After seeing the survey results, Jacobi Medical Center instituted a smartphone policy in February 2012, essentially requiring personal mobile communication devices to be silenced at the start of rounds, except for patient care communication or urgent family matters, Dr. Katz-Sidlow wrote in an email to the The Hospitalist.

Confirmation of the spread of communication technology in the hospital toward smartphones and away from traditional pagers comes from data presented at the American Academy of Pediatrics conference in New Orleans in October by Stephanie Kuhlmann, MD, pediatric hospitalist at the University of Kansas at Wichita.³ Dr. Kuhlmann conducted an electronic survey of pediatric hospitalists, with 60% reporting that they receive work-related text messages. Twelve percent sent more than 10 text messages per shift, while 40% expressed concern about HIPAA violations. Most text messages are not encrypted, and many hospitals have yet to implement appropriately secure programs and policies, Dr. Kuhlmann says.

“Hospitals need to be aware of this trend and need to find a way to secure these text messages,” she adds.

Another recent survey by the Orem, Utah-based firm KLAS Research found that while 70% of clinicians report using smartphones or tablets to look up electronic patient records, they are less likely to input information into the EHR on these devices because of the difficulty of entering data on their small screens.⁴

References

1. Dolan B. 72 percent of US physicians use smartphones. Mobi Health News website. Available at: http://mobihealthnews.com/7505/72-percent-of-us-physicians-use-smartphones/. Accessed Dec. 8, 2012.
2. Katz-Sidlow RJ, Ludwig A, Millers S, Sidlow R. Smartphone use during inpatient attending rounds: prevalence, patterns and potential for distraction. J Hosp Med. 2012;7(8):595-599.
3. Miller NS. Text messages are a growing trend among pediatric hospitalists. Pediatric News Digital Network website. Available at: http://www.pediatricnews.com/news/top-news/single-article/text-messages-are-a-growing-trend-among-pediatric-hospitalists/3dabf7208c75c44d36f368a83221d320.html. Accessed Nov. 1, 2012.
4. Westerlind E. Mobile healthcare applications: can enterprise vendors keep up? KLAS website. Available at: http://www.klasresearch.com/KLASreports. Accessed Dec. 8, 2012.

Smartphone use by hospitalists and other hospital staff is becoming ubiquitous, with a recent survey showing 72% of physicians using these devices at work.¹ At the same time, concerns are being raised about clinical distractions and threats to patient privacy, even while such benefits as rapid access to colleagues, medical references, and patient records are touted.

In a study published in the Journal of Hospital Medicine, Rachel Katz-Sidlow, MD, of the department of pediatrics at Jacobi Medical Center in Bronx, N.Y., and colleagues surveyed residents’ and attendings’ perceptions of the use of smartphones during inpatient rounds, both their own and observed behaviors of colleagues.² Fifty-seven percent of residents and 28% of faculty reported using smartphones during inpatient rounds, while significantly higher percentages observed other team members doing so.

The most common smartphone uses were for patient care, but doctors also use them to read and reply to personal texts and emails, as well as for non-patient-care-related Web searches. The authors observe that smartphones “introduce another source of interruption, multitasking, and distraction into the hospital environment,” with potential negative consequences.

Nineteen percent of residents believed they had missed important clinical information because of smartphone distraction during rounds. After seeing the survey results, Jacobi Medical Center instituted a smartphone policy in February 2012, essentially requiring personal mobile communication devices to be silenced at the start of rounds, except for patient care communication or urgent family matters, Dr. Katz-Sidlow wrote in an email to the The Hospitalist.

Confirmation of the spread of communication technology in the hospital toward smartphones and away from traditional pagers comes from data presented at the American Academy of Pediatrics conference in New Orleans in October by Stephanie Kuhlmann, MD, pediatric hospitalist at the University of Kansas at Wichita.³ Dr. Kuhlmann conducted an electronic survey of pediatric hospitalists, with 60% reporting that they receive work-related text messages. Twelve percent sent more than 10 text messages per shift, while 40% expressed concern about HIPAA violations. Most text messages are not encrypted, and many hospitals have yet to implement appropriately secure programs and policies, Dr. Kuhlmann says.

“Hospitals need to be aware of this trend and need to find a way to secure these text messages,” she adds.

Another recent survey by the Orem, Utah-based firm KLAS Research found that while 70% of clinicians report using smartphones or tablets to look up electronic patient records, they are less likely to input information into the EHR on these devices because of the difficulty of entering data on their small screens.⁴

References

1. Dolan B. 72 percent of US physicians use smartphones. Mobi Health News website. Available at: http://mobihealthnews.com/7505/72-percent-of-us-physicians-use-smartphones/. Accessed Dec. 8, 2012.
2. Katz-Sidlow RJ, Ludwig A, Millers S, Sidlow R. Smartphone use during inpatient attending rounds: prevalence, patterns and potential for distraction. J Hosp Med. 2012;7(8):595-599.
3. Miller NS. Text messages are a growing trend among pediatric hospitalists. Pediatric News Digital Network website. Available at: http://www.pediatricnews.com/news/top-news/single-article/text-messages-are-a-growing-trend-among-pediatric-hospitalists/3dabf7208c75c44d36f368a83221d320.html. Accessed Nov. 1, 2012.
4. Westerlind E. Mobile healthcare applications: can enterprise vendors keep up? KLAS website. Available at: http://www.klasresearch.com/KLASreports. Accessed Dec. 8, 2012.

In hospital medicine, what a hospitalist doesn’t do can be just as important as what he or she does do.

That’s why SHM and hospitalist experts from across the country collaborated with the American Board of Internal Medicine Foundation on its groundbreaking Choosing Wisely campaign to publish 10 procedures that hospitalists should think twice about before conducting. Together, with more than a dozen medical specialties, SHM will announce the list of procedures in Washington, D.C., on Feb. 21.

Of the medical specialties contributing lists to Choosing Wisely, SHM is unique in that it will publish two lists (each with five recommendations): one for adult HM and another for pediatric HM.

Once the recommendations have been made public, hospitalists will have multiple ways of learning about them. SHM will publish the recommendations online, via email, and in The Hospitalist. Details about the unique process of developing the Choosing Wisely lists—and the impact they will have on everyday hospitalist practice—will be published in the Journal of Hospital Medicine.

Others in healthcare, including patients and family members, will have a chance to learn about Choosing Wisely through a partnership with Consumer Reports and the public dialogue that the campaign hopes to generate.

SHM President Shaun Frost, MD, SFHM, has been unequivocal in his support for the campaign and has urged all hospitalists to support it as well. “Attention to care affordability and experience are essential to reforming our broken healthcare system, so let’s lead the charge in these areas and help others who are doing the same,” Dr. Frost wrote in the November 2012 issue of The Hospitalist.

To get more involved with this industry-changing campaign, visit www.choosingwisely.org and check out the upcoming Choosing Wisely pre-course at SHM’s annual meeting at www.hospitalmedicine2013.org.

In hospital medicine, what a hospitalist doesn’t do can be just as important as what he or she does do.

That’s why SHM and hospitalist experts from across the country collaborated with the American Board of Internal Medicine Foundation on its groundbreaking Choosing Wisely campaign to publish 10 procedures that hospitalists should think twice about before conducting. Together, with more than a dozen medical specialties, SHM will announce the list of procedures in Washington, D.C., on Feb. 21.

Of the medical specialties contributing lists to Choosing Wisely, SHM is unique in that it will publish two lists (each with five recommendations): one for adult HM and another for pediatric HM.

Once the recommendations have been made public, hospitalists will have multiple ways of learning about them. SHM will publish the recommendations online, via email, and in The Hospitalist. Details about the unique process of developing the Choosing Wisely lists—and the impact they will have on everyday hospitalist practice—will be published in the Journal of Hospital Medicine.

Others in healthcare, including patients and family members, will have a chance to learn about Choosing Wisely through a partnership with Consumer Reports and the public dialogue that the campaign hopes to generate.

SHM President Shaun Frost, MD, SFHM, has been unequivocal in his support for the campaign and has urged all hospitalists to support it as well. “Attention to care affordability and experience are essential to reforming our broken healthcare system, so let’s lead the charge in these areas and help others who are doing the same,” Dr. Frost wrote in the November 2012 issue of The Hospitalist.

To get more involved with this industry-changing campaign, visit www.choosingwisely.org and check out the upcoming Choosing Wisely pre-course at SHM’s annual meeting at www.hospitalmedicine2013.org.

In hospital medicine, what a hospitalist doesn’t do can be just as important as what he or she does do.

That’s why SHM and hospitalist experts from across the country collaborated with the American Board of Internal Medicine Foundation on its groundbreaking Choosing Wisely campaign to publish 10 procedures that hospitalists should think twice about before conducting. Together, with more than a dozen medical specialties, SHM will announce the list of procedures in Washington, D.C., on Feb. 21.

Of the medical specialties contributing lists to Choosing Wisely, SHM is unique in that it will publish two lists (each with five recommendations): one for adult HM and another for pediatric HM.

Once the recommendations have been made public, hospitalists will have multiple ways of learning about them. SHM will publish the recommendations online, via email, and in The Hospitalist. Details about the unique process of developing the Choosing Wisely lists—and the impact they will have on everyday hospitalist practice—will be published in the Journal of Hospital Medicine.

Others in healthcare, including patients and family members, will have a chance to learn about Choosing Wisely through a partnership with Consumer Reports and the public dialogue that the campaign hopes to generate.

SHM President Shaun Frost, MD, SFHM, has been unequivocal in his support for the campaign and has urged all hospitalists to support it as well. “Attention to care affordability and experience are essential to reforming our broken healthcare system, so let’s lead the charge in these areas and help others who are doing the same,” Dr. Frost wrote in the November 2012 issue of The Hospitalist.

To get more involved with this industry-changing campaign, visit www.choosingwisely.org and check out the upcoming Choosing Wisely pre-course at SHM’s annual meeting at www.hospitalmedicine2013.org.

It’s great to be a Tennessee Volunteer. I said, It’s great to be a Tennessee Volunteer!

The crowd, a sea of orange, packs into Neyland Stadium in Knoxville, Tenn., brimming with pride, dedicated to the team they call the Vols. Neyland Stadium, built in 1921, comfortably seats more than 100,000 brash fans on most fall weekends during the college football season. These die-hard fans pack the stadium regularly, hoping to catch a glimpse of victory.

