Suzanne Bopp

Rates of 30-day readmissions, which are both common and difficult to predict, are of major concern to hospitalists.

“Unfortunately, interventions developed to date have not been universally successful in preventing hospital readmissions for various medical conditions and patient types,” according to a recent article in the Journal of Hospital Medicine. “One potential explanation for this is the inability to reliably predict which patients are at risk for readmission to better target preventative interventions.”

This fact led the authors to perform a study to determine whether the occurrence of automated clinical deterioration alerts (CDAs) could predict 30-day hospital readmission. The 36 variables in the CDA algorithm included age, radiologic agents, and temperature. The retrospective study assessed 3,015 patients admitted to eight general medicine units for all-cause 30-day readmission. Of these, 1,141 patients triggered a CDA, and they were significantly more likely to have a 30-day readmission compared to those who did not trigger a CDA (23.6% versus 15.9%).

The researchers concluded that readily identifiable clinical variables can be identified that predict 30-day readmission.

“It may be important to include these variables in existing prediction tools if pay for performance and across-institution comparisons are to be ‘fair’ to institutions that care for more seriously ill patients,” they write. “The development of an accurate real-time early warning system has the potential to identify patients at risk for various adverse outcomes including clinical deterioration, hospital death and post-discharge readmission. By identifying patients at greatest risk for readmission, valuable healthcare resources can be better targeted to such populations.”

Reference

1. Micek ST, Samant M, Bailey T, et al. Real-time automated clinical deterioration alerts predict thirty-day hospital readmission [published online ahead of print June 3, 2016]. J Hosp Med. doi:10.1002/jhm.2617.

 

Quick Byte

The Cost of Vaccine Avoidance

Many Americans avoid their recommended vaccines: For example, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) reports that only 42% of U.S. adults age 18 or older received the flu vaccine during the 2015–2016 flu season. A study recently released online by Health Affairs calculated the annual cost of the diseases associated with 10 vaccines the CDC recommends for adults. In 2015, that economic burden was $8.95 billion. A full 80% of that—$7.1 billion—was attributed to unvaccinated people.

Reference

1. The cost of US adult vaccine avoidance: $8.95 billion in 2015. Health Affairs website. Accessed October 17, 2016

Rates of 30-day readmissions, which are both common and difficult to predict, are of major concern to hospitalists.

“Unfortunately, interventions developed to date have not been universally successful in preventing hospital readmissions for various medical conditions and patient types,” according to a recent article in the Journal of Hospital Medicine. “One potential explanation for this is the inability to reliably predict which patients are at risk for readmission to better target preventative interventions.”

This fact led the authors to perform a study to determine whether the occurrence of automated clinical deterioration alerts (CDAs) could predict 30-day hospital readmission. The 36 variables in the CDA algorithm included age, radiologic agents, and temperature. The retrospective study assessed 3,015 patients admitted to eight general medicine units for all-cause 30-day readmission. Of these, 1,141 patients triggered a CDA, and they were significantly more likely to have a 30-day readmission compared to those who did not trigger a CDA (23.6% versus 15.9%).

The researchers concluded that readily identifiable clinical variables can be identified that predict 30-day readmission.

“It may be important to include these variables in existing prediction tools if pay for performance and across-institution comparisons are to be ‘fair’ to institutions that care for more seriously ill patients,” they write. “The development of an accurate real-time early warning system has the potential to identify patients at risk for various adverse outcomes including clinical deterioration, hospital death and post-discharge readmission. By identifying patients at greatest risk for readmission, valuable healthcare resources can be better targeted to such populations.”

Reference

1. Micek ST, Samant M, Bailey T, et al. Real-time automated clinical deterioration alerts predict thirty-day hospital readmission [published online ahead of print June 3, 2016]. J Hosp Med. doi:10.1002/jhm.2617.

 

Quick Byte

The Cost of Vaccine Avoidance

Many Americans avoid their recommended vaccines: For example, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) reports that only 42% of U.S. adults age 18 or older received the flu vaccine during the 2015–2016 flu season. A study recently released online by Health Affairs calculated the annual cost of the diseases associated with 10 vaccines the CDC recommends for adults. In 2015, that economic burden was $8.95 billion. A full 80% of that—$7.1 billion—was attributed to unvaccinated people.

Reference

1. The cost of US adult vaccine avoidance: $8.95 billion in 2015. Health Affairs website. Accessed October 17, 2016

Rates of 30-day readmissions, which are both common and difficult to predict, are of major concern to hospitalists.

“Unfortunately, interventions developed to date have not been universally successful in preventing hospital readmissions for various medical conditions and patient types,” according to a recent article in the Journal of Hospital Medicine. “One potential explanation for this is the inability to reliably predict which patients are at risk for readmission to better target preventative interventions.”

This fact led the authors to perform a study to determine whether the occurrence of automated clinical deterioration alerts (CDAs) could predict 30-day hospital readmission. The 36 variables in the CDA algorithm included age, radiologic agents, and temperature. The retrospective study assessed 3,015 patients admitted to eight general medicine units for all-cause 30-day readmission. Of these, 1,141 patients triggered a CDA, and they were significantly more likely to have a 30-day readmission compared to those who did not trigger a CDA (23.6% versus 15.9%).

The researchers concluded that readily identifiable clinical variables can be identified that predict 30-day readmission.

“It may be important to include these variables in existing prediction tools if pay for performance and across-institution comparisons are to be ‘fair’ to institutions that care for more seriously ill patients,” they write. “The development of an accurate real-time early warning system has the potential to identify patients at risk for various adverse outcomes including clinical deterioration, hospital death and post-discharge readmission. By identifying patients at greatest risk for readmission, valuable healthcare resources can be better targeted to such populations.”

Reference

1. Micek ST, Samant M, Bailey T, et al. Real-time automated clinical deterioration alerts predict thirty-day hospital readmission [published online ahead of print June 3, 2016]. J Hosp Med. doi:10.1002/jhm.2617.

 

Quick Byte

The Cost of Vaccine Avoidance

Many Americans avoid their recommended vaccines: For example, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) reports that only 42% of U.S. adults age 18 or older received the flu vaccine during the 2015–2016 flu season. A study recently released online by Health Affairs calculated the annual cost of the diseases associated with 10 vaccines the CDC recommends for adults. In 2015, that economic burden was $8.95 billion. A full 80% of that—$7.1 billion—was attributed to unvaccinated people.

Reference

1. The cost of US adult vaccine avoidance: $8.95 billion in 2015. Health Affairs website. Accessed October 17, 2016

Twenty percent of Americans live in areas where there are shortages of physicians, according to a policy brief in Health Affairs. Some analysts believe the answer to this problem is telehealth, which they say could also save the healthcare industry some $4.28 billion annually.

While the Affordable Care Act signaled a move toward telehealth development at the federal level (through Medicare), states still largely govern coverage of telehealth services by Medicaid or private insurers.

“Currently there is no uniform legal approach to telehealth, and this continues to be a major challenge in its provision. In particular, concerns about reimbursements, for both private insurers and public programs such as Medicaid, continue to limit the implementation and use of telehealth services,” according to the brief.

Now, Congress is considering the Medicare Telehealth Parity Act, intended to modernize the way Medicare reimburses telehealth services and to expand locations and coverage. To enjoy the benefits of telehealth services, states are likely to move toward full-parity laws for the services, the brief notes.

