In This Edition

Literature At A Glance

A guide to this month’s studies

1. Early treatment with intravenous tPA for acute stroke
2. Perioperative morbidity, mortality for current smokers
3. Statins associated with musculoskeletal conditions
4. Antithrombotic medications in patients with history of stroke
5. Extended prophylaxis with aspirin for patients after total hip arthroplasty
6. Prognosis for symptomatic subsegmental pulmonary embolism
7. Video-based educational workshops for academic hospitalists
8. Increased mortality for elective surgeries on Fridays, weekends
9. Basal plus correction insulin regimen and Type 2 diabetes
10. Capnography to diagnose diabetic ketoacidosis in the ED
11. How publicly reported mortality rates correlate with hospitals’ overall mortality
12. Cost savings and preventable acute-care visits for Medicare patients

Early tPA in Acute Stroke Is Associated with Better Short-Term Outcomes in Routine Clinical Practice

Clinical question: Does early treatment with intravenous (IV) tissue plasminogen activator (tPA) result in better outcomes among patients with acute ischemic stroke in routine clinical practice?

Background: IV tPA for acute ischemic stroke is beneficial if given in the first 4.5 hours after symptom onset. However, pooled data from clinical trials have been limited in characterizing the extent to which onset-to-treatment (OTT) with IV tPA influences outcomes and how effective tPA is in routine clinical practice.

Study design: Data analysis from a stroke registry.

Setting: One thousand three hundred ninety-five U.S. hospitals participating in the Get with the Guidelines—Stroke Program.

Synopsis: Data were analyzed from 58,353 tPA-treated patients within 4.5 hours of symptom onset. Clinical outcomes were compared among patients treated in the 0-90-, 91-180-, and 181-270-minute OTT windows. Patient factors strongly associated with shorter OTT were greater stroke severity (odds ratio [OR] 2.8; 95% confidence interval [CI], 2.5-3.1 per five-point increase), arrival by ambulance (OR 5.9; 95% CI, 4.5-7.3), and arrival during regular hours (OR 4.6; 95% CI, 3.8-5.4). Faster OTT, in 15-minute increments, was associated with reduced in-hospital mortality (OR 0.96; 95% CI, 0.95-0.98; P<.001), reduced symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage (OR 0.96; 95% CI, 0.95-0.98; P<.001), increased achievement of independent ambulation at discharge (OR 1.04; 95% CI, 1.03-1.05; P<.001), and increased discharge to home (OR 1.03; 95% CI, 1.02-1.04; P<.001).

Data collected were dependent on the accuracy and completeness of the chart abstraction, and only short-term outcomes were reported. Although no post-discharge outcomes were reported, previous studies have shown that functional status at discharge strongly correlates with three-month disability outcomes.

Bottom line: In routine clinical practice, earlier tPA for acute ischemic strokes results in better short-term clinical outcomes.

Citation: Saver JL, Fonarow GC, Smith EE, et al. Time to treatment with intravenous tissue plasminogen activator and outcome from acute ischemic stroke. JAMA. 2013;309:2480-2488.

Current Smokers Have Higher Perioperative Morbidity and Mortality Compared to Past Smokers

Clinical question: Is there an association between current and past smoking on outcomes among patients having major surgery?

Background: Smoking is associated with adverse postoperative outcomes, but it is not known whether the associations are dose-dependent or limited to patients with smoking-related diseases. Smoking-related effects on postoperative events among patients having major surgery are also not well established.

Study design: Retrospective cohort study.

Setting: Four hundred forty-eight non-VA hospitals across the U.S., Canada, Lebanon, and the United Arab Emirates.

Synopsis: Data from 607,558 adult patients undergoing major surgery were obtained from the American College of Surgeons (ACS) National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (NSQIP) database. After adjusting for confounders (cardiopulmonary diseases and cancer), the effects of current and past smoking (quit >1 year prior) on 30-day post-operative outcomes were measured.

There were 125,192 (21%) current smokers and 78,763 (13%) past smokers. Increased odds of post-op mortality were noted in current smokers only (odds ratio [OR] 1.17; 95% CI, 1.10-1.24). The adjusted odds ratios were higher for arterial and respiratory events among current smokers compared with past smokers (OR 1.65; 95% CI, 1.51-1.81 vs. OR 1.20; CI, 1.09-1.31 for arterial events, respectively) and (OR, 1.45; CI, 1.40-1.51 vs. OR, 1.13; CI, 1.08-1.18, for respiratory events, respectively). No significant effects on venous events were observed.

There was an increased adjusted odds of mortality for current smokers with <10 pack-years, while the effects on arterial and respiratory events increased incrementally with increased pack-years. Smoking was associated with adverse post-op outcomes regardless of smoking-related diseases. Variability in hospital quality or surgical strategies may have confounded the results.

Bottom line: Among patients undergoing major surgery, current but not past smoking was associated with higher mortality; smoking cessation for at least a year prior to surgery may decrease post-operative adverse events.

Citation: Musallam KM, Rosendaal FR, Zaatari G, et al. Smoking and the risk of mortality and vascular and respiratory events in patients undergoing major surgery. JAMA Surg. 2013 Jun 19:1-8. doi: 10.1001/jamasurg.2013.2360 [Epub ahead of print].

Statins Associated with Several Musculoskeletal Conditions

Clinical question: Is statin use associated with musculoskeletal adverse events, including arthropathy and injury, in physically active individuals?

Background: Statin-induced musculoskeletal adverse events (AEs) include myalgias, muscle weakness, cramps, rhabdomyolysis, and tendinous disease. The full spectrum of AEs is unknown because randomized clinical trials have not been powered to detect uncommon AEs.

Study design: Retrospective cohort study with propensity score matching.

Setting: San Antonio military area.

Synopsis: A total of 46,249 patients aged 30 to 85 years who met study criteria were propensity-matched into 6,967 statin users and 6,967 nonusers. The occurrence of musculoskeletal conditions were categorized using ICD-9 codes: Msk1, all musculoskeletal diseases; Msk1a, arthropathies and related diseases; Msk1b, injury-related diseases; and Msk2, drug-associated musculoskeletal pain. Of these, statin users had a higher odds ratio (OR) for Msk1 (OR 1.19; 95% CI, 1.08-1.30), Msk1b (1.13; 1.05-1.21), and Msk2 (1.09; 1.02-1.18). Msk1b (arthropathies) had an OR of 1.07 (0.9-1.16, P=0.07). Simvastatin was used by 73.5% of patients, and years of simvastatin use was not a significant predictor of any of the outcome measures. Secondary and sensitivity analyses showed higher adjusted ORs for statin users in all groups. This study was limited by the use of ICD-9-CM codes for identification of baseline characteristics, and the musculoskeletal diagnosis groups used were not validated.

Bottom line: Statin use is associated with an increased likelihood of musculoskeletal conditions, arthropathies, injuries, and pain.

Citation: Mansi I, Frei CR, Pugh M, Makris U, Mortensen EM. Statins and musculoskeletal conditions, arthropathies, and injuries. JAMA Intern Med. 2013;173:1318-1326.

Evidence-Based Guidelines on Periprocedural Management of Antithrombotic Medications in Patients with History of Stroke

Clinical question: What is the evidence for the periprocedural management of antithrombotics in patients with ischemic cerebrovascular accidents (CVAs)?

Background: Evidence-based guidelines are needed to help clinicians determine the thromboembolic risk of temporary discontinuation of antithrombotic medications, the perioperative bleeding risks of continuing antithrombotic agents, whether bridging therapy should be used, and the appropriate timing of antithrombotic agent discontinuation.

Study design: Systematic literature review with practice recommendations.

Setting: American Academy of Neurology Guideline Development Subcommittee convened an expert panel to review and provide recommendations.

Synopsis: Researchers analyzed 133 literature reviews via MEDLINE and EMBASE. Aspirin in stroke patients:

• Should routinely be continued for dental procedures (Level A);
• Should probably be continued for invasive ocular anesthesia, cataract surgery, dermatologic procedures, transrectal ultrasound-guided prostate biopsy, spinal/epidural procedures, and carpal tunnel surgery (Level B); and
• Should possibly be continued for vitreoretinal surgery, electromyogram (EMG), transbronchial lung biopsy, colonoscopic polypectomy, upper endoscopy and biopsy/sphincterotomy, and abdominal ultrasound-guided biopsies (Level C).

Warfarin in stroke patients:

• Should routinely be continued for dental procedures (Level A); and
• Should possibly continued for dermatologic procedures (Level B) and EMG, prostate procedures, inguinal hemiorrhaphy, and endothermal ablation of great saphenous vein (Level C).
• There is a lack of evidence on warfarin for ophthalmologic procedures, with the exception of ocular anesthesia, where it probably does not increase clinically significant bleeding (Level B).

There was not enough evidence to support or refute a recommendation regarding heparin bridge therapy in reducing thromboembolism in chronically anticoagulated patients (Level B).

Bottom line: These are the most up-to-date guidelines for anticoagulant and antiplatelet agents in patients with transient ischemic attacks and strokes undergoing procedures, but further research is needed in many areas.

Citation: Armstrong MJ, Gronseth G Anderson DC, et al. Summary of evidence-based guideline: periprocedural management of antithrombotic medications in patients with ischemic cerebrovascular disease: Report of the Guideline Development Subcommittee of the American Academy of Neurology. Neurology. 2013;80:2065-2069.

Extended Prophylaxis with Aspirin Was Noninferior to Extended Prophylaxis with Low-Molecular-Weight Heparin

Clinical question: Is aspirin as effective as low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH) for the extended prophylaxis of venous thromboembolism (VTE) after total hip arthroplasty (THA)?

Background: Deep vein thrombosis (DVT) and pulmonary embolism (PE) are common complications after THA. After initial prophylaxis, LMWH given for up to 30 days has been shown to reduce VTE compared with placebo. However, LMWH is costly and may increase the risk of minor bleeding. Aspirin is a potentially simple, low-cost alternative.

Study design: Randomized, placebo-controlled trial.

Setting: Twelve university-affiliated orthopedic hospitals in Canada.

Synopsis: Patients undergoing elective THA without hip fracture, metastatic cancer, or bleeding precluding anticoagulants were eligible. All patients received dalteparin for 10 days and were then randomized to aspirin 81 mg daily or to continue dalteparin. The primary outcome was symptomatic proximal DVT or PE during 90 days’ follow-up. The study was terminated early due to slow enrollment. At that time, 2,364 patients had been enrolled, and an analysis by an independent data safety and monitoring board determined that continuing the study was unlikely to alter the main findings. Extended prophylaxis with aspirin was noninferior to LMWH for the primary outcome, which occurred in 0.3% vs. 1.3%, respectively (95% CI, -0.5% to 2.5%, P<.001 for noninferiority). There were no significant differences in major or minor bleeding.

Though the early termination is a concern, the sample size was large and the results do not suggest inadequate power as a reason for lack of superiority for LMWH. Also, all patients received 10 days of LMWH, which indicates a period of LMWH after discharge will still be needed for most patients prior to initiating aspirin.

Bottom line: After initial LMWH prophylaxis for 10 days, extended prophylaxis with aspirin can be considered, particularly for patients for whom LMWH may not be feasible.

Citation: Anderson DR, Dunbar MJ, Bohm ER, et al. Aspirin versus low-molecular-weight heparin for extended venous thromboembolism prophylaxis after total hip arthroplasty: a randomized trial. Ann Intern Med. 2013;158:800-806.

Symptomatic Subsegmental Pulmonary Embolism (PE) Has a Prognosis Similar to Proximal PE

Clinical question: Is the prognosis of a symptomatic subsegmental pulmonary embolism (PE) similar to that of a more proximal PE?

Background: The use of multidetector computed tomography angiography (CTA) has allowed for better assessment of the pulmonary vasculature and increased detection of distal emboli. Prior studies have raised questions on the clinical importance of subsegmental PE but have been limited by small size or retrospective design.

Study design: Combined data from two prospective trials of management of suspected PE.

Setting: Twelve hospitals in the Netherlands and four tertiary-care emergency departments in Canada.