Throughout the decades of Tennessee Volunteers football, numerous coaches have spent countless hours thinking about how to realize those victories. And they have also spent a lot time thinking about how to keep their players safe. Each coach has had different styles and tactics, but all had one thing in common: They were clearly invested in keeping their players safe. A safe player is a good player, one who can make the full season without injury. As such, before each practice and each game, the players don the gear required to play the safest game possible.

This gear is expensive, difficult to put on, difficult to keep on, makes them run slower, and makes them sweat heavier. When you think about it, it is a wonder that they wear it at all—unless you consider the fact that each precisely placed article takes them one step closer to surviving the game intact, and making it to the next victory. Just like any other type of protective equipment, football equipment has evolved over the course of time. The helmet, for example, is now custom-fit for each player with calipers, and then subsequent additions are applied to ensure durability, shock resistance, and comfort. Relatively new additions include eye shields (to protect the eyes and reduce glare) and even radio devices (to allow the coach to relay last-minute critical information to the quarterback). These helmets are all customized to the players’ position, to allow for the best balance between protection and visibility.

And the helmet is just the beginning. The remaining bare minimum amount of gear needed for standard player safety includes a mouthpiece, jaw pads, neck roll, shoulder pads, shock pads, rib pads, hip pads, knee pads, and cleats. All told, the weight of all this equipment is between 10 and 25 pounds and takes up to an hour to fully gear up. But nonetheless, it has become such a mainstay, of centralized importance to the game, that each team has a dedicated equipment manager. They are charged with providing, maintaining, and transporting the best gear for every member of the team. The equipment manager is a vital resource for the team and the sport.

Despite the extra weight and inconvenience that their gear can burden them with, you don’t see a single football player “skimp” on it. And it would certainly be obvious to all those around them if they ran onto the field without their helmet. Over the years, the football industry has not abandoned gear that they thought was less than perfect, too heavy, too bulky, or made the player perform with less agility. They just made the gear better, lighter, more comfortable, and more protective.

You Can Do This

In a similar fashion, hospital providers have become increasingly interested in keeping themselves—and the patient—safe. But have we come to consensus on who the coach and equipment managers should be, and what the essential elements of the gear should be? I would argue there are a number of coaches and equipment managers in the hospital setting whose mission is to keep their “players” safe. The players are both patients and providers, as generally a “safe provider” is one who makes and implements solid decisions, and who is housed within a safe, predictable, and highly-reliable system, is also one who can and will keep their patients safe.

 

We may not think of ourselves as such, but hospitalists can be extremely effective coaches and equipment managers. They can help create and maintain safe and effective gear for themselves and those patients and providers around them. They can be a mentor for displaying how vitally import this gear is and can work to improve it when it proves to be imperfect.

Although we don’t tend to think of these things as “safety gear,” these things do, in fact, keep us and our patients safe. Some of these include:

• Computerized physician order entry (CPOE) with decision support (or order sets without CPOE);
• Checklists;
• Procedural time-outs;
• Protocols;
• Medication dosing guidelines;
• Handheld devices (for quick lookup of medication doses, side effects, predictive scoring systems, medical calculators, etc.); and
• Gowns and gloves.

Additional “gear” for the patients can include:

• Arm bands for identification and medication scanning;
• Telemetry;
• Bed alarms;
• IV pumps with guard rails around dosing;
• Antibiotic impregnated central lines; and
• Early mobilization protocols.

The Next Level

To take the medical industry to the next level of safe reliability, we need all providers to accept and embrace the concept of “safety gear” for themselves and for their patients. We need to make it perfectly obvious when that gear is missing. It should invoke a reaction of ghastly fear when we witness anyone (provider, patient, or family) skimping on their gear: removing an armband for convenience, bypassing a smart pump, or skipping decision support in CPOE. And for the current gear that is imperfect, slows us down, beeps too often, or reduces our agility, the solution should include improving the gear, not ignoring it or discounting its importance.

So before you go to work today (every day?), think about what you need to keep yourself and your patients safe. And get your gear on.

---

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 scheured@musc.edu.

It’s great to be a Tennessee Volunteer. I said, It’s great to be a Tennessee Volunteer!

The crowd, a sea of orange, packs into Neyland Stadium in Knoxville, Tenn., brimming with pride, dedicated to the team they call the Vols. Neyland Stadium, built in 1921, comfortably seats more than 100,000 brash fans on most fall weekends during the college football season. These die-hard fans pack the stadium regularly, hoping to catch a glimpse of victory.

Throughout the decades of Tennessee Volunteers football, numerous coaches have spent countless hours thinking about how to realize those victories. And they have also spent a lot time thinking about how to keep their players safe. Each coach has had different styles and tactics, but all had one thing in common: They were clearly invested in keeping their players safe. A safe player is a good player, one who can make the full season without injury. As such, before each practice and each game, the players don the gear required to play the safest game possible.

This gear is expensive, difficult to put on, difficult to keep on, makes them run slower, and makes them sweat heavier. When you think about it, it is a wonder that they wear it at all—unless you consider the fact that each precisely placed article takes them one step closer to surviving the game intact, and making it to the next victory. Just like any other type of protective equipment, football equipment has evolved over the course of time. The helmet, for example, is now custom-fit for each player with calipers, and then subsequent additions are applied to ensure durability, shock resistance, and comfort. Relatively new additions include eye shields (to protect the eyes and reduce glare) and even radio devices (to allow the coach to relay last-minute critical information to the quarterback). These helmets are all customized to the players’ position, to allow for the best balance between protection and visibility.

And the helmet is just the beginning. The remaining bare minimum amount of gear needed for standard player safety includes a mouthpiece, jaw pads, neck roll, shoulder pads, shock pads, rib pads, hip pads, knee pads, and cleats. All told, the weight of all this equipment is between 10 and 25 pounds and takes up to an hour to fully gear up. But nonetheless, it has become such a mainstay, of centralized importance to the game, that each team has a dedicated equipment manager. They are charged with providing, maintaining, and transporting the best gear for every member of the team. The equipment manager is a vital resource for the team and the sport.

Despite the extra weight and inconvenience that their gear can burden them with, you don’t see a single football player “skimp” on it. And it would certainly be obvious to all those around them if they ran onto the field without their helmet. Over the years, the football industry has not abandoned gear that they thought was less than perfect, too heavy, too bulky, or made the player perform with less agility. They just made the gear better, lighter, more comfortable, and more protective.

You Can Do This

In a similar fashion, hospital providers have become increasingly interested in keeping themselves—and the patient—safe. But have we come to consensus on who the coach and equipment managers should be, and what the essential elements of the gear should be? I would argue there are a number of coaches and equipment managers in the hospital setting whose mission is to keep their “players” safe. The players are both patients and providers, as generally a “safe provider” is one who makes and implements solid decisions, and who is housed within a safe, predictable, and highly-reliable system, is also one who can and will keep their patients safe.

 

We may not think of ourselves as such, but hospitalists can be extremely effective coaches and equipment managers. They can help create and maintain safe and effective gear for themselves and those patients and providers around them. They can be a mentor for displaying how vitally import this gear is and can work to improve it when it proves to be imperfect.

Although we don’t tend to think of these things as “safety gear,” these things do, in fact, keep us and our patients safe. Some of these include:

• Computerized physician order entry (CPOE) with decision support (or order sets without CPOE);
• Checklists;
• Procedural time-outs;
• Protocols;
• Medication dosing guidelines;
• Handheld devices (for quick lookup of medication doses, side effects, predictive scoring systems, medical calculators, etc.); and
• Gowns and gloves.

Additional “gear” for the patients can include:

• Arm bands for identification and medication scanning;
• Telemetry;
• Bed alarms;
• IV pumps with guard rails around dosing;
• Antibiotic impregnated central lines; and
• Early mobilization protocols.

The Next Level

To take the medical industry to the next level of safe reliability, we need all providers to accept and embrace the concept of “safety gear” for themselves and for their patients. We need to make it perfectly obvious when that gear is missing. It should invoke a reaction of ghastly fear when we witness anyone (provider, patient, or family) skimping on their gear: removing an armband for convenience, bypassing a smart pump, or skipping decision support in CPOE. And for the current gear that is imperfect, slows us down, beeps too often, or reduces our agility, the solution should include improving the gear, not ignoring it or discounting its importance.

So before you go to work today (every day?), think about what you need to keep yourself and your patients safe. And get your gear on.

---

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 scheured@musc.edu.

It’s great to be a Tennessee Volunteer. I said, It’s great to be a Tennessee Volunteer!

The crowd, a sea of orange, packs into Neyland Stadium in Knoxville, Tenn., brimming with pride, dedicated to the team they call the Vols. Neyland Stadium, built in 1921, comfortably seats more than 100,000 brash fans on most fall weekends during the college football season. These die-hard fans pack the stadium regularly, hoping to catch a glimpse of victory.

Throughout the decades of Tennessee Volunteers football, numerous coaches have spent countless hours thinking about how to realize those victories. And they have also spent a lot time thinking about how to keep their players safe. Each coach has had different styles and tactics, but all had one thing in common: They were clearly invested in keeping their players safe. A safe player is a good player, one who can make the full season without injury. As such, before each practice and each game, the players don the gear required to play the safest game possible.

This gear is expensive, difficult to put on, difficult to keep on, makes them run slower, and makes them sweat heavier. When you think about it, it is a wonder that they wear it at all—unless you consider the fact that each precisely placed article takes them one step closer to surviving the game intact, and making it to the next victory. Just like any other type of protective equipment, football equipment has evolved over the course of time. The helmet, for example, is now custom-fit for each player with calipers, and then subsequent additions are applied to ensure durability, shock resistance, and comfort. Relatively new additions include eye shields (to protect the eyes and reduce glare) and even radio devices (to allow the coach to relay last-minute critical information to the quarterback). These helmets are all customized to the players’ position, to allow for the best balance between protection and visibility.