“Without parity, there are limited incentives for the development of telehealth or for providers to move toward telehealth services,” according to the brief. “If there are no incentives to use telehealth, then providers will continue to focus on in-person care, which will keep healthcare costs high, continue to create access issues, and possibly provide lesser standards of care for chronic disease patients who benefit from remote monitoring.”

Reference

1. Yang T. Telehealth parity laws. Health Affairs Website. Accessed October 17, 2016.

Twenty percent of Americans live in areas where there are shortages of physicians, according to a policy brief in Health Affairs. Some analysts believe the answer to this problem is telehealth, which they say could also save the healthcare industry some $4.28 billion annually.

While the Affordable Care Act signaled a move toward telehealth development at the federal level (through Medicare), states still largely govern coverage of telehealth services by Medicaid or private insurers.

“Currently there is no uniform legal approach to telehealth, and this continues to be a major challenge in its provision. In particular, concerns about reimbursements, for both private insurers and public programs such as Medicaid, continue to limit the implementation and use of telehealth services,” according to the brief.

Now, Congress is considering the Medicare Telehealth Parity Act, intended to modernize the way Medicare reimburses telehealth services and to expand locations and coverage. To enjoy the benefits of telehealth services, states are likely to move toward full-parity laws for the services, the brief notes.

“Without parity, there are limited incentives for the development of telehealth or for providers to move toward telehealth services,” according to the brief. “If there are no incentives to use telehealth, then providers will continue to focus on in-person care, which will keep healthcare costs high, continue to create access issues, and possibly provide lesser standards of care for chronic disease patients who benefit from remote monitoring.”

Reference

1. Yang T. Telehealth parity laws. Health Affairs Website. Accessed October 17, 2016.

Twenty percent of Americans live in areas where there are shortages of physicians, according to a policy brief in Health Affairs. Some analysts believe the answer to this problem is telehealth, which they say could also save the healthcare industry some $4.28 billion annually.

While the Affordable Care Act signaled a move toward telehealth development at the federal level (through Medicare), states still largely govern coverage of telehealth services by Medicaid or private insurers.

“Currently there is no uniform legal approach to telehealth, and this continues to be a major challenge in its provision. In particular, concerns about reimbursements, for both private insurers and public programs such as Medicaid, continue to limit the implementation and use of telehealth services,” according to the brief.

Now, Congress is considering the Medicare Telehealth Parity Act, intended to modernize the way Medicare reimburses telehealth services and to expand locations and coverage. To enjoy the benefits of telehealth services, states are likely to move toward full-parity laws for the services, the brief notes.

“Without parity, there are limited incentives for the development of telehealth or for providers to move toward telehealth services,” according to the brief. “If there are no incentives to use telehealth, then providers will continue to focus on in-person care, which will keep healthcare costs high, continue to create access issues, and possibly provide lesser standards of care for chronic disease patients who benefit from remote monitoring.”

Reference

1. Yang T. Telehealth parity laws. Health Affairs Website. Accessed October 17, 2016.

Hospitalists often rely on inpatient telemetry monitoring to identify arrhythmias, ischemia, and QT prolongation, but research has shown that its inappropriate usage increases costs to the healthcare system. An abstract presented at the 2016 meeting of the Society of Hospital Medicine looked at one hospital’s telemetry usage and how it might be improved.

The study revolved around a progress note template the authors developed, which incorporated documentation for telemetry use indications and need for telemetry continuation on non-ICU internal medicine services. The authors also provided an educational session describing American College of Cardiology and American Heart Association (ACC/AHA) telemetry use guidelines for internal medicine residents with a pretest and posttest.

Application of ACA/AHA guidelines was assessed with five scenarios before and after instruction on the guidelines. On pretest, only 29% of trainees answered all five questions correctly; on posttest, 63% did. A comparison between charts of admitted patients with telemetry orders from 2015 with charts from 2013 indicated that the appropriate initiation of telemetry improved significantly as did telemetry documentation. Inappropriate continuation rates were cut in half.

The success of the study suggests further work.

“We plan expansion of telemetry utilization education to internal medicine faculty and nursing to encourage daily review of telemetry usage,” the authors write. “We are also working to develop telemetry orders that end during standard work hours to prevent inadvertent continuation by overnight providers.”

Reference

1. Kuehn C, Steyers CM III, Glenn K, Fang M. Resident-based telemetry utilization innovations lead to improved outcomes [abstract]. J Hosp Med. 2016;11(suppl 1). Accessed October 17, 2016.

Hospitalists often rely on inpatient telemetry monitoring to identify arrhythmias, ischemia, and QT prolongation, but research has shown that its inappropriate usage increases costs to the healthcare system. An abstract presented at the 2016 meeting of the Society of Hospital Medicine looked at one hospital’s telemetry usage and how it might be improved.

The study revolved around a progress note template the authors developed, which incorporated documentation for telemetry use indications and need for telemetry continuation on non-ICU internal medicine services. The authors also provided an educational session describing American College of Cardiology and American Heart Association (ACC/AHA) telemetry use guidelines for internal medicine residents with a pretest and posttest.

Application of ACA/AHA guidelines was assessed with five scenarios before and after instruction on the guidelines. On pretest, only 29% of trainees answered all five questions correctly; on posttest, 63% did. A comparison between charts of admitted patients with telemetry orders from 2015 with charts from 2013 indicated that the appropriate initiation of telemetry improved significantly as did telemetry documentation. Inappropriate continuation rates were cut in half.

The success of the study suggests further work.

“We plan expansion of telemetry utilization education to internal medicine faculty and nursing to encourage daily review of telemetry usage,” the authors write. “We are also working to develop telemetry orders that end during standard work hours to prevent inadvertent continuation by overnight providers.”

Reference

1. Kuehn C, Steyers CM III, Glenn K, Fang M. Resident-based telemetry utilization innovations lead to improved outcomes [abstract]. J Hosp Med. 2016;11(suppl 1). Accessed October 17, 2016.

Hospitalists often rely on inpatient telemetry monitoring to identify arrhythmias, ischemia, and QT prolongation, but research has shown that its inappropriate usage increases costs to the healthcare system. An abstract presented at the 2016 meeting of the Society of Hospital Medicine looked at one hospital’s telemetry usage and how it might be improved.

The study revolved around a progress note template the authors developed, which incorporated documentation for telemetry use indications and need for telemetry continuation on non-ICU internal medicine services. The authors also provided an educational session describing American College of Cardiology and American Heart Association (ACC/AHA) telemetry use guidelines for internal medicine residents with a pretest and posttest.

Application of ACA/AHA guidelines was assessed with five scenarios before and after instruction on the guidelines. On pretest, only 29% of trainees answered all five questions correctly; on posttest, 63% did. A comparison between charts of admitted patients with telemetry orders from 2015 with charts from 2013 indicated that the appropriate initiation of telemetry improved significantly as did telemetry documentation. Inappropriate continuation rates were cut in half.

The success of the study suggests further work.

“We plan expansion of telemetry utilization education to internal medicine faculty and nursing to encourage daily review of telemetry usage,” the authors write. “We are also working to develop telemetry orders that end during standard work hours to prevent inadvertent continuation by overnight providers.”

Reference

1. Kuehn C, Steyers CM III, Glenn K, Fang M. Resident-based telemetry utilization innovations lead to improved outcomes [abstract]. J Hosp Med. 2016;11(suppl 1). Accessed October 17, 2016.

The hospitalist’s performance is among the major determinants of a patient’s hospital experience. But what are the elements of a successful interaction? The authors of an article published in the Journal of Hospital Medicine set out to establish metrics to answer—and measure the answer—to that question, to assess hospitalists’ behaviors, and to establish norms and expectations.