Synopsis: The study cohort consisted of 3,769 patients with suspected PE, of which 2,688 underwent CTA. Of patients diagnosed with PE, 15.5% had isolated subsegmental emboli. All patients were treated with anticoagulation. During three months of follow-up, the incidence of symptomatic recurrence for subsegmental PE was similar to patients with proximal PE (3.6% vs. 2.5%, respectively). The mortality rates for patients with subsegmental and proximal PE were also similar (10.3% vs. 6.3%, respectively).

The study may have been underpowered to detect small differences in event rates; however, there was no trend suggesting that subsegmental PE had better outcomes than more proximal PE. Also, the study did not specifically investigate whether any management strategy is preferred based on thrombus location on CTA.

Bottom line: Clinicians should continue to anticoagulate patients with subsegmental PE as the prognosis is similar to those with proximal PE.

Citation: Den Exter PL, van Es J, Klok FA, et al. Risk profile and clinical outcome of symptomatic subsegmental pulmonary embolism. Blood. 2013;122:1144-1149.

Video-Based Educational Workshop for Academic Hospitalists and House Staff May Improve Professionalism

Clinical question: Can video-based education promote professionalism among academic hospitalists and house staff?

Background: Unprofessional behavior by academic hospitalists and residents can negatively impact the learning environment and patient safety. This behavior increases throughout training, and faculty behavior can be influential. There is a paucity of educational materials to train hospitalists and house staff to recognize and ameliorate unprofessional behaviors.

Study design: Educational survey study.

Setting: University of Chicago, Northwestern University, and NorthShore University Health System teaching hospitals.

Synopsis: Three videos were developed displaying three types of unprofessional behavior: disparaging other physicians, “blocking” admissions, and misrepresenting tests to expedite their completion. There were 44 hospitalists and 244 house staff who received a 60-minute workshop in which they watched the videos using a viewing tool and discussed the videos in small groups.

For all three videos, more than three-quarters of both hospitalists and house staff felt the behavior was unprofessional or somewhat unprofessional. Hospitalists and house staff found the workshop useful and effective (65.9% and 77.1%, respectively) and would change their behavior as a result of the workshop (65.9% and 67.2%, respectively). Those who perceived the videos as “very realistic” were more likely to report intent to change behavior (93% vs. 53%, P=0.01).

This study is limited by its small sample size and possible selection bias. Those interested or concerned about unprofessional behavior may have been more likely to attend the workshop.

Bottom line: Video-based professionalism education is a feasible and well-received way to educate hospitalists and residents about unprofessional behavior and may even affect their future behavior.

Citation: Farnan JM, O’Leary KJ, Didwania A, et al. Promoting professionalism via a video-based educational workshop for academic hospitalists and housestaff. J Hosp Med. 2013;8:386-389.

Friday and Weekend Elective Surgeries Have Increased Mortality

Clinical question: How can the association between mortality and the day of elective surgical procedures be assessed?

Background: Several studies have described the “weekend effect” for both surgical and medical patients, with higher mortality and length of stay in patients admitted on the weekend compared to weekdays. Two potential explanations are poorer quality of care being delivered on the weekend or more severely ill patients being operated on or admitted on the weekend.

Study design: Retrospective analysis of national hospital administrative data.

Setting: All acute-care and specialist hospitals in England from 2008 to 2011.

Synopsis: There were 4,133,346 elective, inpatient surgical procedures studied. Friday surgeries had an adjusted odds ratio of death within 30 days and within two days of 1.44 [95% CI, 1.39-1.50] and 1.42 [95% CI, 1.26-1.60], respectively, when compared with Monday. Weekend surgeries had an adjusted odds ratio of death within 30 days and within two days of 1.82 [95% CI, 1.71-1.94] and 2.67 [95% CI, 2.30-3.09], respectively, when compared with Monday. There were significant trends toward higher mortality at the end of the workweek and weekends for four high-risk procedures: esophagus and/or stomach excision, colon and/or rectum excisions, coronary artery bypass graft, and lung excision. For lower-risk procedures, there was a significant increase in mortality for Friday surgeries but not weekend surgeries. As with all studies using administrative data, inherent selection biases could not be adjusted for Friday or weekend procedures.

Bottom line: Elective surgeries that occur on the weekend and later in the week have an increased risk of mortality, implying that the weekend effect is due to poorer quality of care during weekends, rather than higher-acuity patients presenting on weekends.

Citation: Aylin P, Alexandrescu R, Jen MH, Mayer EK, Bottle A. Day of week of procedure and 30 day mortality for elective surgery: retrospective analysis of hospital episode statistics. BMJ. 2013;346:f2424.

Basal Plus Correction Insulin Regimen Is Effective in Hospitalized Patients with Type 2 Diabetes

Clinical question: Does a basal plus correction insulin regimen (as needed with meals) result in similar glycemic control and lower rates of hypoglycemia compared to a basal-bolus regimen?

Background: Basal bolus is the preferred insulin regimen for non-critically-ill hospitalized patients as per clinical guidelines. But use is limited due to the complexity of the regimen and the fear of inducing hypoglycemia. A less complex, easier-to-implement basal plus correction insulin regimen may be an effective alternative.

Study design: Multicenter, prospective, open-label, randomized study.

Setting: Six hospitals in the U.S.

Synopsis: A group of 375 medical and surgical patients with Type 2 diabetes treated with diet, oral anti-diabetic agents, or low-dose insulin (≤ 0.4 units/kg/day) were randomized to:

• Basal-bolus insulin regimen with glargine once daily and fixed doses of glusiline before meals;
• Basal plus correction insulin (“basal plus”) regimen with glargine once daily and glusiline sliding scale insulin (SSI) before meals; or
• Regular SSI alone.

After the first day of therapy, treatment with basal-bolus and basal-plus regimens resulted in similar improvements in daily blood glucose (BG) (P=0.16), and both were superior to SSI alone (P=0.04). Both regimens also resulted in less treatment failure (defined as mean daily BG of >240 mg/dl or >2 consecutive BG >240 mg/dl) than did treatment with SSI. Hypoglycemia (BG <70 mg/dl) occurred in 16%, 13%, and 3% of patients in the basal-bolus, basal-plus, and SSI groups, respectively (P=0.02). There were no between-group differences in the frequency of severe hypoglycemia (<40 mg/dl; P=0.76).

The study was not powered to evaluate hospital complications (infection, mortality, hospital stay, and readmissions) across groups.

Bottom line: The basal-plus regimen resulted in glycemic control similar to standard basal-bolus regimen and is an effective alternative for the initial management of hyperglycemia in general medical and surgical patients with Type 2 diabetes.

Citation: Umpierrez GE, Smiley D, Hermayer K, et al. Randomized study comparing a basal-bolus with a basal plus correction insulin regimen for the hospital management of medical and surgical patients with type 2 diabetes: Basal plus trial. Diabetes Care. 2013;36:2169-2174.

Capnography Can Help Diagnose Diabetic Ketoacidosis in the ED

Clinical question: Can capnography be used as a screening tool to identify patients with diabetic ketoacidosis (DKA)?

Background: Metabolic acidosis is a major criterion for diagnosing DKA. Previous studies have shown that end-tidal carbon dioxide (ETCO2) measurement by capnography can provide an accurate estimation of arterial carbon dioxide tension (PaCO2) and may be a noninvasive, fast, inexpensive measurement of acidosis in DKA. However, those studies were in pediatric patients and had small sample sizes.

Study design: Cross-sectional, prospective descriptive-analytic study.

Setting: The ED of Imam Reza Medical Research and Training Hospital, Tabriz, East Azarbaijan, Iran.

Synopsis: A total of 181 adult patients older than 18 with suspected DKA and blood sugar >250 mg/dl were included in the study. Simultaneous capnography and arterial blood gas (ABG) were obtained on all patients. Urine ketones, complete blood count, serum levels of potassium, urea, and creatinine were collected. Sixty-two patients were found to have DKA, while 119 had other conditions associated with metabolic acidosis. There was a significant linear relationship between pH and ETCO2 (P>0.0001, relative risk (R)=0.253), PaCO2 and ETCO2 (P>0.0001, R=0.572), and bicarbonate (HCO3) and ETCO2 (P>0.0001, R=0.730). ETCO2 values >24.5 mmHg had a sensitivity and specificity of 0.90 for ruling out DKA. No cutoff point could be determined for ruling in DKA.

The study was open to selection bias as patient collection was only done during the day, so eligible subjects may have been missed. Moreover, though the study suggests that capnography has a role in ruling out DKA, the exact cutoff value is unclear. Other studies found that higher values were needed to exclude diagnosis.

Bottom line: Using ETCO2 values >24.5 mmHg, capnography can help exclude the diagnosis of DKA in adult patients with elevated BG.

Citation: Soleimanour H, Taghizadieh A, Niafar M, Rahmani F, Golzari S, Esfanjani RM. Predictive value of capnography for diagnosis in patients with suspected diabetic ketoacidosis in the emergency department. West J Emerg Med. 2013. doi: 10.5811/westjem.2013.4.14296.

Publicly Reported Mortality Correlates with Overall Mortality

Clinical question: Are publicly reported mortality rates associated with a hospital’s overall medical and surgical mortality rate?

Background: Public reporting of mortality has become an important strategy in Medicare’s quality-improvement initiative. However, the mortality rate for only three conditions, acute myocardial infarction, congestive heart failure, and pneumonia are reported. It is unclear if these rates correlate to a hospital’s overall mortality rate.

Study design: Retrospective cohort.

Setting: National Medicare fee-for-service population.

Synopsis: Using 2008-2009 data from 2,322 acute-care hospitals with 6.7 million admissions, an aggregate mortality rate for the three publicly reported conditions, a standardized 30-day mortality rate for selected medical and surgical conditions, and an overall average composite mortality score was calculated for each hospital. Based on their mortality for the three publicly reported conditions, hospitals were grouped into quartiles from highest (top-performing hospitals) to lowest mortality (poor-performing hospitals).

Top-performing hospitals had a 3.6% (9.4%vs 13.0%; P<.001) lower mortality rate than poor-performing hospitals and an odds ratio >5 of being a top performer in overall mortality (OR 5.3; 95% CI, 4.3-6.5). They also had an 81% lower chance of being in the worst-performing quartile in overall mortality (OR 0.19; 95% CI, 0.14-0.27). Conversely, poor-performing hospitals had a 4.5 times higher risk of being in the lowest quartile in overall mortality. The study is limited by the use of administrative data, which limits the ability to adjust for severity of illness, overall health, and socioeconomic status of each hospital’s population.

Bottom line: A hospital’s mortality performance on the three publicly reported conditions may predict mortality rates across a wide range of medical and surgical conditions.

Citation: McCrum ML, Joynt KE, Orav EJ, Gawande AA, Jha AK. Mortality for publicly reported conditions and overall hospital mortality rates. JAMA Intern Med. 2013;173:1351-1357.

Cost Savings in Decreasing Preventable Acute-Care Visits Are Limited among High-Cost Medicare Utilizers

Clinical question: What role do preventable acute-care visits play in the overall costs of care for the highest Medicare utilizers?

Background: Some 10% of Medicare patients account for more than half the costs. Interventions targeted at decreasing acute-care costs (ED visits and inpatient hospitalizations) for this high-cost population are widespread, but it is unknown what impact they can have.

Study design: Retrospective cohort.

Setting: National Medicare fee-for-service population.

Synopsis: Standardized total costs were created for fee-for-service Medicare patients for 2009 and 2010 in order to identify high-cost and persistently high-cost patients. Algorithms were used to identify preventable ED visits and hospitalizations in both the high-cost and non-high-cost cohorts.

Of the more than 1 million patients in the sample Medicare population, as many as 113,341 were high-cost. As much as 73% of acute-care spending was attributable to this cohort. Overall, 10% of acute-care costs were felt to be preventable in the high-cost group, 13.5% in the persistently high-cost group, and 19% in the non-high-cost group for 2010. The most common reasons for preventable acute care in the high-cost cohort were heart failure, bacterial pneumonia, and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. Catastrophic events (myocardial infarction, stroke, sepsis), cancer, and orthopedic procedures drove overall inpatient costs in the high-cost group.

Preventable costs were higher per capita in areas with higher numbers of primary-care and specialist physicians, but it’s unclear if this was a supply or demand issue. The study also used algorithms that possibly overestimate the amount of preventable acute care.

Bottom line: In the highest Medicare utilizers, cost savings aimed at preventable acute care may be limited and might be better targeted at efficiency during acute-care episodes.