And the helmet is just the beginning. The remaining bare minimum amount of gear needed for standard player safety includes a mouthpiece, jaw pads, neck roll, shoulder pads, shock pads, rib pads, hip pads, knee pads, and cleats. All told, the weight of all this equipment is between 10 and 25 pounds and takes up to an hour to fully gear up. But nonetheless, it has become such a mainstay, of centralized importance to the game, that each team has a dedicated equipment manager. They are charged with providing, maintaining, and transporting the best gear for every member of the team. The equipment manager is a vital resource for the team and the sport.

Despite the extra weight and inconvenience that their gear can burden them with, you don’t see a single football player “skimp” on it. And it would certainly be obvious to all those around them if they ran onto the field without their helmet. Over the years, the football industry has not abandoned gear that they thought was less than perfect, too heavy, too bulky, or made the player perform with less agility. They just made the gear better, lighter, more comfortable, and more protective.

You Can Do This

In a similar fashion, hospital providers have become increasingly interested in keeping themselves—and the patient—safe. But have we come to consensus on who the coach and equipment managers should be, and what the essential elements of the gear should be? I would argue there are a number of coaches and equipment managers in the hospital setting whose mission is to keep their “players” safe. The players are both patients and providers, as generally a “safe provider” is one who makes and implements solid decisions, and who is housed within a safe, predictable, and highly-reliable system, is also one who can and will keep their patients safe.

 

We may not think of ourselves as such, but hospitalists can be extremely effective coaches and equipment managers. They can help create and maintain safe and effective gear for themselves and those patients and providers around them. They can be a mentor for displaying how vitally import this gear is and can work to improve it when it proves to be imperfect.

Although we don’t tend to think of these things as “safety gear,” these things do, in fact, keep us and our patients safe. Some of these include:

• Computerized physician order entry (CPOE) with decision support (or order sets without CPOE);
• Checklists;
• Procedural time-outs;
• Protocols;
• Medication dosing guidelines;
• Handheld devices (for quick lookup of medication doses, side effects, predictive scoring systems, medical calculators, etc.); and
• Gowns and gloves.

Additional “gear” for the patients can include:

• Arm bands for identification and medication scanning;
• Telemetry;
• Bed alarms;
• IV pumps with guard rails around dosing;
• Antibiotic impregnated central lines; and
• Early mobilization protocols.

The Next Level

To take the medical industry to the next level of safe reliability, we need all providers to accept and embrace the concept of “safety gear” for themselves and for their patients. We need to make it perfectly obvious when that gear is missing. It should invoke a reaction of ghastly fear when we witness anyone (provider, patient, or family) skimping on their gear: removing an armband for convenience, bypassing a smart pump, or skipping decision support in CPOE. And for the current gear that is imperfect, slows us down, beeps too often, or reduces our agility, the solution should include improving the gear, not ignoring it or discounting its importance.

So before you go to work today (every day?), think about what you need to keep yourself and your patients safe. And get your gear on.

---

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 scheured@musc.edu.

University of Minnesota hospitalist Karyn Baum, MD, MSEd, directs one of six regional training centers for Team Strategies and Tools to Enhance Performance and Patient Safety (TeamSTEPPS), an evidence-based, multimedia curriculum, tool set, and system for healthcare organizations to improve their teamwork.

Using the TeamSTEPPS approach, Dr. Baum collaborated with hospitalist Albertine Beard, MD, and the charge nurse on a 28-bed medical unit at the Minneapolis VA Medical Center to present a half-day training session for all VA staff, including four hospitalists. The seminar mixed didactics, discussions, and simulations, similar to traditional role-playing techniques but using a high-fidelity manikin that talks and displays vital signs.

"Teamwork is a set of knowledge, skills, and attitudes that lead to the creation of a culture where it’s about us as a team, not about who is highest in the hierarchy," Dr. Baum says. Hospitalists want to be leaders, "but we have a responsibility to be intentional leaders, learning the skills and modeling them," she adds.

Improved teamwork benefits patients through more effective communication and reduction in medical errors, Dr. Baum says, "but it also helps to create a healthy environment in which to work, where we all have each other’s backs."

TeamSTEPPS, developed jointly by the federal Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ) and the Department of Defense, has reached 25% to 30% of U.S. hospitals by annually training about 700 masters. The masters then go back to their institutions and share the techniques.

 

Read more about why improving teamwork is good for your patients.

 

University of Minnesota hospitalist Karyn Baum, MD, MSEd, directs one of six regional training centers for Team Strategies and Tools to Enhance Performance and Patient Safety (TeamSTEPPS), an evidence-based, multimedia curriculum, tool set, and system for healthcare organizations to improve their teamwork.

Using the TeamSTEPPS approach, Dr. Baum collaborated with hospitalist Albertine Beard, MD, and the charge nurse on a 28-bed medical unit at the Minneapolis VA Medical Center to present a half-day training session for all VA staff, including four hospitalists. The seminar mixed didactics, discussions, and simulations, similar to traditional role-playing techniques but using a high-fidelity manikin that talks and displays vital signs.

"Teamwork is a set of knowledge, skills, and attitudes that lead to the creation of a culture where it’s about us as a team, not about who is highest in the hierarchy," Dr. Baum says. Hospitalists want to be leaders, "but we have a responsibility to be intentional leaders, learning the skills and modeling them," she adds.

Improved teamwork benefits patients through more effective communication and reduction in medical errors, Dr. Baum says, "but it also helps to create a healthy environment in which to work, where we all have each other’s backs."

TeamSTEPPS, developed jointly by the federal Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ) and the Department of Defense, has reached 25% to 30% of U.S. hospitals by annually training about 700 masters. The masters then go back to their institutions and share the techniques.

 

Read more about why improving teamwork is good for your patients.

 

University of Minnesota hospitalist Karyn Baum, MD, MSEd, directs one of six regional training centers for Team Strategies and Tools to Enhance Performance and Patient Safety (TeamSTEPPS), an evidence-based, multimedia curriculum, tool set, and system for healthcare organizations to improve their teamwork.

Using the TeamSTEPPS approach, Dr. Baum collaborated with hospitalist Albertine Beard, MD, and the charge nurse on a 28-bed medical unit at the Minneapolis VA Medical Center to present a half-day training session for all VA staff, including four hospitalists. The seminar mixed didactics, discussions, and simulations, similar to traditional role-playing techniques but using a high-fidelity manikin that talks and displays vital signs.

"Teamwork is a set of knowledge, skills, and attitudes that lead to the creation of a culture where it’s about us as a team, not about who is highest in the hierarchy," Dr. Baum says. Hospitalists want to be leaders, "but we have a responsibility to be intentional leaders, learning the skills and modeling them," she adds.

Improved teamwork benefits patients through more effective communication and reduction in medical errors, Dr. Baum says, "but it also helps to create a healthy environment in which to work, where we all have each other’s backs."

TeamSTEPPS, developed jointly by the federal Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ) and the Department of Defense, has reached 25% to 30% of U.S. hospitals by annually training about 700 masters. The masters then go back to their institutions and share the techniques.

 

Read more about why improving teamwork is good for your patients.

 

Need another reason to hone your skills in treating people with kidney disease?

Take a look at a study out of the University of Washington: Kidney disease, researchers there found, is the diagnosis associated with the highest rate of readmission to the hospital and the emergency room and hospital mortality—controlling for cardiovascular disease, infection, sepsis, encephalopathy and “all the usual suspects associated with readmission,” says Katherine Tuttle, MD, clinical professor of medicine in the University of Washington Division of Nephrology.

The study, which included 676,000 hospitalized patients in Washington state in 2006 through 2008, was done in collaboration with Washington State University and Spokane-based Providence Sacred Heart Medical Center. Researchers found that the highest risk was found in patients on dialysis, but even in early stages of chronic kidney disease there was a significantly increased risk of readmissions and death, Dr. Tuttle said.¹

The reasons are not known.

“One reason we think is really important is this issue of medication management,” Dr. Tuttle says.

Researchers then did a pilot study showing that, at the time of discharge, if a pharmacist visited within the first week, the rates of readmission were reduced by 50 percent. “The goal of that visit was basically do what probably should have been done through the hospital, which is adjust drug doses properly for kidney function and address drug interaction,” Dr. Tuttle says.

The research team is working on a large study funded by the National Institutes of Health to validate those findings and look at a broader population of patients. This is more evidence pointing to the importance of handoffs, she says.

"These transitions in care are dangerous situations,” Dr. Tuttle says. “But they’re also opportunities for improvement. And I think anything we can do to enhance education management is likely to be very beneficial in people with chronic kidney disease.”

Hospitalists have "serious work to do in improving continuity in care, and handoffs in general,” she adds.

“So much of what they do in the hospital is influenced by kidney function, whether it’s the drugs they give or the diagnostic tests that they want to do,” she says. “I’m not being critical at all. It’s a new area, relatively speaking, and there are lots of opportunities for improvement in the system.”

Tom Collins is a freelance writer in South Florida.

Reference

1. Risks of subsequent hospitalization and death in patients with kidney disease. Clin J Am Soc Nephrol. 2012;7(3):409-416.

Need another reason to hone your skills in treating people with kidney disease?

Take a look at a study out of the University of Washington: Kidney disease, researchers there found, is the diagnosis associated with the highest rate of readmission to the hospital and the emergency room and hospital mortality—controlling for cardiovascular disease, infection, sepsis, encephalopathy and “all the usual suspects associated with readmission,” says Katherine Tuttle, MD, clinical professor of medicine in the University of Washington Division of Nephrology.

The study, which included 676,000 hospitalized patients in Washington state in 2006 through 2008, was done in collaboration with Washington State University and Spokane-based Providence Sacred Heart Medical Center. Researchers found that the highest risk was found in patients on dialysis, but even in early stages of chronic kidney disease there was a significantly increased risk of readmissions and death, Dr. Tuttle said.¹

The reasons are not known.

“One reason we think is really important is this issue of medication management,” Dr. Tuttle says.

Researchers then did a pilot study showing that, at the time of discharge, if a pharmacist visited within the first week, the rates of readmission were reduced by 50 percent. “The goal of that visit was basically do what probably should have been done through the hospital, which is adjust drug doses properly for kidney function and address drug interaction,” Dr. Tuttle says.

The research team is working on a large study funded by the National Institutes of Health to validate those findings and look at a broader population of patients. This is more evidence pointing to the importance of handoffs, she says.