“This study represents a first step to specifically characterize comportment and communication in hospital medicine,” the authors write.

Patient satisfaction surveys, they state, have some shortcomings in providing useful answers to that question.

“First, the attribution to specific providers is questionable,” the authors write. “Second, recall about the provider by the patients may be poor because surveys are sent to patients days after they return home. Third, the patients’ recovery and health outcomes are likely to influence their assessment of the doctor. Finally, feedback is known to be most valuable and transformative when it is specific and given in real time.”

Researchers asked the chiefs of hospital medicine divisions at five hospitals to identify their “most clinically excellent” hospitalists. Each hospitalist was observed during a routine clinical shift, and behaviors were recorded that were believed to be associated with excellent comportment and communication using the hospital medicine comportment and communication tool (HMCCOT), the final version of which has 23 variables. The physicians’ HMCCOT scores were associated with their patient satisfaction survey scores, suggesting that improved comportment might translate into enhanced patient satisfaction.

The results showed extensive variability in comportment and communication at the bedside. One variable that stood out to the researchers was that teach-back was employed in only 13% of the encounters.

“Previous studies have shown that teach-back corroborates patient comprehension and can be used to engage patients (and caregivers) in realistic goal setting and optimal health service utilization,” the researchers write. “Further, patients who clearly understand their post-discharge plan are 30% less likely to be readmitted or visit the emergency department. The data for our group have helped us to see areas of strengths, such as hand washing, where we are above compliance rates across hospitals in the United States, as well as those matters that represent opportunities for improvement such as connecting more deeply with our patients.”

The researchers call for future studies to determine whether hospitalists can improve feedback from this tool and whether enhancing comportment and communication can improve both patient satisfaction and clinical outcomes.

Reference

1. Kotwal S, Khaliq W, Landis R, Wright S. Developing a comportment and communication tool for use in hospital medicine [published online ahead of print August 13, 2016]. J Hosp Med. doi:10.1002/jhm.2647.

The hospitalist’s performance is among the major determinants of a patient’s hospital experience. But what are the elements of a successful interaction? The authors of an article published in the Journal of Hospital Medicine set out to establish metrics to answer—and measure the answer—to that question, to assess hospitalists’ behaviors, and to establish norms and expectations.

“This study represents a first step to specifically characterize comportment and communication in hospital medicine,” the authors write.

Patient satisfaction surveys, they state, have some shortcomings in providing useful answers to that question.

“First, the attribution to specific providers is questionable,” the authors write. “Second, recall about the provider by the patients may be poor because surveys are sent to patients days after they return home. Third, the patients’ recovery and health outcomes are likely to influence their assessment of the doctor. Finally, feedback is known to be most valuable and transformative when it is specific and given in real time.”

Researchers asked the chiefs of hospital medicine divisions at five hospitals to identify their “most clinically excellent” hospitalists. Each hospitalist was observed during a routine clinical shift, and behaviors were recorded that were believed to be associated with excellent comportment and communication using the hospital medicine comportment and communication tool (HMCCOT), the final version of which has 23 variables. The physicians’ HMCCOT scores were associated with their patient satisfaction survey scores, suggesting that improved comportment might translate into enhanced patient satisfaction.

The results showed extensive variability in comportment and communication at the bedside. One variable that stood out to the researchers was that teach-back was employed in only 13% of the encounters.

“Previous studies have shown that teach-back corroborates patient comprehension and can be used to engage patients (and caregivers) in realistic goal setting and optimal health service utilization,” the researchers write. “Further, patients who clearly understand their post-discharge plan are 30% less likely to be readmitted or visit the emergency department. The data for our group have helped us to see areas of strengths, such as hand washing, where we are above compliance rates across hospitals in the United States, as well as those matters that represent opportunities for improvement such as connecting more deeply with our patients.”

The researchers call for future studies to determine whether hospitalists can improve feedback from this tool and whether enhancing comportment and communication can improve both patient satisfaction and clinical outcomes.

Reference

1. Kotwal S, Khaliq W, Landis R, Wright S. Developing a comportment and communication tool for use in hospital medicine [published online ahead of print August 13, 2016]. J Hosp Med. doi:10.1002/jhm.2647.

The hospitalist’s performance is among the major determinants of a patient’s hospital experience. But what are the elements of a successful interaction? The authors of an article published in the Journal of Hospital Medicine set out to establish metrics to answer—and measure the answer—to that question, to assess hospitalists’ behaviors, and to establish norms and expectations.

“This study represents a first step to specifically characterize comportment and communication in hospital medicine,” the authors write.

Patient satisfaction surveys, they state, have some shortcomings in providing useful answers to that question.

“First, the attribution to specific providers is questionable,” the authors write. “Second, recall about the provider by the patients may be poor because surveys are sent to patients days after they return home. Third, the patients’ recovery and health outcomes are likely to influence their assessment of the doctor. Finally, feedback is known to be most valuable and transformative when it is specific and given in real time.”

Researchers asked the chiefs of hospital medicine divisions at five hospitals to identify their “most clinically excellent” hospitalists. Each hospitalist was observed during a routine clinical shift, and behaviors were recorded that were believed to be associated with excellent comportment and communication using the hospital medicine comportment and communication tool (HMCCOT), the final version of which has 23 variables. The physicians’ HMCCOT scores were associated with their patient satisfaction survey scores, suggesting that improved comportment might translate into enhanced patient satisfaction.

The results showed extensive variability in comportment and communication at the bedside. One variable that stood out to the researchers was that teach-back was employed in only 13% of the encounters.

“Previous studies have shown that teach-back corroborates patient comprehension and can be used to engage patients (and caregivers) in realistic goal setting and optimal health service utilization,” the researchers write. “Further, patients who clearly understand their post-discharge plan are 30% less likely to be readmitted or visit the emergency department. The data for our group have helped us to see areas of strengths, such as hand washing, where we are above compliance rates across hospitals in the United States, as well as those matters that represent opportunities for improvement such as connecting more deeply with our patients.”

The researchers call for future studies to determine whether hospitalists can improve feedback from this tool and whether enhancing comportment and communication can improve both patient satisfaction and clinical outcomes.

Reference

1. Kotwal S, Khaliq W, Landis R, Wright S. Developing a comportment and communication tool for use in hospital medicine [published online ahead of print August 13, 2016]. J Hosp Med. doi:10.1002/jhm.2647.

Decreasing antimicrobial resistance and improving the correct use of antimicrobials is a national priority. According to CDC estimates, at least 2 million illnesses and 23,000 deaths annually are caused by antibiotic-resistant bacteria in the United States alone.

“Antimicrobial resistance is a serious global healthcare issue,” says Kelly Podgorny, DNP, MS, CPHQ, RN, project director at The Joint Commission. “If you review the scientific literature, it will indicate that we’re in crisis mode right now because of this.”

That’s why The Joint Commission recently announced a new Medication Management (MM) standard for hospitals, critical-access hospitals, and nursing care centers. This standard addresses antimicrobial stewardship and becomes effective January 1, 2017.

The Joint Commission is one of many organizations implementing plans to support the national action plan on this issue developed by the White House and signed by President Barack Obama. The purpose of The Joint Commission’s antimicrobial stewardship standard is to improve quality and patient safety and also to support, through its accreditation process, imperatives and actions at a national level.