Citation: Joynt KE, Gawande AA, Orav EJ, Jha AK. Contribution of preventable acute care spending to total spending for high-cost Medicare patients. JAMA. 2013;309:2572-2578.

In This Edition

Literature At A Glance

A guide to this month’s studies

1. Early treatment with intravenous tPA for acute stroke
2. Perioperative morbidity, mortality for current smokers
3. Statins associated with musculoskeletal conditions
4. Antithrombotic medications in patients with history of stroke
5. Extended prophylaxis with aspirin for patients after total hip arthroplasty
6. Prognosis for symptomatic subsegmental pulmonary embolism
7. Video-based educational workshops for academic hospitalists
8. Increased mortality for elective surgeries on Fridays, weekends
9. Basal plus correction insulin regimen and Type 2 diabetes
10. Capnography to diagnose diabetic ketoacidosis in the ED
11. How publicly reported mortality rates correlate with hospitals’ overall mortality
12. Cost savings and preventable acute-care visits for Medicare patients

Early tPA in Acute Stroke Is Associated with Better Short-Term Outcomes in Routine Clinical Practice

Clinical question: Does early treatment with intravenous (IV) tissue plasminogen activator (tPA) result in better outcomes among patients with acute ischemic stroke in routine clinical practice?

Background: IV tPA for acute ischemic stroke is beneficial if given in the first 4.5 hours after symptom onset. However, pooled data from clinical trials have been limited in characterizing the extent to which onset-to-treatment (OTT) with IV tPA influences outcomes and how effective tPA is in routine clinical practice.

Study design: Data analysis from a stroke registry.

Setting: One thousand three hundred ninety-five U.S. hospitals participating in the Get with the Guidelines—Stroke Program.

Synopsis: Data were analyzed from 58,353 tPA-treated patients within 4.5 hours of symptom onset. Clinical outcomes were compared among patients treated in the 0-90-, 91-180-, and 181-270-minute OTT windows. Patient factors strongly associated with shorter OTT were greater stroke severity (odds ratio [OR] 2.8; 95% confidence interval [CI], 2.5-3.1 per five-point increase), arrival by ambulance (OR 5.9; 95% CI, 4.5-7.3), and arrival during regular hours (OR 4.6; 95% CI, 3.8-5.4). Faster OTT, in 15-minute increments, was associated with reduced in-hospital mortality (OR 0.96; 95% CI, 0.95-0.98; P<.001), reduced symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage (OR 0.96; 95% CI, 0.95-0.98; P<.001), increased achievement of independent ambulation at discharge (OR 1.04; 95% CI, 1.03-1.05; P<.001), and increased discharge to home (OR 1.03; 95% CI, 1.02-1.04; P<.001).

Data collected were dependent on the accuracy and completeness of the chart abstraction, and only short-term outcomes were reported. Although no post-discharge outcomes were reported, previous studies have shown that functional status at discharge strongly correlates with three-month disability outcomes.

Bottom line: In routine clinical practice, earlier tPA for acute ischemic strokes results in better short-term clinical outcomes.

Citation: Saver JL, Fonarow GC, Smith EE, et al. Time to treatment with intravenous tissue plasminogen activator and outcome from acute ischemic stroke. JAMA. 2013;309:2480-2488.

Current Smokers Have Higher Perioperative Morbidity and Mortality Compared to Past Smokers

Clinical question: Is there an association between current and past smoking on outcomes among patients having major surgery?

Background: Smoking is associated with adverse postoperative outcomes, but it is not known whether the associations are dose-dependent or limited to patients with smoking-related diseases. Smoking-related effects on postoperative events among patients having major surgery are also not well established.

Study design: Retrospective cohort study.

Setting: Four hundred forty-eight non-VA hospitals across the U.S., Canada, Lebanon, and the United Arab Emirates.

Synopsis: Data from 607,558 adult patients undergoing major surgery were obtained from the American College of Surgeons (ACS) National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (NSQIP) database. After adjusting for confounders (cardiopulmonary diseases and cancer), the effects of current and past smoking (quit >1 year prior) on 30-day post-operative outcomes were measured.

There were 125,192 (21%) current smokers and 78,763 (13%) past smokers. Increased odds of post-op mortality were noted in current smokers only (odds ratio [OR] 1.17; 95% CI, 1.10-1.24). The adjusted odds ratios were higher for arterial and respiratory events among current smokers compared with past smokers (OR 1.65; 95% CI, 1.51-1.81 vs. OR 1.20; CI, 1.09-1.31 for arterial events, respectively) and (OR, 1.45; CI, 1.40-1.51 vs. OR, 1.13; CI, 1.08-1.18, for respiratory events, respectively). No significant effects on venous events were observed.

There was an increased adjusted odds of mortality for current smokers with <10 pack-years, while the effects on arterial and respiratory events increased incrementally with increased pack-years. Smoking was associated with adverse post-op outcomes regardless of smoking-related diseases. Variability in hospital quality or surgical strategies may have confounded the results.

Bottom line: Among patients undergoing major surgery, current but not past smoking was associated with higher mortality; smoking cessation for at least a year prior to surgery may decrease post-operative adverse events.

Citation: Musallam KM, Rosendaal FR, Zaatari G, et al. Smoking and the risk of mortality and vascular and respiratory events in patients undergoing major surgery. JAMA Surg. 2013 Jun 19:1-8. doi: 10.1001/jamasurg.2013.2360 [Epub ahead of print].

Statins Associated with Several Musculoskeletal Conditions

Clinical question: Is statin use associated with musculoskeletal adverse events, including arthropathy and injury, in physically active individuals?

Background: Statin-induced musculoskeletal adverse events (AEs) include myalgias, muscle weakness, cramps, rhabdomyolysis, and tendinous disease. The full spectrum of AEs is unknown because randomized clinical trials have not been powered to detect uncommon AEs.

Study design: Retrospective cohort study with propensity score matching.

Setting: San Antonio military area.

Synopsis: A total of 46,249 patients aged 30 to 85 years who met study criteria were propensity-matched into 6,967 statin users and 6,967 nonusers. The occurrence of musculoskeletal conditions were categorized using ICD-9 codes: Msk1, all musculoskeletal diseases; Msk1a, arthropathies and related diseases; Msk1b, injury-related diseases; and Msk2, drug-associated musculoskeletal pain. Of these, statin users had a higher odds ratio (OR) for Msk1 (OR 1.19; 95% CI, 1.08-1.30), Msk1b (1.13; 1.05-1.21), and Msk2 (1.09; 1.02-1.18). Msk1b (arthropathies) had an OR of 1.07 (0.9-1.16, P=0.07). Simvastatin was used by 73.5% of patients, and years of simvastatin use was not a significant predictor of any of the outcome measures. Secondary and sensitivity analyses showed higher adjusted ORs for statin users in all groups. This study was limited by the use of ICD-9-CM codes for identification of baseline characteristics, and the musculoskeletal diagnosis groups used were not validated.

Bottom line: Statin use is associated with an increased likelihood of musculoskeletal conditions, arthropathies, injuries, and pain.

Citation: Mansi I, Frei CR, Pugh M, Makris U, Mortensen EM. Statins and musculoskeletal conditions, arthropathies, and injuries. JAMA Intern Med. 2013;173:1318-1326.

Evidence-Based Guidelines on Periprocedural Management of Antithrombotic Medications in Patients with History of Stroke

Clinical question: What is the evidence for the periprocedural management of antithrombotics in patients with ischemic cerebrovascular accidents (CVAs)?

Background: Evidence-based guidelines are needed to help clinicians determine the thromboembolic risk of temporary discontinuation of antithrombotic medications, the perioperative bleeding risks of continuing antithrombotic agents, whether bridging therapy should be used, and the appropriate timing of antithrombotic agent discontinuation.

Study design: Systematic literature review with practice recommendations.

Setting: American Academy of Neurology Guideline Development Subcommittee convened an expert panel to review and provide recommendations.

Synopsis: Researchers analyzed 133 literature reviews via MEDLINE and EMBASE. Aspirin in stroke patients:

• Should routinely be continued for dental procedures (Level A);
• Should probably be continued for invasive ocular anesthesia, cataract surgery, dermatologic procedures, transrectal ultrasound-guided prostate biopsy, spinal/epidural procedures, and carpal tunnel surgery (Level B); and
• Should possibly be continued for vitreoretinal surgery, electromyogram (EMG), transbronchial lung biopsy, colonoscopic polypectomy, upper endoscopy and biopsy/sphincterotomy, and abdominal ultrasound-guided biopsies (Level C).

Warfarin in stroke patients:

• Should routinely be continued for dental procedures (Level A); and
• Should possibly continued for dermatologic procedures (Level B) and EMG, prostate procedures, inguinal hemiorrhaphy, and endothermal ablation of great saphenous vein (Level C).
• There is a lack of evidence on warfarin for ophthalmologic procedures, with the exception of ocular anesthesia, where it probably does not increase clinically significant bleeding (Level B).

There was not enough evidence to support or refute a recommendation regarding heparin bridge therapy in reducing thromboembolism in chronically anticoagulated patients (Level B).

Bottom line: These are the most up-to-date guidelines for anticoagulant and antiplatelet agents in patients with transient ischemic attacks and strokes undergoing procedures, but further research is needed in many areas.

Citation: Armstrong MJ, Gronseth G Anderson DC, et al. Summary of evidence-based guideline: periprocedural management of antithrombotic medications in patients with ischemic cerebrovascular disease: Report of the Guideline Development Subcommittee of the American Academy of Neurology. Neurology. 2013;80:2065-2069.

Extended Prophylaxis with Aspirin Was Noninferior to Extended Prophylaxis with Low-Molecular-Weight Heparin

Clinical question: Is aspirin as effective as low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH) for the extended prophylaxis of venous thromboembolism (VTE) after total hip arthroplasty (THA)?

Background: Deep vein thrombosis (DVT) and pulmonary embolism (PE) are common complications after THA. After initial prophylaxis, LMWH given for up to 30 days has been shown to reduce VTE compared with placebo. However, LMWH is costly and may increase the risk of minor bleeding. Aspirin is a potentially simple, low-cost alternative.

Study design: Randomized, placebo-controlled trial.

Setting: Twelve university-affiliated orthopedic hospitals in Canada.

Synopsis: Patients undergoing elective THA without hip fracture, metastatic cancer, or bleeding precluding anticoagulants were eligible. All patients received dalteparin for 10 days and were then randomized to aspirin 81 mg daily or to continue dalteparin. The primary outcome was symptomatic proximal DVT or PE during 90 days’ follow-up. The study was terminated early due to slow enrollment. At that time, 2,364 patients had been enrolled, and an analysis by an independent data safety and monitoring board determined that continuing the study was unlikely to alter the main findings. Extended prophylaxis with aspirin was noninferior to LMWH for the primary outcome, which occurred in 0.3% vs. 1.3%, respectively (95% CI, -0.5% to 2.5%, P<.001 for noninferiority). There were no significant differences in major or minor bleeding.

Though the early termination is a concern, the sample size was large and the results do not suggest inadequate power as a reason for lack of superiority for LMWH. Also, all patients received 10 days of LMWH, which indicates a period of LMWH after discharge will still be needed for most patients prior to initiating aspirin.

Bottom line: After initial LMWH prophylaxis for 10 days, extended prophylaxis with aspirin can be considered, particularly for patients for whom LMWH may not be feasible.

Citation: Anderson DR, Dunbar MJ, Bohm ER, et al. Aspirin versus low-molecular-weight heparin for extended venous thromboembolism prophylaxis after total hip arthroplasty: a randomized trial. Ann Intern Med. 2013;158:800-806.

Symptomatic Subsegmental Pulmonary Embolism (PE) Has a Prognosis Similar to Proximal PE

Clinical question: Is the prognosis of a symptomatic subsegmental pulmonary embolism (PE) similar to that of a more proximal PE?

Background: The use of multidetector computed tomography angiography (CTA) has allowed for better assessment of the pulmonary vasculature and increased detection of distal emboli. Prior studies have raised questions on the clinical importance of subsegmental PE but have been limited by small size or retrospective design.

Study design: Combined data from two prospective trials of management of suspected PE.

Setting: Twelve hospitals in the Netherlands and four tertiary-care emergency departments in Canada.