"These transitions in care are dangerous situations,” Dr. Tuttle says. “But they’re also opportunities for improvement. And I think anything we can do to enhance education management is likely to be very beneficial in people with chronic kidney disease.”

Hospitalists have "serious work to do in improving continuity in care, and handoffs in general,” she adds.

“So much of what they do in the hospital is influenced by kidney function, whether it’s the drugs they give or the diagnostic tests that they want to do,” she says. “I’m not being critical at all. It’s a new area, relatively speaking, and there are lots of opportunities for improvement in the system.”

Tom Collins is a freelance writer in South Florida.

Reference

1. Risks of subsequent hospitalization and death in patients with kidney disease. Clin J Am Soc Nephrol. 2012;7(3):409-416.

Need another reason to hone your skills in treating people with kidney disease?

Take a look at a study out of the University of Washington: Kidney disease, researchers there found, is the diagnosis associated with the highest rate of readmission to the hospital and the emergency room and hospital mortality—controlling for cardiovascular disease, infection, sepsis, encephalopathy and “all the usual suspects associated with readmission,” says Katherine Tuttle, MD, clinical professor of medicine in the University of Washington Division of Nephrology.

The study, which included 676,000 hospitalized patients in Washington state in 2006 through 2008, was done in collaboration with Washington State University and Spokane-based Providence Sacred Heart Medical Center. Researchers found that the highest risk was found in patients on dialysis, but even in early stages of chronic kidney disease there was a significantly increased risk of readmissions and death, Dr. Tuttle said.¹

The reasons are not known.

“One reason we think is really important is this issue of medication management,” Dr. Tuttle says.

Researchers then did a pilot study showing that, at the time of discharge, if a pharmacist visited within the first week, the rates of readmission were reduced by 50 percent. “The goal of that visit was basically do what probably should have been done through the hospital, which is adjust drug doses properly for kidney function and address drug interaction,” Dr. Tuttle says.

The research team is working on a large study funded by the National Institutes of Health to validate those findings and look at a broader population of patients. This is more evidence pointing to the importance of handoffs, she says.

"These transitions in care are dangerous situations,” Dr. Tuttle says. “But they’re also opportunities for improvement. And I think anything we can do to enhance education management is likely to be very beneficial in people with chronic kidney disease.”

Hospitalists have "serious work to do in improving continuity in care, and handoffs in general,” she adds.

“So much of what they do in the hospital is influenced by kidney function, whether it’s the drugs they give or the diagnostic tests that they want to do,” she says. “I’m not being critical at all. It’s a new area, relatively speaking, and there are lots of opportunities for improvement in the system.”

Tom Collins is a freelance writer in South Florida.

Reference

1. Risks of subsequent hospitalization and death in patients with kidney disease. Clin J Am Soc Nephrol. 2012;7(3):409-416.

Two recent studies have reached the same surprising conclusion: Adherence to national quality and performance guidelines does not translate into reduced readmissions rates.

Sula Mazimba, MD, MPH, and colleagues at Kettering Medical Center in Kettering, Ohio, focused on congestive heart failure (CHF) patients, documenting compliance with four core CHF performance measures at discharge and subsequent 30-day readmissions. Only one measure-assessment of left ventricular function-had a significant association with readmissions.

A second study published the same month looked at a wider range of diagnoses in a Medicare population at more than 2,000 hospitals nationwide. That study reached similar conclusions about the disconnect between hospitals that followed Hospital Compare process quality measures and their readmission rates.

Dr. Mazimba says hospitalists and other physicians involved in quality improvement (QI) should be more involved in defining quality measures that reflect quality of care for their patients.

“We should be looking for parameters that have a higher yield for outcomes, such as preventing readmissions,” he says, encouraging better symptom management before the CHF patient is hospitalized and enhanced coordination of care after discharge.

Alpesh Amin, MD, MBA, SFHM, professor and chair of the department of medicine and executive director of the hospitalist program at the University of California at Irvine, says the findings are important, but he adds that the core quality measures studied were never designed to address readmissions.

“The challenge is to find a way to connect the dots between the core measures and readmissions,” he says.

Learn more about the four "core" heart failure quality measures for hospitals by visiting the Resource Rooms on the SHM website, or check out this 80-page implementation guide, “Improving Heart Failure Care for Hospitalized Patients [PDF],” also available on SHM’s website.

Read The Hospitalist columnist Win Whitcomb’s take on readmissions penalty programs.

 

Two recent studies have reached the same surprising conclusion: Adherence to national quality and performance guidelines does not translate into reduced readmissions rates.

Sula Mazimba, MD, MPH, and colleagues at Kettering Medical Center in Kettering, Ohio, focused on congestive heart failure (CHF) patients, documenting compliance with four core CHF performance measures at discharge and subsequent 30-day readmissions. Only one measure-assessment of left ventricular function-had a significant association with readmissions.

A second study published the same month looked at a wider range of diagnoses in a Medicare population at more than 2,000 hospitals nationwide. That study reached similar conclusions about the disconnect between hospitals that followed Hospital Compare process quality measures and their readmission rates.

Dr. Mazimba says hospitalists and other physicians involved in quality improvement (QI) should be more involved in defining quality measures that reflect quality of care for their patients.

“We should be looking for parameters that have a higher yield for outcomes, such as preventing readmissions,” he says, encouraging better symptom management before the CHF patient is hospitalized and enhanced coordination of care after discharge.

Alpesh Amin, MD, MBA, SFHM, professor and chair of the department of medicine and executive director of the hospitalist program at the University of California at Irvine, says the findings are important, but he adds that the core quality measures studied were never designed to address readmissions.

“The challenge is to find a way to connect the dots between the core measures and readmissions,” he says.

Learn more about the four "core" heart failure quality measures for hospitals by visiting the Resource Rooms on the SHM website, or check out this 80-page implementation guide, “Improving Heart Failure Care for Hospitalized Patients [PDF],” also available on SHM’s website.

Read The Hospitalist columnist Win Whitcomb’s take on readmissions penalty programs.

 

Two recent studies have reached the same surprising conclusion: Adherence to national quality and performance guidelines does not translate into reduced readmissions rates.

Sula Mazimba, MD, MPH, and colleagues at Kettering Medical Center in Kettering, Ohio, focused on congestive heart failure (CHF) patients, documenting compliance with four core CHF performance measures at discharge and subsequent 30-day readmissions. Only one measure-assessment of left ventricular function-had a significant association with readmissions.

A second study published the same month looked at a wider range of diagnoses in a Medicare population at more than 2,000 hospitals nationwide. That study reached similar conclusions about the disconnect between hospitals that followed Hospital Compare process quality measures and their readmission rates.

Dr. Mazimba says hospitalists and other physicians involved in quality improvement (QI) should be more involved in defining quality measures that reflect quality of care for their patients.

“We should be looking for parameters that have a higher yield for outcomes, such as preventing readmissions,” he says, encouraging better symptom management before the CHF patient is hospitalized and enhanced coordination of care after discharge.

Alpesh Amin, MD, MBA, SFHM, professor and chair of the department of medicine and executive director of the hospitalist program at the University of California at Irvine, says the findings are important, but he adds that the core quality measures studied were never designed to address readmissions.

“The challenge is to find a way to connect the dots between the core measures and readmissions,” he says.

Learn more about the four "core" heart failure quality measures for hospitals by visiting the Resource Rooms on the SHM website, or check out this 80-page implementation guide, “Improving Heart Failure Care for Hospitalized Patients [PDF],” also available on SHM’s website.

Read The Hospitalist columnist Win Whitcomb’s take on readmissions penalty programs.

 

Applying the HM model to specialties that can dedicate themselves to managing inpatients could improve care efficiency, says the coauthor of a new report from the American Hospital Association's (AHA) Physician Leadership Forum.

The 20-page report, "Creating the Hospital of the Future: The Implications for Hospital-Focused Physician Practice [PDF]," codified a daylong summit of hospitalist leaders and hospital administrators following the annual Health Forum/AHA Leadership Summit last July in San Francisco. SHM helped organize the meeting, which focused on the growing role and importance of "hyphenated hospitalists."

"With the hospitalist movement, it's critical that there is coordination between the inpatient and the outpatient world … but also inpatient-wise, there should be some coordination of services between the various specialties that are dedicated to the hospital," says John Combes, MD, AHA senior vice president. "We have an opportunity here, as more and more subspecialties develop hospital-based and hospital-focused practices, to construct it right."

Dr. Combes says the model is not applicable to all specialties, but early adoption by fields including OBGYN, orthopedics, neurology, and surgery is a good sign. Hospitalist could look at forming large, multispecialty groups to bring all hospital-focused programs under one proverbial roof. "So there's not only coordination at the hospital level, but also at the group level," he adds.

The continued growth of specialty hospitalists might hinge on whether research shows that the approach improves patient outcomes.

"The jury is out on that right now," Dr. Combes says. "As hospitalists get better at defining what their role is within the inpatient setting—particularly around care coordination, care improvement, efficiency, reduction of unnecessary procedures and testing—we'll be able to document more value."

 

Visit our website for more information about hospital-based medical practices.

 

Applying the HM model to specialties that can dedicate themselves to managing inpatients could improve care efficiency, says the coauthor of a new report from the American Hospital Association's (AHA) Physician Leadership Forum.

The 20-page report, "Creating the Hospital of the Future: The Implications for Hospital-Focused Physician Practice [PDF]," codified a daylong summit of hospitalist leaders and hospital administrators following the annual Health Forum/AHA Leadership Summit last July in San Francisco. SHM helped organize the meeting, which focused on the growing role and importance of "hyphenated hospitalists."

"With the hospitalist movement, it's critical that there is coordination between the inpatient and the outpatient world … but also inpatient-wise, there should be some coordination of services between the various specialties that are dedicated to the hospital," says John Combes, MD, AHA senior vice president. "We have an opportunity here, as more and more subspecialties develop hospital-based and hospital-focused practices, to construct it right."

Dr. Combes says the model is not applicable to all specialties, but early adoption by fields including OBGYN, orthopedics, neurology, and surgery is a good sign. Hospitalist could look at forming large, multispecialty groups to bring all hospital-focused programs under one proverbial roof. "So there's not only coordination at the hospital level, but also at the group level," he adds.

The continued growth of specialty hospitalists might hinge on whether research shows that the approach improves patient outcomes.