The Joint Commission’s standard includes medications beyond just antibiotics by addressing antimicrobial stewardship. Clifford Chen, MD and Steven Eagle, MD

“Most of the organizations are focusing on antibiotics,” Podgorny says. “We broadened our perspective. The World Health Organization states that antimicrobial resistance threatens the effective prevention and treatment of an ever-increasing range of infections caused by bacteria, which would be antibiotics, but also includes parasites, viruses, and fungi.”

She emphasizes that hospitals need to have an effective antimicrobial stewardship program supported by hospital leadership. In fact, in The Joint Commission’s standard, the first element of performance requires leadership to establish antimicrobial stewardship as an organizational priority.

For hospitalists, antimicrobial stewardship should be a major issue in their daily work lives.

“The CDC states that studies indicate that 30–50% percent of antibiotics, and we’re just talking about antibiotics here, prescribed in hospitals are unnecessary or inappropriate,” Podgorny says.

References

1. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Antibiotic Resistance Threats in the United States, 2012.

   2. The Joint Commission. New Antimicrobial Stewardship Standard. Accessed September 25, 2016.

Quick Byte

Improving the Bundled Payment Model

Researchers took national Medicare fee-for-service claims for the period 2011–2012 and evaluated how 30- and 90-day episode-based spending related to patient satisfaction and surgical mortality. Results showed patients who had major surgery at high-quality hospitals cost Medicare less than patients at low-quality hospitals. Post-acute care accounted for 59.5% of the difference in 30-day episode spending. Researchers concluded that efforts to increase value with bundled payment should pay attention to improving the care at low-quality hospitals and reducing unnecessary post-acute care.

Reference

1. Tsai TC, Greaves F, Zheng J, Orav EJ, Zinner MJ, Jha AK. Better patient care at high-quality hospitals may save Medicare money and bolster episode-based payment models. Health Aff (Millwood). 2016;35(9):1681-1689.

Decreasing antimicrobial resistance and improving the correct use of antimicrobials is a national priority. According to CDC estimates, at least 2 million illnesses and 23,000 deaths annually are caused by antibiotic-resistant bacteria in the United States alone.

“Antimicrobial resistance is a serious global healthcare issue,” says Kelly Podgorny, DNP, MS, CPHQ, RN, project director at The Joint Commission. “If you review the scientific literature, it will indicate that we’re in crisis mode right now because of this.”

That’s why The Joint Commission recently announced a new Medication Management (MM) standard for hospitals, critical-access hospitals, and nursing care centers. This standard addresses antimicrobial stewardship and becomes effective January 1, 2017.

The Joint Commission is one of many organizations implementing plans to support the national action plan on this issue developed by the White House and signed by President Barack Obama. The purpose of The Joint Commission’s antimicrobial stewardship standard is to improve quality and patient safety and also to support, through its accreditation process, imperatives and actions at a national level.

The Joint Commission’s standard includes medications beyond just antibiotics by addressing antimicrobial stewardship. Clifford Chen, MD and Steven Eagle, MD

“Most of the organizations are focusing on antibiotics,” Podgorny says. “We broadened our perspective. The World Health Organization states that antimicrobial resistance threatens the effective prevention and treatment of an ever-increasing range of infections caused by bacteria, which would be antibiotics, but also includes parasites, viruses, and fungi.”

She emphasizes that hospitals need to have an effective antimicrobial stewardship program supported by hospital leadership. In fact, in The Joint Commission’s standard, the first element of performance requires leadership to establish antimicrobial stewardship as an organizational priority.

For hospitalists, antimicrobial stewardship should be a major issue in their daily work lives.

“The CDC states that studies indicate that 30–50% percent of antibiotics, and we’re just talking about antibiotics here, prescribed in hospitals are unnecessary or inappropriate,” Podgorny says.

References

1. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Antibiotic Resistance Threats in the United States, 2012.

   2. The Joint Commission. New Antimicrobial Stewardship Standard. Accessed September 25, 2016.

Quick Byte

Improving the Bundled Payment Model

Researchers took national Medicare fee-for-service claims for the period 2011–2012 and evaluated how 30- and 90-day episode-based spending related to patient satisfaction and surgical mortality. Results showed patients who had major surgery at high-quality hospitals cost Medicare less than patients at low-quality hospitals. Post-acute care accounted for 59.5% of the difference in 30-day episode spending. Researchers concluded that efforts to increase value with bundled payment should pay attention to improving the care at low-quality hospitals and reducing unnecessary post-acute care.

Reference

1. Tsai TC, Greaves F, Zheng J, Orav EJ, Zinner MJ, Jha AK. Better patient care at high-quality hospitals may save Medicare money and bolster episode-based payment models. Health Aff (Millwood). 2016;35(9):1681-1689.

Decreasing antimicrobial resistance and improving the correct use of antimicrobials is a national priority. According to CDC estimates, at least 2 million illnesses and 23,000 deaths annually are caused by antibiotic-resistant bacteria in the United States alone.

“Antimicrobial resistance is a serious global healthcare issue,” says Kelly Podgorny, DNP, MS, CPHQ, RN, project director at The Joint Commission. “If you review the scientific literature, it will indicate that we’re in crisis mode right now because of this.”

That’s why The Joint Commission recently announced a new Medication Management (MM) standard for hospitals, critical-access hospitals, and nursing care centers. This standard addresses antimicrobial stewardship and becomes effective January 1, 2017.

The Joint Commission is one of many organizations implementing plans to support the national action plan on this issue developed by the White House and signed by President Barack Obama. The purpose of The Joint Commission’s antimicrobial stewardship standard is to improve quality and patient safety and also to support, through its accreditation process, imperatives and actions at a national level.

The Joint Commission’s standard includes medications beyond just antibiotics by addressing antimicrobial stewardship. Clifford Chen, MD and Steven Eagle, MD

“Most of the organizations are focusing on antibiotics,” Podgorny says. “We broadened our perspective. The World Health Organization states that antimicrobial resistance threatens the effective prevention and treatment of an ever-increasing range of infections caused by bacteria, which would be antibiotics, but also includes parasites, viruses, and fungi.”

She emphasizes that hospitals need to have an effective antimicrobial stewardship program supported by hospital leadership. In fact, in The Joint Commission’s standard, the first element of performance requires leadership to establish antimicrobial stewardship as an organizational priority.

For hospitalists, antimicrobial stewardship should be a major issue in their daily work lives.

“The CDC states that studies indicate that 30–50% percent of antibiotics, and we’re just talking about antibiotics here, prescribed in hospitals are unnecessary or inappropriate,” Podgorny says.

References

1. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Antibiotic Resistance Threats in the United States, 2012.

   2. The Joint Commission. New Antimicrobial Stewardship Standard. Accessed September 25, 2016.

Quick Byte

Improving the Bundled Payment Model

Researchers took national Medicare fee-for-service claims for the period 2011–2012 and evaluated how 30- and 90-day episode-based spending related to patient satisfaction and surgical mortality. Results showed patients who had major surgery at high-quality hospitals cost Medicare less than patients at low-quality hospitals. Post-acute care accounted for 59.5% of the difference in 30-day episode spending. Researchers concluded that efforts to increase value with bundled payment should pay attention to improving the care at low-quality hospitals and reducing unnecessary post-acute care.

Reference

1. Tsai TC, Greaves F, Zheng J, Orav EJ, Zinner MJ, Jha AK. Better patient care at high-quality hospitals may save Medicare money and bolster episode-based payment models. Health Aff (Millwood). 2016;35(9):1681-1689.