Synopsis: The study cohort consisted of 3,769 patients with suspected PE, of which 2,688 underwent CTA. Of patients diagnosed with PE, 15.5% had isolated subsegmental emboli. All patients were treated with anticoagulation. During three months of follow-up, the incidence of symptomatic recurrence for subsegmental PE was similar to patients with proximal PE (3.6% vs. 2.5%, respectively). The mortality rates for patients with subsegmental and proximal PE were also similar (10.3% vs. 6.3%, respectively).

The study may have been underpowered to detect small differences in event rates; however, there was no trend suggesting that subsegmental PE had better outcomes than more proximal PE. Also, the study did not specifically investigate whether any management strategy is preferred based on thrombus location on CTA.

Bottom line: Clinicians should continue to anticoagulate patients with subsegmental PE as the prognosis is similar to those with proximal PE.

Citation: Den Exter PL, van Es J, Klok FA, et al. Risk profile and clinical outcome of symptomatic subsegmental pulmonary embolism. Blood. 2013;122:1144-1149.

Video-Based Educational Workshop for Academic Hospitalists and House Staff May Improve Professionalism

Clinical question: Can video-based education promote professionalism among academic hospitalists and house staff?

Background: Unprofessional behavior by academic hospitalists and residents can negatively impact the learning environment and patient safety. This behavior increases throughout training, and faculty behavior can be influential. There is a paucity of educational materials to train hospitalists and house staff to recognize and ameliorate unprofessional behaviors.

Study design: Educational survey study.

Setting: University of Chicago, Northwestern University, and NorthShore University Health System teaching hospitals.

Synopsis: Three videos were developed displaying three types of unprofessional behavior: disparaging other physicians, “blocking” admissions, and misrepresenting tests to expedite their completion. There were 44 hospitalists and 244 house staff who received a 60-minute workshop in which they watched the videos using a viewing tool and discussed the videos in small groups.

For all three videos, more than three-quarters of both hospitalists and house staff felt the behavior was unprofessional or somewhat unprofessional. Hospitalists and house staff found the workshop useful and effective (65.9% and 77.1%, respectively) and would change their behavior as a result of the workshop (65.9% and 67.2%, respectively). Those who perceived the videos as “very realistic” were more likely to report intent to change behavior (93% vs. 53%, P=0.01).

This study is limited by its small sample size and possible selection bias. Those interested or concerned about unprofessional behavior may have been more likely to attend the workshop.

Bottom line: Video-based professionalism education is a feasible and well-received way to educate hospitalists and residents about unprofessional behavior and may even affect their future behavior.

Citation: Farnan JM, O’Leary KJ, Didwania A, et al. Promoting professionalism via a video-based educational workshop for academic hospitalists and housestaff. J Hosp Med. 2013;8:386-389.

Friday and Weekend Elective Surgeries Have Increased Mortality

Clinical question: How can the association between mortality and the day of elective surgical procedures be assessed?

Background: Several studies have described the “weekend effect” for both surgical and medical patients, with higher mortality and length of stay in patients admitted on the weekend compared to weekdays. Two potential explanations are poorer quality of care being delivered on the weekend or more severely ill patients being operated on or admitted on the weekend.

Study design: Retrospective analysis of national hospital administrative data.

Setting: All acute-care and specialist hospitals in England from 2008 to 2011.

Synopsis: There were 4,133,346 elective, inpatient surgical procedures studied. Friday surgeries had an adjusted odds ratio of death within 30 days and within two days of 1.44 [95% CI, 1.39-1.50] and 1.42 [95% CI, 1.26-1.60], respectively, when compared with Monday. Weekend surgeries had an adjusted odds ratio of death within 30 days and within two days of 1.82 [95% CI, 1.71-1.94] and 2.67 [95% CI, 2.30-3.09], respectively, when compared with Monday. There were significant trends toward higher mortality at the end of the workweek and weekends for four high-risk procedures: esophagus and/or stomach excision, colon and/or rectum excisions, coronary artery bypass graft, and lung excision. For lower-risk procedures, there was a significant increase in mortality for Friday surgeries but not weekend surgeries. As with all studies using administrative data, inherent selection biases could not be adjusted for Friday or weekend procedures.

Bottom line: Elective surgeries that occur on the weekend and later in the week have an increased risk of mortality, implying that the weekend effect is due to poorer quality of care during weekends, rather than higher-acuity patients presenting on weekends.

Citation: Aylin P, Alexandrescu R, Jen MH, Mayer EK, Bottle A. Day of week of procedure and 30 day mortality for elective surgery: retrospective analysis of hospital episode statistics. BMJ. 2013;346:f2424.

Basal Plus Correction Insulin Regimen Is Effective in Hospitalized Patients with Type 2 Diabetes

Clinical question: Does a basal plus correction insulin regimen (as needed with meals) result in similar glycemic control and lower rates of hypoglycemia compared to a basal-bolus regimen?

Background: Basal bolus is the preferred insulin regimen for non-critically-ill hospitalized patients as per clinical guidelines. But use is limited due to the complexity of the regimen and the fear of inducing hypoglycemia. A less complex, easier-to-implement basal plus correction insulin regimen may be an effective alternative.

Study design: Multicenter, prospective, open-label, randomized study.

Setting: Six hospitals in the U.S.

Synopsis: A group of 375 medical and surgical patients with Type 2 diabetes treated with diet, oral anti-diabetic agents, or low-dose insulin (≤ 0.4 units/kg/day) were randomized to:

• Basal-bolus insulin regimen with glargine once daily and fixed doses of glusiline before meals;
• Basal plus correction insulin (“basal plus”) regimen with glargine once daily and glusiline sliding scale insulin (SSI) before meals; or
• Regular SSI alone.

After the first day of therapy, treatment with basal-bolus and basal-plus regimens resulted in similar improvements in daily blood glucose (BG) (P=0.16), and both were superior to SSI alone (P=0.04). Both regimens also resulted in less treatment failure (defined as mean daily BG of >240 mg/dl or >2 consecutive BG >240 mg/dl) than did treatment with SSI. Hypoglycemia (BG <70 mg/dl) occurred in 16%, 13%, and 3% of patients in the basal-bolus, basal-plus, and SSI groups, respectively (P=0.02). There were no between-group differences in the frequency of severe hypoglycemia (<40 mg/dl; P=0.76).

The study was not powered to evaluate hospital complications (infection, mortality, hospital stay, and readmissions) across groups.

Bottom line: The basal-plus regimen resulted in glycemic control similar to standard basal-bolus regimen and is an effective alternative for the initial management of hyperglycemia in general medical and surgical patients with Type 2 diabetes.

Citation: Umpierrez GE, Smiley D, Hermayer K, et al. Randomized study comparing a basal-bolus with a basal plus correction insulin regimen for the hospital management of medical and surgical patients with type 2 diabetes: Basal plus trial. Diabetes Care. 2013;36:2169-2174.

Capnography Can Help Diagnose Diabetic Ketoacidosis in the ED

Clinical question: Can capnography be used as a screening tool to identify patients with diabetic ketoacidosis (DKA)?

Background: Metabolic acidosis is a major criterion for diagnosing DKA. Previous studies have shown that end-tidal carbon dioxide (ETCO2) measurement by capnography can provide an accurate estimation of arterial carbon dioxide tension (PaCO2) and may be a noninvasive, fast, inexpensive measurement of acidosis in DKA. However, those studies were in pediatric patients and had small sample sizes.

Study design: Cross-sectional, prospective descriptive-analytic study.

Setting: The ED of Imam Reza Medical Research and Training Hospital, Tabriz, East Azarbaijan, Iran.

Synopsis: A total of 181 adult patients older than 18 with suspected DKA and blood sugar >250 mg/dl were included in the study. Simultaneous capnography and arterial blood gas (ABG) were obtained on all patients. Urine ketones, complete blood count, serum levels of potassium, urea, and creatinine were collected. Sixty-two patients were found to have DKA, while 119 had other conditions associated with metabolic acidosis. There was a significant linear relationship between pH and ETCO2 (P>0.0001, relative risk (R)=0.253), PaCO2 and ETCO2 (P>0.0001, R=0.572), and bicarbonate (HCO3) and ETCO2 (P>0.0001, R=0.730). ETCO2 values >24.5 mmHg had a sensitivity and specificity of 0.90 for ruling out DKA. No cutoff point could be determined for ruling in DKA.

The study was open to selection bias as patient collection was only done during the day, so eligible subjects may have been missed. Moreover, though the study suggests that capnography has a role in ruling out DKA, the exact cutoff value is unclear. Other studies found that higher values were needed to exclude diagnosis.

Bottom line: Using ETCO2 values >24.5 mmHg, capnography can help exclude the diagnosis of DKA in adult patients with elevated BG.

Citation: Soleimanour H, Taghizadieh A, Niafar M, Rahmani F, Golzari S, Esfanjani RM. Predictive value of capnography for diagnosis in patients with suspected diabetic ketoacidosis in the emergency department. West J Emerg Med. 2013. doi: 10.5811/westjem.2013.4.14296.

Publicly Reported Mortality Correlates with Overall Mortality

Clinical question: Are publicly reported mortality rates associated with a hospital’s overall medical and surgical mortality rate?

Background: Public reporting of mortality has become an important strategy in Medicare’s quality-improvement initiative. However, the mortality rate for only three conditions, acute myocardial infarction, congestive heart failure, and pneumonia are reported. It is unclear if these rates correlate to a hospital’s overall mortality rate.

Study design: Retrospective cohort.

Setting: National Medicare fee-for-service population.

Synopsis: Using 2008-2009 data from 2,322 acute-care hospitals with 6.7 million admissions, an aggregate mortality rate for the three publicly reported conditions, a standardized 30-day mortality rate for selected medical and surgical conditions, and an overall average composite mortality score was calculated for each hospital. Based on their mortality for the three publicly reported conditions, hospitals were grouped into quartiles from highest (top-performing hospitals) to lowest mortality (poor-performing hospitals).

Top-performing hospitals had a 3.6% (9.4%vs 13.0%; P<.001) lower mortality rate than poor-performing hospitals and an odds ratio >5 of being a top performer in overall mortality (OR 5.3; 95% CI, 4.3-6.5). They also had an 81% lower chance of being in the worst-performing quartile in overall mortality (OR 0.19; 95% CI, 0.14-0.27). Conversely, poor-performing hospitals had a 4.5 times higher risk of being in the lowest quartile in overall mortality. The study is limited by the use of administrative data, which limits the ability to adjust for severity of illness, overall health, and socioeconomic status of each hospital’s population.

Bottom line: A hospital’s mortality performance on the three publicly reported conditions may predict mortality rates across a wide range of medical and surgical conditions.

Citation: McCrum ML, Joynt KE, Orav EJ, Gawande AA, Jha AK. Mortality for publicly reported conditions and overall hospital mortality rates. JAMA Intern Med. 2013;173:1351-1357.

Cost Savings in Decreasing Preventable Acute-Care Visits Are Limited among High-Cost Medicare Utilizers

Clinical question: What role do preventable acute-care visits play in the overall costs of care for the highest Medicare utilizers?

Background: Some 10% of Medicare patients account for more than half the costs. Interventions targeted at decreasing acute-care costs (ED visits and inpatient hospitalizations) for this high-cost population are widespread, but it is unknown what impact they can have.

Study design: Retrospective cohort.

Setting: National Medicare fee-for-service population.

Synopsis: Standardized total costs were created for fee-for-service Medicare patients for 2009 and 2010 in order to identify high-cost and persistently high-cost patients. Algorithms were used to identify preventable ED visits and hospitalizations in both the high-cost and non-high-cost cohorts.

Of the more than 1 million patients in the sample Medicare population, as many as 113,341 were high-cost. As much as 73% of acute-care spending was attributable to this cohort. Overall, 10% of acute-care costs were felt to be preventable in the high-cost group, 13.5% in the persistently high-cost group, and 19% in the non-high-cost group for 2010. The most common reasons for preventable acute care in the high-cost cohort were heart failure, bacterial pneumonia, and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. Catastrophic events (myocardial infarction, stroke, sepsis), cancer, and orthopedic procedures drove overall inpatient costs in the high-cost group.

Preventable costs were higher per capita in areas with higher numbers of primary-care and specialist physicians, but it’s unclear if this was a supply or demand issue. The study also used algorithms that possibly overestimate the amount of preventable acute care.