"The jury is out on that right now," Dr. Combes says. "As hospitalists get better at defining what their role is within the inpatient setting—particularly around care coordination, care improvement, efficiency, reduction of unnecessary procedures and testing—we'll be able to document more value."

 

Visit our website for more information about hospital-based medical practices.

 

Applying the HM model to specialties that can dedicate themselves to managing inpatients could improve care efficiency, says the coauthor of a new report from the American Hospital Association's (AHA) Physician Leadership Forum.

The 20-page report, "Creating the Hospital of the Future: The Implications for Hospital-Focused Physician Practice [PDF]," codified a daylong summit of hospitalist leaders and hospital administrators following the annual Health Forum/AHA Leadership Summit last July in San Francisco. SHM helped organize the meeting, which focused on the growing role and importance of "hyphenated hospitalists."

"With the hospitalist movement, it's critical that there is coordination between the inpatient and the outpatient world … but also inpatient-wise, there should be some coordination of services between the various specialties that are dedicated to the hospital," says John Combes, MD, AHA senior vice president. "We have an opportunity here, as more and more subspecialties develop hospital-based and hospital-focused practices, to construct it right."

Dr. Combes says the model is not applicable to all specialties, but early adoption by fields including OBGYN, orthopedics, neurology, and surgery is a good sign. Hospitalist could look at forming large, multispecialty groups to bring all hospital-focused programs under one proverbial roof. "So there's not only coordination at the hospital level, but also at the group level," he adds.

The continued growth of specialty hospitalists might hinge on whether research shows that the approach improves patient outcomes.

"The jury is out on that right now," Dr. Combes says. "As hospitalists get better at defining what their role is within the inpatient setting—particularly around care coordination, care improvement, efficiency, reduction of unnecessary procedures and testing—we'll be able to document more value."

 

Visit our website for more information about hospital-based medical practices.

 

There are 10 industry-changing recommendations in the recent Institute of Medicine (IOM) report “Best Care at Lower Cost: The Path to Continuously Learning Health Care in America.” Suggestions include reforming payment, adopting digital infrastructure, and improving the continuity of care. And to Brent James, MD, all of those recommendations are areas in which hospitalists can help lead healthcare from fee-for-service to an organized-care model.

Dr. James, executive director of the Institute for Health Care Delivery Research and chief quality officer at Intermountain Healthcare in Salt Lake City, says hospitalists can be linchpins to that hoped-for sea change because the specialty’s growth the past 15 years shows that physicians taking a collaborative, evidence-based approach to patient care can improve outcomes and lower costs.

“In some sense, the hospitalist movement triggered [the move to organized care],” says Dr. James, one of the IOM report’s authors. “You started to have teams caring for inpatients in a coordinated way. Pieces started to kind of fall into place underneath it. So I regard this as … [hospitalists] coming into their own, their vision of the future starting to really take hold.”

The report estimates the national cost of unnecessary or wasteful healthcare at $750 billion per year. Published in September, the report was crafted by a nationwide committee of healthcare leaders, including hospitalist and medical researcher David Meltzer, MD, PhD, chief of University of Chicago’s Division of Hospital Medicine and director of the Center for Health and Social Sciences in Chicago.

Dr. Meltzer says that for a relatively young specialty, hospitalists have been “remarkably forward-looking.” The specialty, in his view, has embraced teamwork, digital infrastructure, and quality initiatives. As the U.S. healthcare system evolves, he notes, HM leaders need to keep that mentality. Hospitalists are confronted daily with a combination of sicker patients and more treatment options, and making the right decisions is paramount to a “learning healthcare system,” Dr. Meltzer adds.

“As the database of options grows, decision-making becomes more difficult,” he says. “We have an important role to play in how to think about trying to control costs.”

Gary Kaplan, MD, FACP, FACMPE, FACPE, chairman and chief executive officer of Virginia Mason Health System in Seattle, agrees that HM’s priorities dovetail nicely with reform efforts. He hopes the IOM report’s findings will serve as a springboard for hospitalists to further spearhead improvements.

In particular, Dr. Kaplan notes that healthcare delivery organizations should develop, implement, and fine-tune their “systems, engineering tools, and process-improvement methods.” Such changes would help “eliminate inefficiencies, remove unnecessary burdens on clinicians and staff, enhance patient experience, and improve patient health outcomes,” he says.

“The hospitalists and the care teams with which the hospitalist connects are very critical to streamlining operations,” Dr. Kaplan adds.

Dr. James, who has long championed process improvement as the key to improved clinical outcomes, says that extending the hospitalist model throughout healthcare can only have good results. He preaches the implementation of standardized protocols and sees hospitalists as natural torchbearers for the cause.

 

“When you start to focus on process—our old jargon for it was ‘continuum of care’—it forces you to patient-centered care,” he says. “Instead of building your care around the physicians, or around the hospital, or around the technology, you build the care around the patient.”

Dr. James has heard physicians say protocols are too rigid and do not improve patient care. He disagrees—vehemently.

“It’s not just that we allow, or even that we encourage, we demand that you modify [the protocol] for individual patient needs,” he says. “What I have is a standard process of care. That means that you don’t have to bird-dog every little step. I take my most important resource—a trained, expert mind—and focus it on that relatively small set of problems that need to be modified. We’ve found that it massively improves patient outcomes.”

Many of the IOM report’s complaints about unnecessary testing, poor communication, and inefficient care delivery connect with the quality, patient-safety, and practice-management improvements HM groups already push, Dr. Kaplan adds. To advance healthcare delivery’s evolution, hospitalists should view the task of reform as an opportunity, not a challenge.

“There are very powerful opportunities for the hospitalist now to have great impact,” he says. “To not just be the passive participants in a broken and dysfunctional system, but in many ways, [to be] one of the architects of an improved care system going forward.”

Richard Quinn is a freelance writer in New Jersey.

There are 10 industry-changing recommendations in the recent Institute of Medicine (IOM) report “Best Care at Lower Cost: The Path to Continuously Learning Health Care in America.” Suggestions include reforming payment, adopting digital infrastructure, and improving the continuity of care. And to Brent James, MD, all of those recommendations are areas in which hospitalists can help lead healthcare from fee-for-service to an organized-care model.

Dr. James, executive director of the Institute for Health Care Delivery Research and chief quality officer at Intermountain Healthcare in Salt Lake City, says hospitalists can be linchpins to that hoped-for sea change because the specialty’s growth the past 15 years shows that physicians taking a collaborative, evidence-based approach to patient care can improve outcomes and lower costs.

“In some sense, the hospitalist movement triggered [the move to organized care],” says Dr. James, one of the IOM report’s authors. “You started to have teams caring for inpatients in a coordinated way. Pieces started to kind of fall into place underneath it. So I regard this as … [hospitalists] coming into their own, their vision of the future starting to really take hold.”

The report estimates the national cost of unnecessary or wasteful healthcare at $750 billion per year. Published in September, the report was crafted by a nationwide committee of healthcare leaders, including hospitalist and medical researcher David Meltzer, MD, PhD, chief of University of Chicago’s Division of Hospital Medicine and director of the Center for Health and Social Sciences in Chicago.

Dr. Meltzer says that for a relatively young specialty, hospitalists have been “remarkably forward-looking.” The specialty, in his view, has embraced teamwork, digital infrastructure, and quality initiatives. As the U.S. healthcare system evolves, he notes, HM leaders need to keep that mentality. Hospitalists are confronted daily with a combination of sicker patients and more treatment options, and making the right decisions is paramount to a “learning healthcare system,” Dr. Meltzer adds.

“As the database of options grows, decision-making becomes more difficult,” he says. “We have an important role to play in how to think about trying to control costs.”

Gary Kaplan, MD, FACP, FACMPE, FACPE, chairman and chief executive officer of Virginia Mason Health System in Seattle, agrees that HM’s priorities dovetail nicely with reform efforts. He hopes the IOM report’s findings will serve as a springboard for hospitalists to further spearhead improvements.

In particular, Dr. Kaplan notes that healthcare delivery organizations should develop, implement, and fine-tune their “systems, engineering tools, and process-improvement methods.” Such changes would help “eliminate inefficiencies, remove unnecessary burdens on clinicians and staff, enhance patient experience, and improve patient health outcomes,” he says.

“The hospitalists and the care teams with which the hospitalist connects are very critical to streamlining operations,” Dr. Kaplan adds.

Dr. James, who has long championed process improvement as the key to improved clinical outcomes, says that extending the hospitalist model throughout healthcare can only have good results. He preaches the implementation of standardized protocols and sees hospitalists as natural torchbearers for the cause.

 

“When you start to focus on process—our old jargon for it was ‘continuum of care’—it forces you to patient-centered care,” he says. “Instead of building your care around the physicians, or around the hospital, or around the technology, you build the care around the patient.”

Dr. James has heard physicians say protocols are too rigid and do not improve patient care. He disagrees—vehemently.

“It’s not just that we allow, or even that we encourage, we demand that you modify [the protocol] for individual patient needs,” he says. “What I have is a standard process of care. That means that you don’t have to bird-dog every little step. I take my most important resource—a trained, expert mind—and focus it on that relatively small set of problems that need to be modified. We’ve found that it massively improves patient outcomes.”

Many of the IOM report’s complaints about unnecessary testing, poor communication, and inefficient care delivery connect with the quality, patient-safety, and practice-management improvements HM groups already push, Dr. Kaplan adds. To advance healthcare delivery’s evolution, hospitalists should view the task of reform as an opportunity, not a challenge.

“There are very powerful opportunities for the hospitalist now to have great impact,” he says. “To not just be the passive participants in a broken and dysfunctional system, but in many ways, [to be] one of the architects of an improved care system going forward.”

Richard Quinn is a freelance writer in New Jersey.

There are 10 industry-changing recommendations in the recent Institute of Medicine (IOM) report “Best Care at Lower Cost: The Path to Continuously Learning Health Care in America.” Suggestions include reforming payment, adopting digital infrastructure, and improving the continuity of care. And to Brent James, MD, all of those recommendations are areas in which hospitalists can help lead healthcare from fee-for-service to an organized-care model.