The aviation safety model is often discussed in a healthcare context but in a way that may miss the most important points, a new article in BMJ Quality & Safety suggests.

The article, “Learning from Near Misses in Aviation: So Much More to It Than You Thought” by Robert Wears, MD, PhD, MS, of University of Florida’s Department of Emergency Medicine, suggests healthcare still has important lessons to learn from aviation. The article focuses on a book called Close Calls: Managing Risk and Resilience in Airline Flight Safety by Carl Macrae.

“Although the book itself is about airlines, it has important lessons for improving safety in healthcare, especially with respect to management of incidents or ‘near misses,’” Dr. Wears writes. “Its rich descriptions and detailed explanation of the practical, everyday work of flight safety investigators should be required reading for anyone interested in patient safety. It will destroy many of the myths and misconceptions about reporting systems and learning from incidents that have caused us to expend so much effort for such meager results; it will also overturn the normative model of safety prevalent in healthcare.”

Dr. Wears says he wanted to write the article for two reasons.

“First, the patient safety orthodoxy has been obsessed with systems for reporting incidents, accidents, hazards, general ‘hiccups’ in clinical work for years, but almost nothing of value has come from this effort despite frequent badgering of physicians to report more,” he says. “Second, mainstream patient safety has also been enamored of the aviation safety model, but its ideas about how aviation safety is actually accomplished are naive and simplistic.”

He emphasizes that patient safety efforts to date have focused on the wrong things: too much on acquiring and storing reports and too little on analyzing them to develop an understanding of the systems in which hazards to patients arise.

“Making sense of incidents is far more important than classifying, counting, or trending them,” Dr. Wears says.

Hospitalists are on the front line of these issues, of course.

“Hospitalists regularly encounter hazards to patients in their daily work and, for the most part, successfully manage to mitigate or work around them, but the hazards remain in the system, only to pop up again sometime later. … A rich description of how a successful and effective safety reporting and analysis effort really works—not how we imagine it to work—could help us exchange our current wasteful and ineffective approach for something better,” he says.

Reference

1. Wears R. Learning from near misses in aviation: so much more to it than you thought [published online ahead of print September 1, 2016]. BMJ Qual Saf. doi:10.1136/bmjqs-2016-005990.

The aviation safety model is often discussed in a healthcare context but in a way that may miss the most important points, a new article in BMJ Quality & Safety suggests.

The article, “Learning from Near Misses in Aviation: So Much More to It Than You Thought” by Robert Wears, MD, PhD, MS, of University of Florida’s Department of Emergency Medicine, suggests healthcare still has important lessons to learn from aviation. The article focuses on a book called Close Calls: Managing Risk and Resilience in Airline Flight Safety by Carl Macrae.

“Although the book itself is about airlines, it has important lessons for improving safety in healthcare, especially with respect to management of incidents or ‘near misses,’” Dr. Wears writes. “Its rich descriptions and detailed explanation of the practical, everyday work of flight safety investigators should be required reading for anyone interested in patient safety. It will destroy many of the myths and misconceptions about reporting systems and learning from incidents that have caused us to expend so much effort for such meager results; it will also overturn the normative model of safety prevalent in healthcare.”

Dr. Wears says he wanted to write the article for two reasons.

“First, the patient safety orthodoxy has been obsessed with systems for reporting incidents, accidents, hazards, general ‘hiccups’ in clinical work for years, but almost nothing of value has come from this effort despite frequent badgering of physicians to report more,” he says. “Second, mainstream patient safety has also been enamored of the aviation safety model, but its ideas about how aviation safety is actually accomplished are naive and simplistic.”

He emphasizes that patient safety efforts to date have focused on the wrong things: too much on acquiring and storing reports and too little on analyzing them to develop an understanding of the systems in which hazards to patients arise.

“Making sense of incidents is far more important than classifying, counting, or trending them,” Dr. Wears says.

Hospitalists are on the front line of these issues, of course.

“Hospitalists regularly encounter hazards to patients in their daily work and, for the most part, successfully manage to mitigate or work around them, but the hazards remain in the system, only to pop up again sometime later. … A rich description of how a successful and effective safety reporting and analysis effort really works—not how we imagine it to work—could help us exchange our current wasteful and ineffective approach for something better,” he says.

Reference

1. Wears R. Learning from near misses in aviation: so much more to it than you thought [published online ahead of print September 1, 2016]. BMJ Qual Saf. doi:10.1136/bmjqs-2016-005990.

The aviation safety model is often discussed in a healthcare context but in a way that may miss the most important points, a new article in BMJ Quality & Safety suggests.

The article, “Learning from Near Misses in Aviation: So Much More to It Than You Thought” by Robert Wears, MD, PhD, MS, of University of Florida’s Department of Emergency Medicine, suggests healthcare still has important lessons to learn from aviation. The article focuses on a book called Close Calls: Managing Risk and Resilience in Airline Flight Safety by Carl Macrae.

“Although the book itself is about airlines, it has important lessons for improving safety in healthcare, especially with respect to management of incidents or ‘near misses,’” Dr. Wears writes. “Its rich descriptions and detailed explanation of the practical, everyday work of flight safety investigators should be required reading for anyone interested in patient safety. It will destroy many of the myths and misconceptions about reporting systems and learning from incidents that have caused us to expend so much effort for such meager results; it will also overturn the normative model of safety prevalent in healthcare.”

Dr. Wears says he wanted to write the article for two reasons.

“First, the patient safety orthodoxy has been obsessed with systems for reporting incidents, accidents, hazards, general ‘hiccups’ in clinical work for years, but almost nothing of value has come from this effort despite frequent badgering of physicians to report more,” he says. “Second, mainstream patient safety has also been enamored of the aviation safety model, but its ideas about how aviation safety is actually accomplished are naive and simplistic.”

He emphasizes that patient safety efforts to date have focused on the wrong things: too much on acquiring and storing reports and too little on analyzing them to develop an understanding of the systems in which hazards to patients arise.

“Making sense of incidents is far more important than classifying, counting, or trending them,” Dr. Wears says.

Hospitalists are on the front line of these issues, of course.

“Hospitalists regularly encounter hazards to patients in their daily work and, for the most part, successfully manage to mitigate or work around them, but the hazards remain in the system, only to pop up again sometime later. … A rich description of how a successful and effective safety reporting and analysis effort really works—not how we imagine it to work—could help us exchange our current wasteful and ineffective approach for something better,” he says.

Reference

1. Wears R. Learning from near misses in aviation: so much more to it than you thought [published online ahead of print September 1, 2016]. BMJ Qual Saf. doi:10.1136/bmjqs-2016-005990.

One of the biggest complaints of hospital patients today is poor sleep, which is not conducive to healing or good health in general.

“The reason I’m interested, as a cardiologist, is that sleep disorders are associated with an increased risk of cardiovascular mortality,” says Peter M. Farrehi, MD, assistant professor of internal medicine at the University of Michigan and lead author of a recent sleep study published in The American Journal of Medicine.

Most information about sleeping in the hospital comes from ICU studies, he says.

Dr. Farrehi wanted to actually test an intervention rather than simply survey patients. All patients received an eye mask, ear plugs, and a white-noise machine, then were randomized to receive an education-based script on the importance of using these sleep-enhancing tools or a discussion about the general benefits of sleep.

“To avoid bias in the study both from the research staff and also hospital staff, I didn't want only the intervention to have the tools,” he says. “This was a double-blind, randomized control trial in the hospital, which is really unusual.”