Bottom line: In the highest Medicare utilizers, cost savings aimed at preventable acute care may be limited and might be better targeted at efficiency during acute-care episodes.

Citation: Joynt KE, Gawande AA, Orav EJ, Jha AK. Contribution of preventable acute care spending to total spending for high-cost Medicare patients. JAMA. 2013;309:2572-2578.

In This Edition

Literature At A Glance

A guide to this month’s studies

1. Early treatment with intravenous tPA for acute stroke
2. Perioperative morbidity, mortality for current smokers
3. Statins associated with musculoskeletal conditions
4. Antithrombotic medications in patients with history of stroke
5. Extended prophylaxis with aspirin for patients after total hip arthroplasty
6. Prognosis for symptomatic subsegmental pulmonary embolism
7. Video-based educational workshops for academic hospitalists
8. Increased mortality for elective surgeries on Fridays, weekends
9. Basal plus correction insulin regimen and Type 2 diabetes
10. Capnography to diagnose diabetic ketoacidosis in the ED
11. How publicly reported mortality rates correlate with hospitals’ overall mortality
12. Cost savings and preventable acute-care visits for Medicare patients

Early tPA in Acute Stroke Is Associated with Better Short-Term Outcomes in Routine Clinical Practice

Clinical question: Does early treatment with intravenous (IV) tissue plasminogen activator (tPA) result in better outcomes among patients with acute ischemic stroke in routine clinical practice?

Background: IV tPA for acute ischemic stroke is beneficial if given in the first 4.5 hours after symptom onset. However, pooled data from clinical trials have been limited in characterizing the extent to which onset-to-treatment (OTT) with IV tPA influences outcomes and how effective tPA is in routine clinical practice.

Study design: Data analysis from a stroke registry.

Setting: One thousand three hundred ninety-five U.S. hospitals participating in the Get with the Guidelines—Stroke Program.

Synopsis: Data were analyzed from 58,353 tPA-treated patients within 4.5 hours of symptom onset. Clinical outcomes were compared among patients treated in the 0-90-, 91-180-, and 181-270-minute OTT windows. Patient factors strongly associated with shorter OTT were greater stroke severity (odds ratio [OR] 2.8; 95% confidence interval [CI], 2.5-3.1 per five-point increase), arrival by ambulance (OR 5.9; 95% CI, 4.5-7.3), and arrival during regular hours (OR 4.6; 95% CI, 3.8-5.4). Faster OTT, in 15-minute increments, was associated with reduced in-hospital mortality (OR 0.96; 95% CI, 0.95-0.98; P<.001), reduced symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage (OR 0.96; 95% CI, 0.95-0.98; P<.001), increased achievement of independent ambulation at discharge (OR 1.04; 95% CI, 1.03-1.05; P<.001), and increased discharge to home (OR 1.03; 95% CI, 1.02-1.04; P<.001).

Data collected were dependent on the accuracy and completeness of the chart abstraction, and only short-term outcomes were reported. Although no post-discharge outcomes were reported, previous studies have shown that functional status at discharge strongly correlates with three-month disability outcomes.

Bottom line: In routine clinical practice, earlier tPA for acute ischemic strokes results in better short-term clinical outcomes.

Citation: Saver JL, Fonarow GC, Smith EE, et al. Time to treatment with intravenous tissue plasminogen activator and outcome from acute ischemic stroke. JAMA. 2013;309:2480-2488.

Current Smokers Have Higher Perioperative Morbidity and Mortality Compared to Past Smokers

Clinical question: Is there an association between current and past smoking on outcomes among patients having major surgery?

Background: Smoking is associated with adverse postoperative outcomes, but it is not known whether the associations are dose-dependent or limited to patients with smoking-related diseases. Smoking-related effects on postoperative events among patients having major surgery are also not well established.

Study design: Retrospective cohort study.

Setting: Four hundred forty-eight non-VA hospitals across the U.S., Canada, Lebanon, and the United Arab Emirates.

Synopsis: Data from 607,558 adult patients undergoing major surgery were obtained from the American College of Surgeons (ACS) National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (NSQIP) database. After adjusting for confounders (cardiopulmonary diseases and cancer), the effects of current and past smoking (quit >1 year prior) on 30-day post-operative outcomes were measured.

There were 125,192 (21%) current smokers and 78,763 (13%) past smokers. Increased odds of post-op mortality were noted in current smokers only (odds ratio [OR] 1.17; 95% CI, 1.10-1.24). The adjusted odds ratios were higher for arterial and respiratory events among current smokers compared with past smokers (OR 1.65; 95% CI, 1.51-1.81 vs. OR 1.20; CI, 1.09-1.31 for arterial events, respectively) and (OR, 1.45; CI, 1.40-1.51 vs. OR, 1.13; CI, 1.08-1.18, for respiratory events, respectively). No significant effects on venous events were observed.

There was an increased adjusted odds of mortality for current smokers with <10 pack-years, while the effects on arterial and respiratory events increased incrementally with increased pack-years. Smoking was associated with adverse post-op outcomes regardless of smoking-related diseases. Variability in hospital quality or surgical strategies may have confounded the results.

Bottom line: Among patients undergoing major surgery, current but not past smoking was associated with higher mortality; smoking cessation for at least a year prior to surgery may decrease post-operative adverse events.

Citation: Musallam KM, Rosendaal FR, Zaatari G, et al. Smoking and the risk of mortality and vascular and respiratory events in patients undergoing major surgery. JAMA Surg. 2013 Jun 19:1-8. doi: 10.1001/jamasurg.2013.2360 [Epub ahead of print].

Statins Associated with Several Musculoskeletal Conditions

Clinical question: Is statin use associated with musculoskeletal adverse events, including arthropathy and injury, in physically active individuals?

Background: Statin-induced musculoskeletal adverse events (AEs) include myalgias, muscle weakness, cramps, rhabdomyolysis, and tendinous disease. The full spectrum of AEs is unknown because randomized clinical trials have not been powered to detect uncommon AEs.

Study design: Retrospective cohort study with propensity score matching.

Setting: San Antonio military area.

Synopsis: A total of 46,249 patients aged 30 to 85 years who met study criteria were propensity-matched into 6,967 statin users and 6,967 nonusers. The occurrence of musculoskeletal conditions were categorized using ICD-9 codes: Msk1, all musculoskeletal diseases; Msk1a, arthropathies and related diseases; Msk1b, injury-related diseases; and Msk2, drug-associated musculoskeletal pain. Of these, statin users had a higher odds ratio (OR) for Msk1 (OR 1.19; 95% CI, 1.08-1.30), Msk1b (1.13; 1.05-1.21), and Msk2 (1.09; 1.02-1.18). Msk1b (arthropathies) had an OR of 1.07 (0.9-1.16, P=0.07). Simvastatin was used by 73.5% of patients, and years of simvastatin use was not a significant predictor of any of the outcome measures. Secondary and sensitivity analyses showed higher adjusted ORs for statin users in all groups. This study was limited by the use of ICD-9-CM codes for identification of baseline characteristics, and the musculoskeletal diagnosis groups used were not validated.

Bottom line: Statin use is associated with an increased likelihood of musculoskeletal conditions, arthropathies, injuries, and pain.

Citation: Mansi I, Frei CR, Pugh M, Makris U, Mortensen EM. Statins and musculoskeletal conditions, arthropathies, and injuries. JAMA Intern Med. 2013;173:1318-1326.

Evidence-Based Guidelines on Periprocedural Management of Antithrombotic Medications in Patients with History of Stroke

Clinical question: What is the evidence for the periprocedural management of antithrombotics in patients with ischemic cerebrovascular accidents (CVAs)?

Background: Evidence-based guidelines are needed to help clinicians determine the thromboembolic risk of temporary discontinuation of antithrombotic medications, the perioperative bleeding risks of continuing antithrombotic agents, whether bridging therapy should be used, and the appropriate timing of antithrombotic agent discontinuation.

Study design: Systematic literature review with practice recommendations.

Setting: American Academy of Neurology Guideline Development Subcommittee convened an expert panel to review and provide recommendations.

Synopsis: Researchers analyzed 133 literature reviews via MEDLINE and EMBASE. Aspirin in stroke patients:

• Should routinely be continued for dental procedures (Level A);
• Should probably be continued for invasive ocular anesthesia, cataract surgery, dermatologic procedures, transrectal ultrasound-guided prostate biopsy, spinal/epidural procedures, and carpal tunnel surgery (Level B); and
• Should possibly be continued for vitreoretinal surgery, electromyogram (EMG), transbronchial lung biopsy, colonoscopic polypectomy, upper endoscopy and biopsy/sphincterotomy, and abdominal ultrasound-guided biopsies (Level C).

Warfarin in stroke patients:

• Should routinely be continued for dental procedures (Level A); and
• Should possibly continued for dermatologic procedures (Level B) and EMG, prostate procedures, inguinal hemiorrhaphy, and endothermal ablation of great saphenous vein (Level C).
• There is a lack of evidence on warfarin for ophthalmologic procedures, with the exception of ocular anesthesia, where it probably does not increase clinically significant bleeding (Level B).

There was not enough evidence to support or refute a recommendation regarding heparin bridge therapy in reducing thromboembolism in chronically anticoagulated patients (Level B).

Bottom line: These are the most up-to-date guidelines for anticoagulant and antiplatelet agents in patients with transient ischemic attacks and strokes undergoing procedures, but further research is needed in many areas.

Citation: Armstrong MJ, Gronseth G Anderson DC, et al. Summary of evidence-based guideline: periprocedural management of antithrombotic medications in patients with ischemic cerebrovascular disease: Report of the Guideline Development Subcommittee of the American Academy of Neurology. Neurology. 2013;80:2065-2069.

Extended Prophylaxis with Aspirin Was Noninferior to Extended Prophylaxis with Low-Molecular-Weight Heparin

Clinical question: Is aspirin as effective as low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH) for the extended prophylaxis of venous thromboembolism (VTE) after total hip arthroplasty (THA)?

Background: Deep vein thrombosis (DVT) and pulmonary embolism (PE) are common complications after THA. After initial prophylaxis, LMWH given for up to 30 days has been shown to reduce VTE compared with placebo. However, LMWH is costly and may increase the risk of minor bleeding. Aspirin is a potentially simple, low-cost alternative.

Study design: Randomized, placebo-controlled trial.

Setting: Twelve university-affiliated orthopedic hospitals in Canada.

Synopsis: Patients undergoing elective THA without hip fracture, metastatic cancer, or bleeding precluding anticoagulants were eligible. All patients received dalteparin for 10 days and were then randomized to aspirin 81 mg daily or to continue dalteparin. The primary outcome was symptomatic proximal DVT or PE during 90 days’ follow-up. The study was terminated early due to slow enrollment. At that time, 2,364 patients had been enrolled, and an analysis by an independent data safety and monitoring board determined that continuing the study was unlikely to alter the main findings. Extended prophylaxis with aspirin was noninferior to LMWH for the primary outcome, which occurred in 0.3% vs. 1.3%, respectively (95% CI, -0.5% to 2.5%, P<.001 for noninferiority). There were no significant differences in major or minor bleeding.

Though the early termination is a concern, the sample size was large and the results do not suggest inadequate power as a reason for lack of superiority for LMWH. Also, all patients received 10 days of LMWH, which indicates a period of LMWH after discharge will still be needed for most patients prior to initiating aspirin.

Bottom line: After initial LMWH prophylaxis for 10 days, extended prophylaxis with aspirin can be considered, particularly for patients for whom LMWH may not be feasible.

Citation: Anderson DR, Dunbar MJ, Bohm ER, et al. Aspirin versus low-molecular-weight heparin for extended venous thromboembolism prophylaxis after total hip arthroplasty: a randomized trial. Ann Intern Med. 2013;158:800-806.

Symptomatic Subsegmental Pulmonary Embolism (PE) Has a Prognosis Similar to Proximal PE

Clinical question: Is the prognosis of a symptomatic subsegmental pulmonary embolism (PE) similar to that of a more proximal PE?

Background: The use of multidetector computed tomography angiography (CTA) has allowed for better assessment of the pulmonary vasculature and increased detection of distal emboli. Prior studies have raised questions on the clinical importance of subsegmental PE but have been limited by small size or retrospective design.