Dr. James, executive director of the Institute for Health Care Delivery Research and chief quality officer at Intermountain Healthcare in Salt Lake City, says hospitalists can be linchpins to that hoped-for sea change because the specialty’s growth the past 15 years shows that physicians taking a collaborative, evidence-based approach to patient care can improve outcomes and lower costs.

“In some sense, the hospitalist movement triggered [the move to organized care],” says Dr. James, one of the IOM report’s authors. “You started to have teams caring for inpatients in a coordinated way. Pieces started to kind of fall into place underneath it. So I regard this as … [hospitalists] coming into their own, their vision of the future starting to really take hold.”

The report estimates the national cost of unnecessary or wasteful healthcare at $750 billion per year. Published in September, the report was crafted by a nationwide committee of healthcare leaders, including hospitalist and medical researcher David Meltzer, MD, PhD, chief of University of Chicago’s Division of Hospital Medicine and director of the Center for Health and Social Sciences in Chicago.

Dr. Meltzer says that for a relatively young specialty, hospitalists have been “remarkably forward-looking.” The specialty, in his view, has embraced teamwork, digital infrastructure, and quality initiatives. As the U.S. healthcare system evolves, he notes, HM leaders need to keep that mentality. Hospitalists are confronted daily with a combination of sicker patients and more treatment options, and making the right decisions is paramount to a “learning healthcare system,” Dr. Meltzer adds.

“As the database of options grows, decision-making becomes more difficult,” he says. “We have an important role to play in how to think about trying to control costs.”

Gary Kaplan, MD, FACP, FACMPE, FACPE, chairman and chief executive officer of Virginia Mason Health System in Seattle, agrees that HM’s priorities dovetail nicely with reform efforts. He hopes the IOM report’s findings will serve as a springboard for hospitalists to further spearhead improvements.

In particular, Dr. Kaplan notes that healthcare delivery organizations should develop, implement, and fine-tune their “systems, engineering tools, and process-improvement methods.” Such changes would help “eliminate inefficiencies, remove unnecessary burdens on clinicians and staff, enhance patient experience, and improve patient health outcomes,” he says.

“The hospitalists and the care teams with which the hospitalist connects are very critical to streamlining operations,” Dr. Kaplan adds.

Dr. James, who has long championed process improvement as the key to improved clinical outcomes, says that extending the hospitalist model throughout healthcare can only have good results. He preaches the implementation of standardized protocols and sees hospitalists as natural torchbearers for the cause.

 

“When you start to focus on process—our old jargon for it was ‘continuum of care’—it forces you to patient-centered care,” he says. “Instead of building your care around the physicians, or around the hospital, or around the technology, you build the care around the patient.”

Dr. James has heard physicians say protocols are too rigid and do not improve patient care. He disagrees—vehemently.

“It’s not just that we allow, or even that we encourage, we demand that you modify [the protocol] for individual patient needs,” he says. “What I have is a standard process of care. That means that you don’t have to bird-dog every little step. I take my most important resource—a trained, expert mind—and focus it on that relatively small set of problems that need to be modified. We’ve found that it massively improves patient outcomes.”

Many of the IOM report’s complaints about unnecessary testing, poor communication, and inefficient care delivery connect with the quality, patient-safety, and practice-management improvements HM groups already push, Dr. Kaplan adds. To advance healthcare delivery’s evolution, hospitalists should view the task of reform as an opportunity, not a challenge.

“There are very powerful opportunities for the hospitalist now to have great impact,” he says. “To not just be the passive participants in a broken and dysfunctional system, but in many ways, [to be] one of the architects of an improved care system going forward.”

Richard Quinn is a freelance writer in New Jersey.

The prefix “neuro” has become quite popular the last couple of years. We have neuroeconomics, neuroplasticity, neuroergonomics, and, of course, neurohospitalist. The explosion of interest in the brain can be seen in the popular press, television, blogs, and the Journal of the American Medical Association.

I predict that recent breakthroughs in brain science and related fields (cognitive psychology, neurobiology, molecular biology, linguistics, and artificial intelligence, among others) will have a profound impact on the fields of quality improvement (QI) and patient safety, and, consequently on HM. To date, the patient safety movement has focused on systems issues in an effort to reduce harm induced by the healthcare system. I submit that for healthcare to be reliable and error-free in the future, we must leverage the innate strengths of the brain. Here I mention four areas where brain science breakthroughs can enable us to improve patient safety practices.

Diagnostic Error

Patrick Croskerry, an emergency physician and researcher, has described errors in diagnosis as stemming in part from cognitive bias. He offers “de-biasing strategies” as an approach to decreasing diagnostic error.

One of the most powerful de-biasing strategies is metacognition, or awareness of one’s own thinking processes. Closely related to metacognition is mindfulness, defined as the “nonjudgmental awareness of the present moment.” A growing body of literature makes the case that enhancing mindfulness might reduce the impact bias has on diagnostic error.¹ Table 1 (right) mentions a subset of bias types and how mindfulness might mitigate them. I’m sure you can think of cases you’ve encountered where bias has affected the diagnostic outcome.

click for large version

Empathy and Patient Experience

As the focus on patient experience grows, approaches to improving performance on patient satisfaction surveys are proliferating. Whatever technical components you choose to employ, a capacity for caregiver empathy is a crucial underlying factor to a better patient experience. Harvard psychiatrist Helen Riess, MD, points out that we are now beginning to understand the neurobiological basis of empathy. She and others present evidence that we may be able to “up-regulate” empathy through education or cognitive practices.² Several studies suggest we might be able to realize improved therapeutic relationships between physicians and patients, and they have led to programs, such as the ones at Stanford and Emory universities, that train caregivers to enhance empathy and compassion.

Interruptions and Cognitive Error

It has been customary in high-risk industries to ensure that certain procedures are free of interruptions. There is recognition that disturbances during high-stakes tasks, such as airline takeoff, carry disastrous consequences. We now know that multitasking is a myth and that the brain instead switches between tasks sequentially. But task-switching comes at the high cost of a marked increase in the rate of cognitive error.³ As we learn more, decreasing interruptions or delineating “interruption-free” zones in healthcare could be a way to mitigate an inherent vulnerability in our cognitive abilities.

Fatigue and Medical Error

It is well documented that sleep deprivation correlates with a decline in cognitive

performance in a number of classes of healthcare workers. Fatigue has also increased diagnostic error among residents. A 2011 Sentinel Alert from The Joint Commission creates a standard that healthcare organizations implement a fatigue-management plan to mitigate the potential harm caused by tired professionals.

Most of the approaches to improving outcomes in the hospital have focused on process improvement and systems thinking. But errors also occur due to the thinking process of clinicians. In the book “Brain Rules,” author John Medina argues that schools and businesses create an environment that is less than friendly to the brain, citing current classroom design and cubicles for office workers. As a result, he states, we often have poor educational and business performance. I have little doubt that if Medina spent a few hours in a hospital, he would come to a similar conclusion: We don’t do the brain any favors when it comes to creating a healthy environment for providing safe and reliable care to our patients.

 

References

1. Sibinga EM, Wu AW. Clinician mindfulness and patient safety. JAMA. 2010;304(22):2532-2533.
2. Riess H. Empathy in medicine─a neurobiological perspective. JAMA. 2010;304(14):1604-1605.
3. Rogers RD, Monsell S. The costs of a predictable switch between simple cognitive tasks. J Exper Psychol. 1995;124(2):207–231.

Dr. Whitcomb is medical director of healthcare quality at Baystate Medical Center in Springfield, Mass. He is a co-founder and past president of SHM. Email him at wfwhit@comcast.net.

The prefix “neuro” has become quite popular the last couple of years. We have neuroeconomics, neuroplasticity, neuroergonomics, and, of course, neurohospitalist. The explosion of interest in the brain can be seen in the popular press, television, blogs, and the Journal of the American Medical Association.

I predict that recent breakthroughs in brain science and related fields (cognitive psychology, neurobiology, molecular biology, linguistics, and artificial intelligence, among others) will have a profound impact on the fields of quality improvement (QI) and patient safety, and, consequently on HM. To date, the patient safety movement has focused on systems issues in an effort to reduce harm induced by the healthcare system. I submit that for healthcare to be reliable and error-free in the future, we must leverage the innate strengths of the brain. Here I mention four areas where brain science breakthroughs can enable us to improve patient safety practices.

Diagnostic Error

Patrick Croskerry, an emergency physician and researcher, has described errors in diagnosis as stemming in part from cognitive bias. He offers “de-biasing strategies” as an approach to decreasing diagnostic error.

One of the most powerful de-biasing strategies is metacognition, or awareness of one’s own thinking processes. Closely related to metacognition is mindfulness, defined as the “nonjudgmental awareness of the present moment.” A growing body of literature makes the case that enhancing mindfulness might reduce the impact bias has on diagnostic error.¹ Table 1 (right) mentions a subset of bias types and how mindfulness might mitigate them. I’m sure you can think of cases you’ve encountered where bias has affected the diagnostic outcome.

click for large version

Empathy and Patient Experience

As the focus on patient experience grows, approaches to improving performance on patient satisfaction surveys are proliferating. Whatever technical components you choose to employ, a capacity for caregiver empathy is a crucial underlying factor to a better patient experience. Harvard psychiatrist Helen Riess, MD, points out that we are now beginning to understand the neurobiological basis of empathy. She and others present evidence that we may be able to “up-regulate” empathy through education or cognitive practices.² Several studies suggest we might be able to realize improved therapeutic relationships between physicians and patients, and they have led to programs, such as the ones at Stanford and Emory universities, that train caregivers to enhance empathy and compassion.

Interruptions and Cognitive Error

It has been customary in high-risk industries to ensure that certain procedures are free of interruptions. There is recognition that disturbances during high-stakes tasks, such as airline takeoff, carry disastrous consequences. We now know that multitasking is a myth and that the brain instead switches between tasks sequentially. But task-switching comes at the high cost of a marked increase in the rate of cognitive error.³ As we learn more, decreasing interruptions or delineating “interruption-free” zones in healthcare could be a way to mitigate an inherent vulnerability in our cognitive abilities.

Fatigue and Medical Error

It is well documented that sleep deprivation correlates with a decline in cognitive

performance in a number of classes of healthcare workers. Fatigue has also increased diagnostic error among residents. A 2011 Sentinel Alert from The Joint Commission creates a standard that healthcare organizations implement a fatigue-management plan to mitigate the potential harm caused by tired professionals.