Patients in the group that was taught about the sleep-enhancing tools had a statistically significant difference in their perceptions of fatigue and a trend toward improving their sleep and wake disturbances.

Dr. Farrehi suggests hospitalists talk to their patients complaining of poor sleep about these sleep tools. If they are not available in their hospital, hospitalists might refer their medical director to this paper to see if there is any interest in purchasing these sleep tools.

Reference

1. 1. Farrehi PM, Clore KR, Scott JR, Vanini G, Clauw DJ. Efficacy of sleep tool education during hospitalization: a randomized controlled trial [published online ahead of print August 23, 2016]. Am J Med. doi:10.1016/j.amjmed.2016.08.001.

One of the biggest complaints of hospital patients today is poor sleep, which is not conducive to healing or good health in general.

“The reason I’m interested, as a cardiologist, is that sleep disorders are associated with an increased risk of cardiovascular mortality,” says Peter M. Farrehi, MD, assistant professor of internal medicine at the University of Michigan and lead author of a recent sleep study published in The American Journal of Medicine.

Most information about sleeping in the hospital comes from ICU studies, he says.

Dr. Farrehi wanted to actually test an intervention rather than simply survey patients. All patients received an eye mask, ear plugs, and a white-noise machine, then were randomized to receive an education-based script on the importance of using these sleep-enhancing tools or a discussion about the general benefits of sleep.

“To avoid bias in the study both from the research staff and also hospital staff, I didn't want only the intervention to have the tools,” he says. “This was a double-blind, randomized control trial in the hospital, which is really unusual.”

Patients in the group that was taught about the sleep-enhancing tools had a statistically significant difference in their perceptions of fatigue and a trend toward improving their sleep and wake disturbances.

Dr. Farrehi suggests hospitalists talk to their patients complaining of poor sleep about these sleep tools. If they are not available in their hospital, hospitalists might refer their medical director to this paper to see if there is any interest in purchasing these sleep tools.

Reference

1. 1. Farrehi PM, Clore KR, Scott JR, Vanini G, Clauw DJ. Efficacy of sleep tool education during hospitalization: a randomized controlled trial [published online ahead of print August 23, 2016]. Am J Med. doi:10.1016/j.amjmed.2016.08.001.

One of the biggest complaints of hospital patients today is poor sleep, which is not conducive to healing or good health in general.

“The reason I’m interested, as a cardiologist, is that sleep disorders are associated with an increased risk of cardiovascular mortality,” says Peter M. Farrehi, MD, assistant professor of internal medicine at the University of Michigan and lead author of a recent sleep study published in The American Journal of Medicine.

Most information about sleeping in the hospital comes from ICU studies, he says.

Dr. Farrehi wanted to actually test an intervention rather than simply survey patients. All patients received an eye mask, ear plugs, and a white-noise machine, then were randomized to receive an education-based script on the importance of using these sleep-enhancing tools or a discussion about the general benefits of sleep.

“To avoid bias in the study both from the research staff and also hospital staff, I didn't want only the intervention to have the tools,” he says. “This was a double-blind, randomized control trial in the hospital, which is really unusual.”

Patients in the group that was taught about the sleep-enhancing tools had a statistically significant difference in their perceptions of fatigue and a trend toward improving their sleep and wake disturbances.

Dr. Farrehi suggests hospitalists talk to their patients complaining of poor sleep about these sleep tools. If they are not available in their hospital, hospitalists might refer their medical director to this paper to see if there is any interest in purchasing these sleep tools.

Reference

1. 1. Farrehi PM, Clore KR, Scott JR, Vanini G, Clauw DJ. Efficacy of sleep tool education during hospitalization: a randomized controlled trial [published online ahead of print August 23, 2016]. Am J Med. doi:10.1016/j.amjmed.2016.08.001.

As compared with the general population, hospitalists are especially prone to stress and burnout, according to an abstract published in the Journal of Hospital Medicine.

The study’s scoring showed that hospitalists started with higher levels of perceived stress than the general population of adults of similar ages. Among hospitalists who attended an average of two mindfulness sessions over five weeks, there was a statistically significant increase in mindfulness and a decrease in perceived stress.

The low number of participants, seven hospitalists, makes extrapolation difficult, but the results are suggestive.

“Even with those seven people, we did see there was a significant difference in their stress and an increase in their mindfulness, which I thought was kind of impressive just for going to only two or three sessions,” says study co-author Dennis Chang, MD, of the Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai. “I think the biggest thing that I would like to see is if it actually improves how we take care of our patients, not just ourselves.”

Dr. Chang says one factor that inspired the study was a hospital survey.

“We do an annual survey of our hospitalists, and it seemed that we had, as a lot of hospital groups do, a burnout problem: People were feeling a little bit burnt out,” Dr. Chang says. “We read some articles on mindfulness, and we thought it might be interesting to see if it would help our hospital.”

Starting this Fall, Mount Sinai will offer a tailored mindfulness session for providers.

“We’re hoping we’ll see if these results really stand up,” Dr. Chang says.

He encourages hospitalists to learn more about mindfulness and to realize that small changes can have an impact.

“Even doing some breathing exercises for a couple of minutes a day can actually make a big difference,” he says. “It doesn’t take a lot of time. Maybe even going to one mindfulness session can give you some tools that you can use. It can make a huge difference in your stress levels and how you take care of patients.”

Reference

1. Chablani S, Nguyen VT, Chang D. Mindfulness for hospitalists: a pilot study investigating the effect of a mindfulness initiative on mindfulness and perceived stress among hospitalists [abstract]. J Hosp Med. 2016;11(suppl 1). Accessed September 9, 2016.

As compared with the general population, hospitalists are especially prone to stress and burnout, according to an abstract published in the Journal of Hospital Medicine.

The study’s scoring showed that hospitalists started with higher levels of perceived stress than the general population of adults of similar ages. Among hospitalists who attended an average of two mindfulness sessions over five weeks, there was a statistically significant increase in mindfulness and a decrease in perceived stress.

The low number of participants, seven hospitalists, makes extrapolation difficult, but the results are suggestive.

“Even with those seven people, we did see there was a significant difference in their stress and an increase in their mindfulness, which I thought was kind of impressive just for going to only two or three sessions,” says study co-author Dennis Chang, MD, of the Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai. “I think the biggest thing that I would like to see is if it actually improves how we take care of our patients, not just ourselves.”

Dr. Chang says one factor that inspired the study was a hospital survey.

“We do an annual survey of our hospitalists, and it seemed that we had, as a lot of hospital groups do, a burnout problem: People were feeling a little bit burnt out,” Dr. Chang says. “We read some articles on mindfulness, and we thought it might be interesting to see if it would help our hospital.”

Starting this Fall, Mount Sinai will offer a tailored mindfulness session for providers.

“We’re hoping we’ll see if these results really stand up,” Dr. Chang says.

He encourages hospitalists to learn more about mindfulness and to realize that small changes can have an impact.

“Even doing some breathing exercises for a couple of minutes a day can actually make a big difference,” he says. “It doesn’t take a lot of time. Maybe even going to one mindfulness session can give you some tools that you can use. It can make a huge difference in your stress levels and how you take care of patients.”

Reference

1. Chablani S, Nguyen VT, Chang D. Mindfulness for hospitalists: a pilot study investigating the effect of a mindfulness initiative on mindfulness and perceived stress among hospitalists [abstract]. J Hosp Med. 2016;11(suppl 1). Accessed September 9, 2016.

As compared with the general population, hospitalists are especially prone to stress and burnout, according to an abstract published in the Journal of Hospital Medicine.