Study design: Combined data from two prospective trials of management of suspected PE.

Setting: Twelve hospitals in the Netherlands and four tertiary-care emergency departments in Canada.

Synopsis: The study cohort consisted of 3,769 patients with suspected PE, of which 2,688 underwent CTA. Of patients diagnosed with PE, 15.5% had isolated subsegmental emboli. All patients were treated with anticoagulation. During three months of follow-up, the incidence of symptomatic recurrence for subsegmental PE was similar to patients with proximal PE (3.6% vs. 2.5%, respectively). The mortality rates for patients with subsegmental and proximal PE were also similar (10.3% vs. 6.3%, respectively).

The study may have been underpowered to detect small differences in event rates; however, there was no trend suggesting that subsegmental PE had better outcomes than more proximal PE. Also, the study did not specifically investigate whether any management strategy is preferred based on thrombus location on CTA.

Bottom line: Clinicians should continue to anticoagulate patients with subsegmental PE as the prognosis is similar to those with proximal PE.

Citation: Den Exter PL, van Es J, Klok FA, et al. Risk profile and clinical outcome of symptomatic subsegmental pulmonary embolism. Blood. 2013;122:1144-1149.

Video-Based Educational Workshop for Academic Hospitalists and House Staff May Improve Professionalism

Clinical question: Can video-based education promote professionalism among academic hospitalists and house staff?

Background: Unprofessional behavior by academic hospitalists and residents can negatively impact the learning environment and patient safety. This behavior increases throughout training, and faculty behavior can be influential. There is a paucity of educational materials to train hospitalists and house staff to recognize and ameliorate unprofessional behaviors.

Study design: Educational survey study.

Setting: University of Chicago, Northwestern University, and NorthShore University Health System teaching hospitals.

Synopsis: Three videos were developed displaying three types of unprofessional behavior: disparaging other physicians, “blocking” admissions, and misrepresenting tests to expedite their completion. There were 44 hospitalists and 244 house staff who received a 60-minute workshop in which they watched the videos using a viewing tool and discussed the videos in small groups.

For all three videos, more than three-quarters of both hospitalists and house staff felt the behavior was unprofessional or somewhat unprofessional. Hospitalists and house staff found the workshop useful and effective (65.9% and 77.1%, respectively) and would change their behavior as a result of the workshop (65.9% and 67.2%, respectively). Those who perceived the videos as “very realistic” were more likely to report intent to change behavior (93% vs. 53%, P=0.01).

This study is limited by its small sample size and possible selection bias. Those interested or concerned about unprofessional behavior may have been more likely to attend the workshop.

Bottom line: Video-based professionalism education is a feasible and well-received way to educate hospitalists and residents about unprofessional behavior and may even affect their future behavior.

Citation: Farnan JM, O’Leary KJ, Didwania A, et al. Promoting professionalism via a video-based educational workshop for academic hospitalists and housestaff. J Hosp Med. 2013;8:386-389.

Friday and Weekend Elective Surgeries Have Increased Mortality

Clinical question: How can the association between mortality and the day of elective surgical procedures be assessed?

Background: Several studies have described the “weekend effect” for both surgical and medical patients, with higher mortality and length of stay in patients admitted on the weekend compared to weekdays. Two potential explanations are poorer quality of care being delivered on the weekend or more severely ill patients being operated on or admitted on the weekend.

Study design: Retrospective analysis of national hospital administrative data.

Setting: All acute-care and specialist hospitals in England from 2008 to 2011.

Synopsis: There were 4,133,346 elective, inpatient surgical procedures studied. Friday surgeries had an adjusted odds ratio of death within 30 days and within two days of 1.44 [95% CI, 1.39-1.50] and 1.42 [95% CI, 1.26-1.60], respectively, when compared with Monday. Weekend surgeries had an adjusted odds ratio of death within 30 days and within two days of 1.82 [95% CI, 1.71-1.94] and 2.67 [95% CI, 2.30-3.09], respectively, when compared with Monday. There were significant trends toward higher mortality at the end of the workweek and weekends for four high-risk procedures: esophagus and/or stomach excision, colon and/or rectum excisions, coronary artery bypass graft, and lung excision. For lower-risk procedures, there was a significant increase in mortality for Friday surgeries but not weekend surgeries. As with all studies using administrative data, inherent selection biases could not be adjusted for Friday or weekend procedures.

Bottom line: Elective surgeries that occur on the weekend and later in the week have an increased risk of mortality, implying that the weekend effect is due to poorer quality of care during weekends, rather than higher-acuity patients presenting on weekends.

Citation: Aylin P, Alexandrescu R, Jen MH, Mayer EK, Bottle A. Day of week of procedure and 30 day mortality for elective surgery: retrospective analysis of hospital episode statistics. BMJ. 2013;346:f2424.

Basal Plus Correction Insulin Regimen Is Effective in Hospitalized Patients with Type 2 Diabetes

Clinical question: Does a basal plus correction insulin regimen (as needed with meals) result in similar glycemic control and lower rates of hypoglycemia compared to a basal-bolus regimen?

Background: Basal bolus is the preferred insulin regimen for non-critically-ill hospitalized patients as per clinical guidelines. But use is limited due to the complexity of the regimen and the fear of inducing hypoglycemia. A less complex, easier-to-implement basal plus correction insulin regimen may be an effective alternative.

Study design: Multicenter, prospective, open-label, randomized study.

Setting: Six hospitals in the U.S.

Synopsis: A group of 375 medical and surgical patients with Type 2 diabetes treated with diet, oral anti-diabetic agents, or low-dose insulin (≤ 0.4 units/kg/day) were randomized to:

• Basal-bolus insulin regimen with glargine once daily and fixed doses of glusiline before meals;
• Basal plus correction insulin (“basal plus”) regimen with glargine once daily and glusiline sliding scale insulin (SSI) before meals; or
• Regular SSI alone.

After the first day of therapy, treatment with basal-bolus and basal-plus regimens resulted in similar improvements in daily blood glucose (BG) (P=0.16), and both were superior to SSI alone (P=0.04). Both regimens also resulted in less treatment failure (defined as mean daily BG of >240 mg/dl or >2 consecutive BG >240 mg/dl) than did treatment with SSI. Hypoglycemia (BG <70 mg/dl) occurred in 16%, 13%, and 3% of patients in the basal-bolus, basal-plus, and SSI groups, respectively (P=0.02). There were no between-group differences in the frequency of severe hypoglycemia (<40 mg/dl; P=0.76).

The study was not powered to evaluate hospital complications (infection, mortality, hospital stay, and readmissions) across groups.

Bottom line: The basal-plus regimen resulted in glycemic control similar to standard basal-bolus regimen and is an effective alternative for the initial management of hyperglycemia in general medical and surgical patients with Type 2 diabetes.

Citation: Umpierrez GE, Smiley D, Hermayer K, et al. Randomized study comparing a basal-bolus with a basal plus correction insulin regimen for the hospital management of medical and surgical patients with type 2 diabetes: Basal plus trial. Diabetes Care. 2013;36:2169-2174.

Capnography Can Help Diagnose Diabetic Ketoacidosis in the ED

Clinical question: Can capnography be used as a screening tool to identify patients with diabetic ketoacidosis (DKA)?

Background: Metabolic acidosis is a major criterion for diagnosing DKA. Previous studies have shown that end-tidal carbon dioxide (ETCO2) measurement by capnography can provide an accurate estimation of arterial carbon dioxide tension (PaCO2) and may be a noninvasive, fast, inexpensive measurement of acidosis in DKA. However, those studies were in pediatric patients and had small sample sizes.

Study design: Cross-sectional, prospective descriptive-analytic study.

Setting: The ED of Imam Reza Medical Research and Training Hospital, Tabriz, East Azarbaijan, Iran.

Synopsis: A total of 181 adult patients older than 18 with suspected DKA and blood sugar >250 mg/dl were included in the study. Simultaneous capnography and arterial blood gas (ABG) were obtained on all patients. Urine ketones, complete blood count, serum levels of potassium, urea, and creatinine were collected. Sixty-two patients were found to have DKA, while 119 had other conditions associated with metabolic acidosis. There was a significant linear relationship between pH and ETCO2 (P>0.0001, relative risk (R)=0.253), PaCO2 and ETCO2 (P>0.0001, R=0.572), and bicarbonate (HCO3) and ETCO2 (P>0.0001, R=0.730). ETCO2 values >24.5 mmHg had a sensitivity and specificity of 0.90 for ruling out DKA. No cutoff point could be determined for ruling in DKA.

The study was open to selection bias as patient collection was only done during the day, so eligible subjects may have been missed. Moreover, though the study suggests that capnography has a role in ruling out DKA, the exact cutoff value is unclear. Other studies found that higher values were needed to exclude diagnosis.

Bottom line: Using ETCO2 values >24.5 mmHg, capnography can help exclude the diagnosis of DKA in adult patients with elevated BG.

Citation: Soleimanour H, Taghizadieh A, Niafar M, Rahmani F, Golzari S, Esfanjani RM. Predictive value of capnography for diagnosis in patients with suspected diabetic ketoacidosis in the emergency department. West J Emerg Med. 2013. doi: 10.5811/westjem.2013.4.14296.

Publicly Reported Mortality Correlates with Overall Mortality

Clinical question: Are publicly reported mortality rates associated with a hospital’s overall medical and surgical mortality rate?

Background: Public reporting of mortality has become an important strategy in Medicare’s quality-improvement initiative. However, the mortality rate for only three conditions, acute myocardial infarction, congestive heart failure, and pneumonia are reported. It is unclear if these rates correlate to a hospital’s overall mortality rate.

Study design: Retrospective cohort.

Setting: National Medicare fee-for-service population.

Synopsis: Using 2008-2009 data from 2,322 acute-care hospitals with 6.7 million admissions, an aggregate mortality rate for the three publicly reported conditions, a standardized 30-day mortality rate for selected medical and surgical conditions, and an overall average composite mortality score was calculated for each hospital. Based on their mortality for the three publicly reported conditions, hospitals were grouped into quartiles from highest (top-performing hospitals) to lowest mortality (poor-performing hospitals).

Top-performing hospitals had a 3.6% (9.4%vs 13.0%; P<.001) lower mortality rate than poor-performing hospitals and an odds ratio >5 of being a top performer in overall mortality (OR 5.3; 95% CI, 4.3-6.5). They also had an 81% lower chance of being in the worst-performing quartile in overall mortality (OR 0.19; 95% CI, 0.14-0.27). Conversely, poor-performing hospitals had a 4.5 times higher risk of being in the lowest quartile in overall mortality. The study is limited by the use of administrative data, which limits the ability to adjust for severity of illness, overall health, and socioeconomic status of each hospital’s population.

Bottom line: A hospital’s mortality performance on the three publicly reported conditions may predict mortality rates across a wide range of medical and surgical conditions.

Citation: McCrum ML, Joynt KE, Orav EJ, Gawande AA, Jha AK. Mortality for publicly reported conditions and overall hospital mortality rates. JAMA Intern Med. 2013;173:1351-1357.

Cost Savings in Decreasing Preventable Acute-Care Visits Are Limited among High-Cost Medicare Utilizers

Clinical question: What role do preventable acute-care visits play in the overall costs of care for the highest Medicare utilizers?

Background: Some 10% of Medicare patients account for more than half the costs. Interventions targeted at decreasing acute-care costs (ED visits and inpatient hospitalizations) for this high-cost population are widespread, but it is unknown what impact they can have.

Study design: Retrospective cohort.

Setting: National Medicare fee-for-service population.

Synopsis: Standardized total costs were created for fee-for-service Medicare patients for 2009 and 2010 in order to identify high-cost and persistently high-cost patients. Algorithms were used to identify preventable ED visits and hospitalizations in both the high-cost and non-high-cost cohorts.

Of the more than 1 million patients in the sample Medicare population, as many as 113,341 were high-cost. As much as 73% of acute-care spending was attributable to this cohort. Overall, 10% of acute-care costs were felt to be preventable in the high-cost group, 13.5% in the persistently high-cost group, and 19% in the non-high-cost group for 2010. The most common reasons for preventable acute care in the high-cost cohort were heart failure, bacterial pneumonia, and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. Catastrophic events (myocardial infarction, stroke, sepsis), cancer, and orthopedic procedures drove overall inpatient costs in the high-cost group.