Most of the approaches to improving outcomes in the hospital have focused on process improvement and systems thinking. But errors also occur due to the thinking process of clinicians. In the book “Brain Rules,” author John Medina argues that schools and businesses create an environment that is less than friendly to the brain, citing current classroom design and cubicles for office workers. As a result, he states, we often have poor educational and business performance. I have little doubt that if Medina spent a few hours in a hospital, he would come to a similar conclusion: We don’t do the brain any favors when it comes to creating a healthy environment for providing safe and reliable care to our patients.

 

References

1. Sibinga EM, Wu AW. Clinician mindfulness and patient safety. JAMA. 2010;304(22):2532-2533.
2. Riess H. Empathy in medicine─a neurobiological perspective. JAMA. 2010;304(14):1604-1605.
3. Rogers RD, Monsell S. The costs of a predictable switch between simple cognitive tasks. J Exper Psychol. 1995;124(2):207–231.

Dr. Whitcomb is medical director of healthcare quality at Baystate Medical Center in Springfield, Mass. He is a co-founder and past president of SHM. Email him at wfwhit@comcast.net.

The prefix “neuro” has become quite popular the last couple of years. We have neuroeconomics, neuroplasticity, neuroergonomics, and, of course, neurohospitalist. The explosion of interest in the brain can be seen in the popular press, television, blogs, and the Journal of the American Medical Association.

I predict that recent breakthroughs in brain science and related fields (cognitive psychology, neurobiology, molecular biology, linguistics, and artificial intelligence, among others) will have a profound impact on the fields of quality improvement (QI) and patient safety, and, consequently on HM. To date, the patient safety movement has focused on systems issues in an effort to reduce harm induced by the healthcare system. I submit that for healthcare to be reliable and error-free in the future, we must leverage the innate strengths of the brain. Here I mention four areas where brain science breakthroughs can enable us to improve patient safety practices.

Diagnostic Error

Patrick Croskerry, an emergency physician and researcher, has described errors in diagnosis as stemming in part from cognitive bias. He offers “de-biasing strategies” as an approach to decreasing diagnostic error.

One of the most powerful de-biasing strategies is metacognition, or awareness of one’s own thinking processes. Closely related to metacognition is mindfulness, defined as the “nonjudgmental awareness of the present moment.” A growing body of literature makes the case that enhancing mindfulness might reduce the impact bias has on diagnostic error.¹ Table 1 (right) mentions a subset of bias types and how mindfulness might mitigate them. I’m sure you can think of cases you’ve encountered where bias has affected the diagnostic outcome.

click for large version

Empathy and Patient Experience

As the focus on patient experience grows, approaches to improving performance on patient satisfaction surveys are proliferating. Whatever technical components you choose to employ, a capacity for caregiver empathy is a crucial underlying factor to a better patient experience. Harvard psychiatrist Helen Riess, MD, points out that we are now beginning to understand the neurobiological basis of empathy. She and others present evidence that we may be able to “up-regulate” empathy through education or cognitive practices.² Several studies suggest we might be able to realize improved therapeutic relationships between physicians and patients, and they have led to programs, such as the ones at Stanford and Emory universities, that train caregivers to enhance empathy and compassion.

Interruptions and Cognitive Error

It has been customary in high-risk industries to ensure that certain procedures are free of interruptions. There is recognition that disturbances during high-stakes tasks, such as airline takeoff, carry disastrous consequences. We now know that multitasking is a myth and that the brain instead switches between tasks sequentially. But task-switching comes at the high cost of a marked increase in the rate of cognitive error.³ As we learn more, decreasing interruptions or delineating “interruption-free” zones in healthcare could be a way to mitigate an inherent vulnerability in our cognitive abilities.

Fatigue and Medical Error

It is well documented that sleep deprivation correlates with a decline in cognitive

performance in a number of classes of healthcare workers. Fatigue has also increased diagnostic error among residents. A 2011 Sentinel Alert from The Joint Commission creates a standard that healthcare organizations implement a fatigue-management plan to mitigate the potential harm caused by tired professionals.

Most of the approaches to improving outcomes in the hospital have focused on process improvement and systems thinking. But errors also occur due to the thinking process of clinicians. In the book “Brain Rules,” author John Medina argues that schools and businesses create an environment that is less than friendly to the brain, citing current classroom design and cubicles for office workers. As a result, he states, we often have poor educational and business performance. I have little doubt that if Medina spent a few hours in a hospital, he would come to a similar conclusion: We don’t do the brain any favors when it comes to creating a healthy environment for providing safe and reliable care to our patients.

 

References

1. Sibinga EM, Wu AW. Clinician mindfulness and patient safety. JAMA. 2010;304(22):2532-2533.
2. Riess H. Empathy in medicine─a neurobiological perspective. JAMA. 2010;304(14):1604-1605.
3. Rogers RD, Monsell S. The costs of a predictable switch between simple cognitive tasks. J Exper Psychol. 1995;124(2):207–231.

Dr. Whitcomb is medical director of healthcare quality at Baystate Medical Center in Springfield, Mass. He is a co-founder and past president of SHM. Email him at wfwhit@comcast.net.

For most of my medical career, the hospital functioned more as a swap meet, where every physician had his or her own booth, than as an integrated, community health resource with a focused mission. Although the innovation of HM might be counted as the beginning of a new, more aligned approach between physicians and the hospital as an institution, the rapidly evolving employment of physicians by hospitals and the focusing of physician practice primarily on inpatient care has taken this to another level.

The New Paradigm

A number of recent surveys by physician recruitment firms and physician management companies have found that less than 25% of physicians are self-employed. Planned changes to insurance and Medicare reimbursement for healthcare have driven cardiologists, orthopedists, surgeons, and many other physicians, who want to protect their flow of patients and dollars, to readily become hospital or large-group-practice employees. The entrance of accountable-care organizations (ACOs) to the landscape and the greater need for physician and hospital alignment have only accelerated this trend.

At the same time, the growth of all sorts of hospitalist specialties has further changed the medical staff of the hospital. Internal-medicine and family-practice hospitalists now number more than 35,000. There are probably more than 2,000 pediatric hospitalists. The newly formed Society of OB/GYN Hospitalists (SOGH) estimates there are more than 1,500 so-called laborists in the U.S., and there are several hundred neurohospitalists, orthopedic hospitalists, and acute-care surgeons.

It is clear to me that a “home team” for the hospital of the future is developing, and it includes hospitalists, ED physicians, critical-care physicians, and the growing panoply of hospital-employed cardiologists and surgeons. There is an opportunity for alignment and integration in what has been a fragmented delivery of healthcare.

On the commercial side of the equation, this new opportunity for physician-hospital alignment might allow for a new distribution of compensation. It already is common for hospitals to be transferring some of “their” Medicare Part A dollars to hospitalists. With penalties or additional payments in the ACO model (e.g. shared savings) or in value-based purchasing, there certainly are mechanisms to redistribute funding to new physician compensation models, based more on performance than on volume of services (i.e. the old productivity model).

On another level, where compensation and performance merge, the new medical staff has the ability to deliver a safer hospital experience to our patients and to improve performance. This could take the form of reduction in hospital-acquired infections (HAIs) or reducing unnecessary DVTs and PEs. It could take the form of a better discharge process that leads to fewer unnecessary readmissions or fewer preventable ED visits. On the OB side, 24-hour on-site availability of OB hospitalists has been shown to reduce adverse birth events and, therefore, reduce liability risk and malpractice premiums. On-site availability for patients with fractures and trauma cases by orthopedic hospitalists or hospital-employed orthopedists also can reduce expenses and adverse events for these acutely ill patients.

HM’s Role

With all these changes occurring so rapidly and with all these new players being thrown into the stew at the hospital, it may be worth a few minutes for the “traditional” hospitalist on the medical service to step back and see how our role may evolve. We already have an increasing role in comanagement of surgical and subspecialty patients, as well as a more integrated role at the ED-hospitalist interface. As hospitals look for hospital-focused physicians, there is a potential for scope creep that must be thoughtfully managed.

 

This may require “rules of engagement” with other key services. While it may be appropriate for a patient with an acute abdomen to be admitted to the hospitalist service, if the hospitalist determines that this patient needs surgery sooner rather than later, there needs to be a straightforward way to get the surgeon in house and on the case and the patient to the operating room. To this point, medical hospitalists can help manage the medical aspects of a neurosurgical case, but we don’t do burr holes. And if there is to be pushback from the surgeon, this can’t happen at 2 a.m. over the telephone; it must be handled by the service leaders at their weekly meeting.

On another level, hospitalists need to be careful that the hospital doesn’t just hand us the administrative functions of other physicians’ care. Hospitalists are not the default to do H&Ps on surgical cases or handle their discharges, even if this falls into the hospital strategy to be able to employ fewer high-priced surgeons and subspecialists by handing off some of their work to their hospitalists.

On the other hand, it is totally appropriate for many of the hospital-focused physicians to come together, possibly under the leadership of the hospital CMO, to look at the workflow and to set up a new way to deliver healthcare that not only redefines the workload, but also involves the rest of the team, including nursing, pharmacy, case management, and social services. Medical hospitalists will need to consider whether we should be the hub of the new physician enterprise and what that would mean for workload, FTEs, and scope of practice.

Such organizations as SHM and the American Hospital Association (AHA) are thinking how best to support and convene the hospital-based physician. AHA has developed a Physician Forum with more than 6,000 members who now have their practices aligned with their hospital. SHM has held meetings of the leaders of hospital-focused practice and is developing virtual forums on Hospital Medicine Exchange to keep the discussion going. Through the Hospital Care Collaborative (HCC), SHM is engaging the leadership of pharmacy, nursing, case management, social services, and respiratory therapy.

Although we are still early in creating the direction for the new medical staff, the water is rising and the current is moving rapidly. The strong forces that are driving new payment paradigms are leading to changes in compensation and an emphasis on definable, measureable outcomes of performance and safety. Hospitalists, who have been thinking in this way and who have some experience in the new ways, should be well positioned to lead and participate actively in the formation of the new hospital home team.

When opportunity knocks, you still have to get up and answer the door. It’s time to get ready to step up.

Dr. Wellikson is CEO of SHM.