The study’s scoring showed that hospitalists started with higher levels of perceived stress than the general population of adults of similar ages. Among hospitalists who attended an average of two mindfulness sessions over five weeks, there was a statistically significant increase in mindfulness and a decrease in perceived stress.

The low number of participants, seven hospitalists, makes extrapolation difficult, but the results are suggestive.

“Even with those seven people, we did see there was a significant difference in their stress and an increase in their mindfulness, which I thought was kind of impressive just for going to only two or three sessions,” says study co-author Dennis Chang, MD, of the Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai. “I think the biggest thing that I would like to see is if it actually improves how we take care of our patients, not just ourselves.”

Dr. Chang says one factor that inspired the study was a hospital survey.

“We do an annual survey of our hospitalists, and it seemed that we had, as a lot of hospital groups do, a burnout problem: People were feeling a little bit burnt out,” Dr. Chang says. “We read some articles on mindfulness, and we thought it might be interesting to see if it would help our hospital.”

Starting this Fall, Mount Sinai will offer a tailored mindfulness session for providers.

“We’re hoping we’ll see if these results really stand up,” Dr. Chang says.

He encourages hospitalists to learn more about mindfulness and to realize that small changes can have an impact.

“Even doing some breathing exercises for a couple of minutes a day can actually make a big difference,” he says. “It doesn’t take a lot of time. Maybe even going to one mindfulness session can give you some tools that you can use. It can make a huge difference in your stress levels and how you take care of patients.”

Reference

1. Chablani S, Nguyen VT, Chang D. Mindfulness for hospitalists: a pilot study investigating the effect of a mindfulness initiative on mindfulness and perceived stress among hospitalists [abstract]. J Hosp Med. 2016;11(suppl 1). Accessed September 9, 2016.

Recent wars have led to innovations in military trauma care that can be applied to civilians, say the authors of a JAMA Viewpoint published in June.¹

During the Afghanistan and Iraq wars, the percentage of wounded soldiers who died as a result of their injuries reached its lowest point in recorded history, writes lead author Donald M. Berwick, MD, MPP, of the Institute for Healthcare Improvement in Cambridge, Mass., along with colleagues from the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine in Washington, D.C.

“Effective bleeding-control measures, improved resuscitation techniques, and aggressive neurocritical care interventions are among many advances that saved lives on the battlefield that otherwise would have been lost,” they write.

The reduction in injury-related deaths is in part due to the Military Health System and its Joint Trauma System embracing a culture of continuous performance improvement and an agile approach, a model called “focused empiricism,” the authors say. A new report from the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine clarifies the components of such a learning health system, which can also be applied to civilian care:

• Leadership and a culture of learning: “A learning health system must be stewarded by leadership committed to nurturing a culture of continuous learning and improvement. ... Such a system should unite military and civilian trauma care leaders around a common, core aim established at the highest level in the nation; namely, to achieve zero preventable deaths after injury and minimize trauma-related disability.”
• Transparency and incentives for quality trauma care: “Trauma care practitioners at all levels, including trauma surgeons and other physicians, nurses, technicians, and prehospital care personnel, should have access to data on their performance relative to that of their peers.”
• Systems for ensuring an expert trauma care workforce: “A joint, integrated network of military and civilian trauma centers should be created as a training platform to prepare and sustain an expert workforce and to promote the translation of best practices between sectors.”

The progress made by the military’s trauma system could be lost, the writers conclude, without concerted efforts to disseminate and maintain the advances. The authors note that in the United States, there are nearly 150,000 deaths from trauma each year, and injury is the third-leading cause of death.

The “hundreds of thousands of civilians who have sustained trauma deserve the benefits of care improvements achieved in military medicine,” they conclude.

Reference

1. Berwick DM, Downey AS, Cornett EA. A national trauma care system to achieve zero preventable deaths after injury: recommendations from a National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine report [published online ahead of print June 17, 2006]. JAMA. doi:10.1001/jama.2016.8524.

Quick Byte

Rating RTLS Options

The healthcare industry typically uses real-time location systems (RTLS) to help improve care quality, workflow efficiency, and bottom lines, according to a recent article in HealthcareITNews. The research firm KLAS rated 11 RTLS vendors and gave Centrak the highest overall performance score, beating competitors including AwarePoint, Cerner, GE Healthcare, and Intelligent Insights.

Reference

1. Siwicki B. KLAS ranks real-time location systems from AwarePoint, Cerner, CenTrak, Versus and others. HealthcareITNews website. Accessed July 13, 2016.

Recent wars have led to innovations in military trauma care that can be applied to civilians, say the authors of a JAMA Viewpoint published in June.¹

During the Afghanistan and Iraq wars, the percentage of wounded soldiers who died as a result of their injuries reached its lowest point in recorded history, writes lead author Donald M. Berwick, MD, MPP, of the Institute for Healthcare Improvement in Cambridge, Mass., along with colleagues from the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine in Washington, D.C.

“Effective bleeding-control measures, improved resuscitation techniques, and aggressive neurocritical care interventions are among many advances that saved lives on the battlefield that otherwise would have been lost,” they write.

The reduction in injury-related deaths is in part due to the Military Health System and its Joint Trauma System embracing a culture of continuous performance improvement and an agile approach, a model called “focused empiricism,” the authors say. A new report from the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine clarifies the components of such a learning health system, which can also be applied to civilian care:

• Leadership and a culture of learning: “A learning health system must be stewarded by leadership committed to nurturing a culture of continuous learning and improvement. ... Such a system should unite military and civilian trauma care leaders around a common, core aim established at the highest level in the nation; namely, to achieve zero preventable deaths after injury and minimize trauma-related disability.”
• Transparency and incentives for quality trauma care: “Trauma care practitioners at all levels, including trauma surgeons and other physicians, nurses, technicians, and prehospital care personnel, should have access to data on their performance relative to that of their peers.”
• Systems for ensuring an expert trauma care workforce: “A joint, integrated network of military and civilian trauma centers should be created as a training platform to prepare and sustain an expert workforce and to promote the translation of best practices between sectors.”

The progress made by the military’s trauma system could be lost, the writers conclude, without concerted efforts to disseminate and maintain the advances. The authors note that in the United States, there are nearly 150,000 deaths from trauma each year, and injury is the third-leading cause of death.

The “hundreds of thousands of civilians who have sustained trauma deserve the benefits of care improvements achieved in military medicine,” they conclude.

Reference

1. Berwick DM, Downey AS, Cornett EA. A national trauma care system to achieve zero preventable deaths after injury: recommendations from a National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine report [published online ahead of print June 17, 2006]. JAMA. doi:10.1001/jama.2016.8524.

Quick Byte

Rating RTLS Options

The healthcare industry typically uses real-time location systems (RTLS) to help improve care quality, workflow efficiency, and bottom lines, according to a recent article in HealthcareITNews. The research firm KLAS rated 11 RTLS vendors and gave Centrak the highest overall performance score, beating competitors including AwarePoint, Cerner, GE Healthcare, and Intelligent Insights.

Reference

1. Siwicki B. KLAS ranks real-time location systems from AwarePoint, Cerner, CenTrak, Versus and others. HealthcareITNews website. Accessed July 13, 2016.