For most of my medical career, the hospital functioned more as a swap meet, where every physician had his or her own booth, than as an integrated, community health resource with a focused mission. Although the innovation of HM might be counted as the beginning of a new, more aligned approach between physicians and the hospital as an institution, the rapidly evolving employment of physicians by hospitals and the focusing of physician practice primarily on inpatient care has taken this to another level.

The New Paradigm

A number of recent surveys by physician recruitment firms and physician management companies have found that less than 25% of physicians are self-employed. Planned changes to insurance and Medicare reimbursement for healthcare have driven cardiologists, orthopedists, surgeons, and many other physicians, who want to protect their flow of patients and dollars, to readily become hospital or large-group-practice employees. The entrance of accountable-care organizations (ACOs) to the landscape and the greater need for physician and hospital alignment have only accelerated this trend.

At the same time, the growth of all sorts of hospitalist specialties has further changed the medical staff of the hospital. Internal-medicine and family-practice hospitalists now number more than 35,000. There are probably more than 2,000 pediatric hospitalists. The newly formed Society of OB/GYN Hospitalists (SOGH) estimates there are more than 1,500 so-called laborists in the U.S., and there are several hundred neurohospitalists, orthopedic hospitalists, and acute-care surgeons.

It is clear to me that a “home team” for the hospital of the future is developing, and it includes hospitalists, ED physicians, critical-care physicians, and the growing panoply of hospital-employed cardiologists and surgeons. There is an opportunity for alignment and integration in what has been a fragmented delivery of healthcare.

On the commercial side of the equation, this new opportunity for physician-hospital alignment might allow for a new distribution of compensation. It already is common for hospitals to be transferring some of “their” Medicare Part A dollars to hospitalists. With penalties or additional payments in the ACO model (e.g. shared savings) or in value-based purchasing, there certainly are mechanisms to redistribute funding to new physician compensation models, based more on performance than on volume of services (i.e. the old productivity model).

On another level, where compensation and performance merge, the new medical staff has the ability to deliver a safer hospital experience to our patients and to improve performance. This could take the form of reduction in hospital-acquired infections (HAIs) or reducing unnecessary DVTs and PEs. It could take the form of a better discharge process that leads to fewer unnecessary readmissions or fewer preventable ED visits. On the OB side, 24-hour on-site availability of OB hospitalists has been shown to reduce adverse birth events and, therefore, reduce liability risk and malpractice premiums. On-site availability for patients with fractures and trauma cases by orthopedic hospitalists or hospital-employed orthopedists also can reduce expenses and adverse events for these acutely ill patients.

HM’s Role

With all these changes occurring so rapidly and with all these new players being thrown into the stew at the hospital, it may be worth a few minutes for the “traditional” hospitalist on the medical service to step back and see how our role may evolve. We already have an increasing role in comanagement of surgical and subspecialty patients, as well as a more integrated role at the ED-hospitalist interface. As hospitals look for hospital-focused physicians, there is a potential for scope creep that must be thoughtfully managed.

 

This may require “rules of engagement” with other key services. While it may be appropriate for a patient with an acute abdomen to be admitted to the hospitalist service, if the hospitalist determines that this patient needs surgery sooner rather than later, there needs to be a straightforward way to get the surgeon in house and on the case and the patient to the operating room. To this point, medical hospitalists can help manage the medical aspects of a neurosurgical case, but we don’t do burr holes. And if there is to be pushback from the surgeon, this can’t happen at 2 a.m. over the telephone; it must be handled by the service leaders at their weekly meeting.

On another level, hospitalists need to be careful that the hospital doesn’t just hand us the administrative functions of other physicians’ care. Hospitalists are not the default to do H&Ps on surgical cases or handle their discharges, even if this falls into the hospital strategy to be able to employ fewer high-priced surgeons and subspecialists by handing off some of their work to their hospitalists.

On the other hand, it is totally appropriate for many of the hospital-focused physicians to come together, possibly under the leadership of the hospital CMO, to look at the workflow and to set up a new way to deliver healthcare that not only redefines the workload, but also involves the rest of the team, including nursing, pharmacy, case management, and social services. Medical hospitalists will need to consider whether we should be the hub of the new physician enterprise and what that would mean for workload, FTEs, and scope of practice.

Such organizations as SHM and the American Hospital Association (AHA) are thinking how best to support and convene the hospital-based physician. AHA has developed a Physician Forum with more than 6,000 members who now have their practices aligned with their hospital. SHM has held meetings of the leaders of hospital-focused practice and is developing virtual forums on Hospital Medicine Exchange to keep the discussion going. Through the Hospital Care Collaborative (HCC), SHM is engaging the leadership of pharmacy, nursing, case management, social services, and respiratory therapy.

Although we are still early in creating the direction for the new medical staff, the water is rising and the current is moving rapidly. The strong forces that are driving new payment paradigms are leading to changes in compensation and an emphasis on definable, measureable outcomes of performance and safety. Hospitalists, who have been thinking in this way and who have some experience in the new ways, should be well positioned to lead and participate actively in the formation of the new hospital home team.

When opportunity knocks, you still have to get up and answer the door. It’s time to get ready to step up.

Dr. Wellikson is CEO of SHM.

For most of my medical career, the hospital functioned more as a swap meet, where every physician had his or her own booth, than as an integrated, community health resource with a focused mission. Although the innovation of HM might be counted as the beginning of a new, more aligned approach between physicians and the hospital as an institution, the rapidly evolving employment of physicians by hospitals and the focusing of physician practice primarily on inpatient care has taken this to another level.

The New Paradigm

A number of recent surveys by physician recruitment firms and physician management companies have found that less than 25% of physicians are self-employed. Planned changes to insurance and Medicare reimbursement for healthcare have driven cardiologists, orthopedists, surgeons, and many other physicians, who want to protect their flow of patients and dollars, to readily become hospital or large-group-practice employees. The entrance of accountable-care organizations (ACOs) to the landscape and the greater need for physician and hospital alignment have only accelerated this trend.

At the same time, the growth of all sorts of hospitalist specialties has further changed the medical staff of the hospital. Internal-medicine and family-practice hospitalists now number more than 35,000. There are probably more than 2,000 pediatric hospitalists. The newly formed Society of OB/GYN Hospitalists (SOGH) estimates there are more than 1,500 so-called laborists in the U.S., and there are several hundred neurohospitalists, orthopedic hospitalists, and acute-care surgeons.

It is clear to me that a “home team” for the hospital of the future is developing, and it includes hospitalists, ED physicians, critical-care physicians, and the growing panoply of hospital-employed cardiologists and surgeons. There is an opportunity for alignment and integration in what has been a fragmented delivery of healthcare.

On the commercial side of the equation, this new opportunity for physician-hospital alignment might allow for a new distribution of compensation. It already is common for hospitals to be transferring some of “their” Medicare Part A dollars to hospitalists. With penalties or additional payments in the ACO model (e.g. shared savings) or in value-based purchasing, there certainly are mechanisms to redistribute funding to new physician compensation models, based more on performance than on volume of services (i.e. the old productivity model).

On another level, where compensation and performance merge, the new medical staff has the ability to deliver a safer hospital experience to our patients and to improve performance. This could take the form of reduction in hospital-acquired infections (HAIs) or reducing unnecessary DVTs and PEs. It could take the form of a better discharge process that leads to fewer unnecessary readmissions or fewer preventable ED visits. On the OB side, 24-hour on-site availability of OB hospitalists has been shown to reduce adverse birth events and, therefore, reduce liability risk and malpractice premiums. On-site availability for patients with fractures and trauma cases by orthopedic hospitalists or hospital-employed orthopedists also can reduce expenses and adverse events for these acutely ill patients.

HM’s Role

With all these changes occurring so rapidly and with all these new players being thrown into the stew at the hospital, it may be worth a few minutes for the “traditional” hospitalist on the medical service to step back and see how our role may evolve. We already have an increasing role in comanagement of surgical and subspecialty patients, as well as a more integrated role at the ED-hospitalist interface. As hospitals look for hospital-focused physicians, there is a potential for scope creep that must be thoughtfully managed.

 

This may require “rules of engagement” with other key services. While it may be appropriate for a patient with an acute abdomen to be admitted to the hospitalist service, if the hospitalist determines that this patient needs surgery sooner rather than later, there needs to be a straightforward way to get the surgeon in house and on the case and the patient to the operating room. To this point, medical hospitalists can help manage the medical aspects of a neurosurgical case, but we don’t do burr holes. And if there is to be pushback from the surgeon, this can’t happen at 2 a.m. over the telephone; it must be handled by the service leaders at their weekly meeting.

On another level, hospitalists need to be careful that the hospital doesn’t just hand us the administrative functions of other physicians’ care. Hospitalists are not the default to do H&Ps on surgical cases or handle their discharges, even if this falls into the hospital strategy to be able to employ fewer high-priced surgeons and subspecialists by handing off some of their work to their hospitalists.

On the other hand, it is totally appropriate for many of the hospital-focused physicians to come together, possibly under the leadership of the hospital CMO, to look at the workflow and to set up a new way to deliver healthcare that not only redefines the workload, but also involves the rest of the team, including nursing, pharmacy, case management, and social services. Medical hospitalists will need to consider whether we should be the hub of the new physician enterprise and what that would mean for workload, FTEs, and scope of practice.

Such organizations as SHM and the American Hospital Association (AHA) are thinking how best to support and convene the hospital-based physician. AHA has developed a Physician Forum with more than 6,000 members who now have their practices aligned with their hospital. SHM has held meetings of the leaders of hospital-focused practice and is developing virtual forums on Hospital Medicine Exchange to keep the discussion going. Through the Hospital Care Collaborative (HCC), SHM is engaging the leadership of pharmacy, nursing, case management, social services, and respiratory therapy.

Although we are still early in creating the direction for the new medical staff, the water is rising and the current is moving rapidly. The strong forces that are driving new payment paradigms are leading to changes in compensation and an emphasis on definable, measureable outcomes of performance and safety. Hospitalists, who have been thinking in this way and who have some experience in the new ways, should be well positioned to lead and participate actively in the formation of the new hospital home team.

When opportunity knocks, you still have to get up and answer the door. It’s time to get ready to step up.

Dr. Wellikson is CEO of SHM.