Recent wars have led to innovations in military trauma care that can be applied to civilians, say the authors of a JAMA Viewpoint published in June.¹

During the Afghanistan and Iraq wars, the percentage of wounded soldiers who died as a result of their injuries reached its lowest point in recorded history, writes lead author Donald M. Berwick, MD, MPP, of the Institute for Healthcare Improvement in Cambridge, Mass., along with colleagues from the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine in Washington, D.C.

“Effective bleeding-control measures, improved resuscitation techniques, and aggressive neurocritical care interventions are among many advances that saved lives on the battlefield that otherwise would have been lost,” they write.

The reduction in injury-related deaths is in part due to the Military Health System and its Joint Trauma System embracing a culture of continuous performance improvement and an agile approach, a model called “focused empiricism,” the authors say. A new report from the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine clarifies the components of such a learning health system, which can also be applied to civilian care:

• Leadership and a culture of learning: “A learning health system must be stewarded by leadership committed to nurturing a culture of continuous learning and improvement. ... Such a system should unite military and civilian trauma care leaders around a common, core aim established at the highest level in the nation; namely, to achieve zero preventable deaths after injury and minimize trauma-related disability.”
• Transparency and incentives for quality trauma care: “Trauma care practitioners at all levels, including trauma surgeons and other physicians, nurses, technicians, and prehospital care personnel, should have access to data on their performance relative to that of their peers.”
• Systems for ensuring an expert trauma care workforce: “A joint, integrated network of military and civilian trauma centers should be created as a training platform to prepare and sustain an expert workforce and to promote the translation of best practices between sectors.”

The progress made by the military’s trauma system could be lost, the writers conclude, without concerted efforts to disseminate and maintain the advances. The authors note that in the United States, there are nearly 150,000 deaths from trauma each year, and injury is the third-leading cause of death.

The “hundreds of thousands of civilians who have sustained trauma deserve the benefits of care improvements achieved in military medicine,” they conclude.

Reference

1. Berwick DM, Downey AS, Cornett EA. A national trauma care system to achieve zero preventable deaths after injury: recommendations from a National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine report [published online ahead of print June 17, 2006]. JAMA. doi:10.1001/jama.2016.8524.

Quick Byte

Rating RTLS Options

The healthcare industry typically uses real-time location systems (RTLS) to help improve care quality, workflow efficiency, and bottom lines, according to a recent article in HealthcareITNews. The research firm KLAS rated 11 RTLS vendors and gave Centrak the highest overall performance score, beating competitors including AwarePoint, Cerner, GE Healthcare, and Intelligent Insights.

Reference

1. Siwicki B. KLAS ranks real-time location systems from AwarePoint, Cerner, CenTrak, Versus and others. HealthcareITNews website. Accessed July 13, 2016.

As part of an emerging and rapidly growing specialty, academic hospitalists face unique challenges in career advancement. Key mentoring needs, especially developing reputation and relationships outside of their institution, often pose a challenge and were the inspiration for a new paper published in the Journal of Hospital Medicine.

“Increasingly, we are not having faculty who are going up for promotion and reliably running into challenges around mentorship, national reputation, and having a network outside of their local hospital that is critical for advancement,” says lead author Ethan Cumbler, MD, FHM, FACP, of the Department of Medicine at the University of Colorado School of Medicine. “Hospital medicine as a movement is built on a foundation of innovation, and so as a specialty, we have a mandate to not only innovate but to disseminate those innovations.”

The model of the visiting professorship described in the paper takes midcareer academic hospitalists and provides an infrastructure for reciprocal faculty exchanges. This provides a forum to increase professional networks.

“We found that both junior faculty and our visiting professors saw value in advancing those goals,” Dr. Cumbler says. “We also saw evidence of the spread of ideas and new shared scholarship derived from having these reciprocal visits.”

This has model relevance for nonacademic hospitals, too. For example, it’d be useful for hospital medicine groups to share ideas with one another, Dr. Cumbler says.

“This is a simple structure, but it’s just like a small pebble thrown into a large body of water can create ripples which affect distant shores—sometimes it’s very simple concepts that are worth pursuing,” he says.

Reference

1. Cumbler E, Herzke C, Smalligan R, Glasheen JJ, O’Malley C, Pierce JR Jr. Visiting professorship in hospital medicine: an innovative twist for a growing specialty [published online ahead of print June 23, 2016]. J Hosp Med. doi:10.1002/jhm.2625.

As part of an emerging and rapidly growing specialty, academic hospitalists face unique challenges in career advancement. Key mentoring needs, especially developing reputation and relationships outside of their institution, often pose a challenge and were the inspiration for a new paper published in the Journal of Hospital Medicine.

“Increasingly, we are not having faculty who are going up for promotion and reliably running into challenges around mentorship, national reputation, and having a network outside of their local hospital that is critical for advancement,” says lead author Ethan Cumbler, MD, FHM, FACP, of the Department of Medicine at the University of Colorado School of Medicine. “Hospital medicine as a movement is built on a foundation of innovation, and so as a specialty, we have a mandate to not only innovate but to disseminate those innovations.”

The model of the visiting professorship described in the paper takes midcareer academic hospitalists and provides an infrastructure for reciprocal faculty exchanges. This provides a forum to increase professional networks.

“We found that both junior faculty and our visiting professors saw value in advancing those goals,” Dr. Cumbler says. “We also saw evidence of the spread of ideas and new shared scholarship derived from having these reciprocal visits.”

This has model relevance for nonacademic hospitals, too. For example, it’d be useful for hospital medicine groups to share ideas with one another, Dr. Cumbler says.

“This is a simple structure, but it’s just like a small pebble thrown into a large body of water can create ripples which affect distant shores—sometimes it’s very simple concepts that are worth pursuing,” he says.

Reference

1. Cumbler E, Herzke C, Smalligan R, Glasheen JJ, O’Malley C, Pierce JR Jr. Visiting professorship in hospital medicine: an innovative twist for a growing specialty [published online ahead of print June 23, 2016]. J Hosp Med. doi:10.1002/jhm.2625.

As part of an emerging and rapidly growing specialty, academic hospitalists face unique challenges in career advancement. Key mentoring needs, especially developing reputation and relationships outside of their institution, often pose a challenge and were the inspiration for a new paper published in the Journal of Hospital Medicine.

“Increasingly, we are not having faculty who are going up for promotion and reliably running into challenges around mentorship, national reputation, and having a network outside of their local hospital that is critical for advancement,” says lead author Ethan Cumbler, MD, FHM, FACP, of the Department of Medicine at the University of Colorado School of Medicine. “Hospital medicine as a movement is built on a foundation of innovation, and so as a specialty, we have a mandate to not only innovate but to disseminate those innovations.”

The model of the visiting professorship described in the paper takes midcareer academic hospitalists and provides an infrastructure for reciprocal faculty exchanges. This provides a forum to increase professional networks.

“We found that both junior faculty and our visiting professors saw value in advancing those goals,” Dr. Cumbler says. “We also saw evidence of the spread of ideas and new shared scholarship derived from having these reciprocal visits.”

This has model relevance for nonacademic hospitals, too. For example, it’d be useful for hospital medicine groups to share ideas with one another, Dr. Cumbler says.

“This is a simple structure, but it’s just like a small pebble thrown into a large body of water can create ripples which affect distant shores—sometimes it’s very simple concepts that are worth pursuing,” he says.

Reference

1. Cumbler E, Herzke C, Smalligan R, Glasheen JJ, O’Malley C, Pierce JR Jr. Visiting professorship in hospital medicine: an innovative twist for a growing specialty [published online ahead of print June 23, 2016]. J Hosp Med. doi:10.1002/jhm.2625.