Preventable costs were higher per capita in areas with higher numbers of primary-care and specialist physicians, but it’s unclear if this was a supply or demand issue. The study also used algorithms that possibly overestimate the amount of preventable acute care.

Bottom line: In the highest Medicare utilizers, cost savings aimed at preventable acute care may be limited and might be better targeted at efficiency during acute-care episodes.

Citation: Joynt KE, Gawande AA, Orav EJ, Jha AK. Contribution of preventable acute care spending to total spending for high-cost Medicare patients. JAMA. 2013;309:2572-2578.

Hospitalists have long recognized that compensation varies significantly by geographic location and by the type of hospitalist medicine group (HMG) you work in: private vs. hospital-owned vs. national-management-owned. A review of SHM’s 2012 State of Hospital Medicine report suggests that hospitalist compensation is also evolving toward a model that more routinely includes both some production variable and performance-based pay (see Figure 1). Although the proportion of compensation paid as a base salary has been trending up over the last few years, so has the proportion paid as a performance incentive.

click for large version

The pay distribution of adult-medicine hospitalists employed by management companies is composed of a high base percentage (mean 88.3% by survey data) and relatively low production and performance variables (mean 6.8% and 4.9%, respectively) compared with other employment models. Contrast that with private hospitalist-only groups, where the mean base is 76.3% with an emphasis on a production component (19.4%) and slightly less on performance pay at 4.2%.

Of the three employment models, however, hospital-/health-system-employed groups have the highest proportion of compensation based on performance metrics with a mean of 7.8%. This makes sense given the financial penalties hospitals and health systems are facing from the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) around pay-for-performance measures. Hospitals are looking for help from hospitalists in improving quality of care and patient satisfaction and avoiding incurring future penalties. Compensation models in these groups reflect the goals of aligning performance on these measures with financial incentives/risk for hospitalists working in these environments.

What are the top performance metrics hospitalists are being compensated for? CMS’ hospital value-based purchasing (HVBP) core measures and patient satisfaction scores are at the top of the list. More than 70% of all HMGs identify these two measures as part of their performance pay incentive, which is seen consistently by geographic location and by type of hospitalist group.

Beyond these top two metrics, management-company-employed groups also focus on ED throughput measures and early morning discharge times, with more than 70% of these groups having pay incentives aligned with these goals. They also have a higher proportion of their groups participating in several other measures, such as clinical protocols, medication reconciliation, EHR utilization, transitions of care, and readmission rates. In comparison, both hospital-employed and private groups have a wider variety of performance measures in which they participate. Differences are seen geographically, too, with hospitalists located in the Western region having a wider variety of performance measures than other regions.

How hospitalists are compensated for their work will likely continue to evolve. Overall, for nonacademic HMGs serving adults only, we are seeing an upward trend in percentage paid as base pay (from 76% in 2010 to 81% in 2012) and in performance (from 5% in 2010 to 7% in 2012). Hospitalists should anticipate that performance-based pay will continue to account for an increasingly larger percentage of their overall compensation, especially as CMS’ pay-for-performance measures for hospital systems really start to take effect.

Hospital CEOs and CFOs are looking to hospitalists to help deliver on quality, satisfaction, and other performance measures. Incentives will be put in place to reward those groups who do it well.

Dr. Sites is senior medical director of hospitalist programs at Providence Health and Services in Oregon. She is a member of SHM’s Practice Analysis Committee.

Hospitalists have long recognized that compensation varies significantly by geographic location and by the type of hospitalist medicine group (HMG) you work in: private vs. hospital-owned vs. national-management-owned. A review of SHM’s 2012 State of Hospital Medicine report suggests that hospitalist compensation is also evolving toward a model that more routinely includes both some production variable and performance-based pay (see Figure 1). Although the proportion of compensation paid as a base salary has been trending up over the last few years, so has the proportion paid as a performance incentive.

click for large version

The pay distribution of adult-medicine hospitalists employed by management companies is composed of a high base percentage (mean 88.3% by survey data) and relatively low production and performance variables (mean 6.8% and 4.9%, respectively) compared with other employment models. Contrast that with private hospitalist-only groups, where the mean base is 76.3% with an emphasis on a production component (19.4%) and slightly less on performance pay at 4.2%.

Of the three employment models, however, hospital-/health-system-employed groups have the highest proportion of compensation based on performance metrics with a mean of 7.8%. This makes sense given the financial penalties hospitals and health systems are facing from the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) around pay-for-performance measures. Hospitals are looking for help from hospitalists in improving quality of care and patient satisfaction and avoiding incurring future penalties. Compensation models in these groups reflect the goals of aligning performance on these measures with financial incentives/risk for hospitalists working in these environments.

What are the top performance metrics hospitalists are being compensated for? CMS’ hospital value-based purchasing (HVBP) core measures and patient satisfaction scores are at the top of the list. More than 70% of all HMGs identify these two measures as part of their performance pay incentive, which is seen consistently by geographic location and by type of hospitalist group.

Beyond these top two metrics, management-company-employed groups also focus on ED throughput measures and early morning discharge times, with more than 70% of these groups having pay incentives aligned with these goals. They also have a higher proportion of their groups participating in several other measures, such as clinical protocols, medication reconciliation, EHR utilization, transitions of care, and readmission rates. In comparison, both hospital-employed and private groups have a wider variety of performance measures in which they participate. Differences are seen geographically, too, with hospitalists located in the Western region having a wider variety of performance measures than other regions.

How hospitalists are compensated for their work will likely continue to evolve. Overall, for nonacademic HMGs serving adults only, we are seeing an upward trend in percentage paid as base pay (from 76% in 2010 to 81% in 2012) and in performance (from 5% in 2010 to 7% in 2012). Hospitalists should anticipate that performance-based pay will continue to account for an increasingly larger percentage of their overall compensation, especially as CMS’ pay-for-performance measures for hospital systems really start to take effect.

Hospital CEOs and CFOs are looking to hospitalists to help deliver on quality, satisfaction, and other performance measures. Incentives will be put in place to reward those groups who do it well.

Dr. Sites is senior medical director of hospitalist programs at Providence Health and Services in Oregon. She is a member of SHM’s Practice Analysis Committee.

Hospitalists have long recognized that compensation varies significantly by geographic location and by the type of hospitalist medicine group (HMG) you work in: private vs. hospital-owned vs. national-management-owned. A review of SHM’s 2012 State of Hospital Medicine report suggests that hospitalist compensation is also evolving toward a model that more routinely includes both some production variable and performance-based pay (see Figure 1). Although the proportion of compensation paid as a base salary has been trending up over the last few years, so has the proportion paid as a performance incentive.

click for large version

The pay distribution of adult-medicine hospitalists employed by management companies is composed of a high base percentage (mean 88.3% by survey data) and relatively low production and performance variables (mean 6.8% and 4.9%, respectively) compared with other employment models. Contrast that with private hospitalist-only groups, where the mean base is 76.3% with an emphasis on a production component (19.4%) and slightly less on performance pay at 4.2%.

Of the three employment models, however, hospital-/health-system-employed groups have the highest proportion of compensation based on performance metrics with a mean of 7.8%. This makes sense given the financial penalties hospitals and health systems are facing from the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) around pay-for-performance measures. Hospitals are looking for help from hospitalists in improving quality of care and patient satisfaction and avoiding incurring future penalties. Compensation models in these groups reflect the goals of aligning performance on these measures with financial incentives/risk for hospitalists working in these environments.

What are the top performance metrics hospitalists are being compensated for? CMS’ hospital value-based purchasing (HVBP) core measures and patient satisfaction scores are at the top of the list. More than 70% of all HMGs identify these two measures as part of their performance pay incentive, which is seen consistently by geographic location and by type of hospitalist group.

Beyond these top two metrics, management-company-employed groups also focus on ED throughput measures and early morning discharge times, with more than 70% of these groups having pay incentives aligned with these goals. They also have a higher proportion of their groups participating in several other measures, such as clinical protocols, medication reconciliation, EHR utilization, transitions of care, and readmission rates. In comparison, both hospital-employed and private groups have a wider variety of performance measures in which they participate. Differences are seen geographically, too, with hospitalists located in the Western region having a wider variety of performance measures than other regions.

How hospitalists are compensated for their work will likely continue to evolve. Overall, for nonacademic HMGs serving adults only, we are seeing an upward trend in percentage paid as base pay (from 76% in 2010 to 81% in 2012) and in performance (from 5% in 2010 to 7% in 2012). Hospitalists should anticipate that performance-based pay will continue to account for an increasingly larger percentage of their overall compensation, especially as CMS’ pay-for-performance measures for hospital systems really start to take effect.

Hospital CEOs and CFOs are looking to hospitalists to help deliver on quality, satisfaction, and other performance measures. Incentives will be put in place to reward those groups who do it well.

Dr. Sites is senior medical director of hospitalist programs at Providence Health and Services in Oregon. She is a member of SHM’s Practice Analysis Committee.

The Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) recently issued a Final Rule for the Inpatient Prospective Payment System, which guides payment and programs associated with inpatient hospitalizations. In this year’s rule, CMS adjusted the criteria for inpatient admissions in an attempt to simplify and clarify the decision-making process.

The policy would allow physicians to admit a patient if they reasonably expect and document in the medical record that a beneficiary will need to stay in the hospital for more than two midnights. Admissions based on this time-limited expectation will be presumed to be appropriate for Medicare Part A payment. CMS cited concerns about the growing trend of longer observation stays to support this change.

With observation stays, there are two major financial concerns for patients: whether the hospital stay is paid under Medicare Part A or Part B, and whether Medicare will pay for post-acute care in a skilled-nursing facility (SNF). Medicare Part A reimburses for inpatient admissions, with a one-time deductible for the benefit period. Outpatient services, such as observation care and physician services, are covered under Medicare Part B, which has copays and co-insurance that greatly increase the costs for beneficiaries. In addition, SNF coverage through Medicare Part A is determined by the three-day rule; a patient must be an inpatient for three days to qualify for coverage.

While the long-term impacts of this regulatory change to the admission criteria remain to be seen, SHM is concerned that the rule does not adequately address the broader problems associated with inpatient and observation status. As we note in our comments to CMS on the new rule:¹

Even with these changes, the central tension created by the bifurcation in admission status still remains.…Other policies and programs, such as the attempts to reduce admissions, may inadvertently add pressure to the admission decision.

Indeed, for beneficiaries, the barrier to SNF coverage remains. CMS takes care to note that, while time under emergency care and observation care count toward the two-midnight presumption for inpatient admission, it does not count toward the three-day rule for SNF coverage. This is particularly problematic; as advances in medicine allow for the treatment of higher-acuity and -severity conditions with observation stays or shorter inpatient stays, patients might not be getting the follow-up care they need. This puts them at risk for additional complications and, ultimately, readmissions to the hospital.

In an era of seeking value in the healthcare system, it seems like an opportunity lost to streamline and coordinate care across settings and to ensure that patients are getting the follow-up care they require. It is for this reason that hospitalists continue to push for passage of the Improving Access to Medicare Coverage Act, a bill sponsored by Rep. Joe Courtney (D-Conn.), Rep. Tom Latham (R-Iowa), and Sen. Sherrod Brown (D-Ohio) that would count observation status as time toward the three-day requirement for SNF coverage.

A recent Office of Inspector General (OIG) report for the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services on observation status sums up the problem succinctly.2 The OIG states that “CMS should consider how to ensure that beneficiaries with similar post-hospital care needs have the same access and cost-sharing for SNF services.”²

SHM concurs.

Joshua Lapps is SHM’s government relations specialist.

References

1. Society of Hospital Medicine. SHM submits comments in response to FY2014 inpatient prospective payment system proposed rule. Society of Hospital Medicine website. Available at: http://www.hospitalmedicine.org/AM/Template.cfm?Section=Letters_to_Congress_and_Regulatory_Agencies&Template=/CM/ContentDisplay.cfm&ContentID=34044. Accessed Sept. 9, 2013.
2. Office of Inspector General. Memorandum report: Hospitals’ use of observations stays and short inpatient stays for Medicare beneficiaries, OEI-02-12-00040. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services website. Available at: http://oig.hhs.gov/oei/reports/oei-02-12-00040.pdf. Accessed Sept. 9, 2013.

The Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) recently issued a Final Rule for the Inpatient Prospective Payment System, which guides payment and programs associated with inpatient hospitalizations. In this year’s rule, CMS adjusted the criteria for inpatient admissions in an attempt to simplify and clarify the decision-making process.

The policy would allow physicians to admit a patient if they reasonably expect and document in the medical record that a beneficiary will need to stay in the hospital for more than two midnights. Admissions based on this time-limited expectation will be presumed to be appropriate for Medicare Part A payment. CMS cited concerns about the growing trend of longer observation stays to support this change.

With observation stays, there are two major financial concerns for patients: whether the hospital stay is paid under Medicare Part A or Part B, and whether Medicare will pay for post-acute care in a skilled-nursing facility (SNF). Medicare Part A reimburses for inpatient admissions, with a one-time deductible for the benefit period. Outpatient services, such as observation care and physician services, are covered under Medicare Part B, which has copays and co-insurance that greatly increase the costs for beneficiaries. In addition, SNF coverage through Medicare Part A is determined by the three-day rule; a patient must be an inpatient for three days to qualify for coverage.

While the long-term impacts of this regulatory change to the admission criteria remain to be seen, SHM is concerned that the rule does not adequately address the broader problems associated with inpatient and observation status. As we note in our comments to CMS on the new rule:¹

Even with these changes, the central tension created by the bifurcation in admission status still remains.…Other policies and programs, such as the attempts to reduce admissions, may inadvertently add pressure to the admission decision.

Indeed, for beneficiaries, the barrier to SNF coverage remains. CMS takes care to note that, while time under emergency care and observation care count toward the two-midnight presumption for inpatient admission, it does not count toward the three-day rule for SNF coverage. This is particularly problematic; as advances in medicine allow for the treatment of higher-acuity and -severity conditions with observation stays or shorter inpatient stays, patients might not be getting the follow-up care they need. This puts them at risk for additional complications and, ultimately, readmissions to the hospital.

In an era of seeking value in the healthcare system, it seems like an opportunity lost to streamline and coordinate care across settings and to ensure that patients are getting the follow-up care they require. It is for this reason that hospitalists continue to push for passage of the Improving Access to Medicare Coverage Act, a bill sponsored by Rep. Joe Courtney (D-Conn.), Rep. Tom Latham (R-Iowa), and Sen. Sherrod Brown (D-Ohio) that would count observation status as time toward the three-day requirement for SNF coverage.

A recent Office of Inspector General (OIG) report for the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services on observation status sums up the problem succinctly.2 The OIG states that “CMS should consider how to ensure that beneficiaries with similar post-hospital care needs have the same access and cost-sharing for SNF services.”²

SHM concurs.

Joshua Lapps is SHM’s government relations specialist.

References

1. Society of Hospital Medicine. SHM submits comments in response to FY2014 inpatient prospective payment system proposed rule. Society of Hospital Medicine website. Available at: http://www.hospitalmedicine.org/AM/Template.cfm?Section=Letters_to_Congress_and_Regulatory_Agencies&Template=/CM/ContentDisplay.cfm&ContentID=34044. Accessed Sept. 9, 2013.
2. Office of Inspector General. Memorandum report: Hospitals’ use of observations stays and short inpatient stays for Medicare beneficiaries, OEI-02-12-00040. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services website. Available at: http://oig.hhs.gov/oei/reports/oei-02-12-00040.pdf. Accessed Sept. 9, 2013.

The Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) recently issued a Final Rule for the Inpatient Prospective Payment System, which guides payment and programs associated with inpatient hospitalizations. In this year’s rule, CMS adjusted the criteria for inpatient admissions in an attempt to simplify and clarify the decision-making process.

The policy would allow physicians to admit a patient if they reasonably expect and document in the medical record that a beneficiary will need to stay in the hospital for more than two midnights. Admissions based on this time-limited expectation will be presumed to be appropriate for Medicare Part A payment. CMS cited concerns about the growing trend of longer observation stays to support this change.

With observation stays, there are two major financial concerns for patients: whether the hospital stay is paid under Medicare Part A or Part B, and whether Medicare will pay for post-acute care in a skilled-nursing facility (SNF). Medicare Part A reimburses for inpatient admissions, with a one-time deductible for the benefit period. Outpatient services, such as observation care and physician services, are covered under Medicare Part B, which has copays and co-insurance that greatly increase the costs for beneficiaries. In addition, SNF coverage through Medicare Part A is determined by the three-day rule; a patient must be an inpatient for three days to qualify for coverage.

While the long-term impacts of this regulatory change to the admission criteria remain to be seen, SHM is concerned that the rule does not adequately address the broader problems associated with inpatient and observation status. As we note in our comments to CMS on the new rule:¹

Even with these changes, the central tension created by the bifurcation in admission status still remains.…Other policies and programs, such as the attempts to reduce admissions, may inadvertently add pressure to the admission decision.

Indeed, for beneficiaries, the barrier to SNF coverage remains. CMS takes care to note that, while time under emergency care and observation care count toward the two-midnight presumption for inpatient admission, it does not count toward the three-day rule for SNF coverage. This is particularly problematic; as advances in medicine allow for the treatment of higher-acuity and -severity conditions with observation stays or shorter inpatient stays, patients might not be getting the follow-up care they need. This puts them at risk for additional complications and, ultimately, readmissions to the hospital.

In an era of seeking value in the healthcare system, it seems like an opportunity lost to streamline and coordinate care across settings and to ensure that patients are getting the follow-up care they require. It is for this reason that hospitalists continue to push for passage of the Improving Access to Medicare Coverage Act, a bill sponsored by Rep. Joe Courtney (D-Conn.), Rep. Tom Latham (R-Iowa), and Sen. Sherrod Brown (D-Ohio) that would count observation status as time toward the three-day requirement for SNF coverage.

A recent Office of Inspector General (OIG) report for the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services on observation status sums up the problem succinctly.2 The OIG states that “CMS should consider how to ensure that beneficiaries with similar post-hospital care needs have the same access and cost-sharing for SNF services.”²

SHM concurs.

Joshua Lapps is SHM’s government relations specialist.

References

1. Society of Hospital Medicine. SHM submits comments in response to FY2014 inpatient prospective payment system proposed rule. Society of Hospital Medicine website. Available at: http://www.hospitalmedicine.org/AM/Template.cfm?Section=Letters_to_Congress_and_Regulatory_Agencies&Template=/CM/ContentDisplay.cfm&ContentID=34044. Accessed Sept. 9, 2013.
2. Office of Inspector General. Memorandum report: Hospitals’ use of observations stays and short inpatient stays for Medicare beneficiaries, OEI-02-12-00040. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services website. Available at: http://oig.hhs.gov/oei/reports/oei-02-12-00040.pdf. Accessed Sept. 9, 2013.

What breakout-session and pre-course topics are HM14 course director Daniel Brotman, MD, SFHM, and assistant course director Efren Manjarrez, MD, SFHM, looking forward to showcasing? Here is a sampling:

• Bleeding risks: a crucial yet misunderstood area.
• New anticoagulants: a quickly evolving area that will affect lots of hospitalists and patients.
• What keeps your CFO up at night: a financial perspective from a hospital president and hospitalist.
• Choosing Wisely: Learn how SHM turned the ABIM Foundation’s Choosing Wisely initiative into practical recommendations for hospitalists.
• Pediatric clinical conundrums.
• Updates in key specialty and content areas.
• Hospital-acquired infection control by Sanjay Saint.
• CMS’ meaningful use.

What breakout-session and pre-course topics are HM14 course director Daniel Brotman, MD, SFHM, and assistant course director Efren Manjarrez, MD, SFHM, looking forward to showcasing? Here is a sampling:

• Bleeding risks: a crucial yet misunderstood area.
• New anticoagulants: a quickly evolving area that will affect lots of hospitalists and patients.
• What keeps your CFO up at night: a financial perspective from a hospital president and hospitalist.
• Choosing Wisely: Learn how SHM turned the ABIM Foundation’s Choosing Wisely initiative into practical recommendations for hospitalists.
• Pediatric clinical conundrums.
• Updates in key specialty and content areas.
• Hospital-acquired infection control by Sanjay Saint.
• CMS’ meaningful use.

What breakout-session and pre-course topics are HM14 course director Daniel Brotman, MD, SFHM, and assistant course director Efren Manjarrez, MD, SFHM, looking forward to showcasing? Here is a sampling:

• Bleeding risks: a crucial yet misunderstood area.
• New anticoagulants: a quickly evolving area that will affect lots of hospitalists and patients.
• What keeps your CFO up at night: a financial perspective from a hospital president and hospitalist.
• Choosing Wisely: Learn how SHM turned the ABIM Foundation’s Choosing Wisely initiative into practical recommendations for hospitalists.
• Pediatric clinical conundrums.
• Updates in key specialty and content areas.
• Hospital-acquired infection control by Sanjay Saint.
• CMS’ meaningful use.

SHM’s next annual meeting, HM14, is only six months away. So today is the day to make scheduling requests and book a room. And, for the first time, the biggest annual event in hospital medicine will be in Las Vegas.

HM14 will be held March 24-27 at Mandalay Bay Resort and Casino in Las Vegas. Meeting registration is now open at www.hospitalmedicine2014.org. The early registration discount ends Jan. 26.

Who should attend HM14? Bring the whole team: hospitalists, pediatricians, academic hospitalists, general internists, family physicians, nurse practitioners, physician assistants, administrators, and providers practicing in acute-care settings.

SHM’s next annual meeting, HM14, is only six months away. So today is the day to make scheduling requests and book a room. And, for the first time, the biggest annual event in hospital medicine will be in Las Vegas.

HM14 will be held March 24-27 at Mandalay Bay Resort and Casino in Las Vegas. Meeting registration is now open at www.hospitalmedicine2014.org. The early registration discount ends Jan. 26.

Who should attend HM14? Bring the whole team: hospitalists, pediatricians, academic hospitalists, general internists, family physicians, nurse practitioners, physician assistants, administrators, and providers practicing in acute-care settings.

SHM’s next annual meeting, HM14, is only six months away. So today is the day to make scheduling requests and book a room. And, for the first time, the biggest annual event in hospital medicine will be in Las Vegas.

HM14 will be held March 24-27 at Mandalay Bay Resort and Casino in Las Vegas. Meeting registration is now open at www.hospitalmedicine2014.org. The early registration discount ends Jan. 26.

Who should attend HM14? Bring the whole team: hospitalists, pediatricians, academic hospitalists, general internists, family physicians, nurse practitioners, physician assistants, administrators, and providers practicing in acute-care settings.

Dr. Nagamine is a hospitalist physician at Kaiser Permanente Medical Center in Santa Clara, Calif., where she previously was a quality chief and safety officer. She is a member of the National Quality Forum Patient Safety Complications Steering Committee, an SHM board member, and a member of SHM’s Hospital Quality and Patient Safety Committee, which she chaired for four years.

Undergraduate education: University of Hawaii, Honolulu.

Medical school: University of Hawaii.

Notable: In the early stages of the patient-safety movement, Dr. Nagamine worked with aviation-safety experts and Kaiser colleagues to develop innovative patient-safety programs. She has led numerous quality-improvement (QI) projects, including the development of a patient-safety curriculum for staff and anonymous reporting mechanisms that focus on identifying problems in the system rather than focusing simply on individuals. For her efforts, she was awarded SHM’s Clinical Award of Excellence in 2002.

After leading many other QI initiatives on a national level, she was named a Senior Fellow in Hospital Medicine in 2010. Dr. Nagamine has been with SHM’s Project BOOST since its inception, serving on the advisory board and as a mentor. She says the SFHM designation acknowledges that she has contributed to hospital medicine in a meaningful way.

FYI: A doctor who enjoys creative projects outside of the workplace, Dr. Nagamine is working on a documentary about her father’s struggles as a World War II soldier and a poor immigrant starting a new life in California.

Quotable: “Creating a culture of safety and transparency allows us to get real about the fact that we’re human and fallible. Ultimately, we get much more information about where the problems are and how to fix them.”

Dr. Nagamine is a hospitalist physician at Kaiser Permanente Medical Center in Santa Clara, Calif., where she previously was a quality chief and safety officer. She is a member of the National Quality Forum Patient Safety Complications Steering Committee, an SHM board member, and a member of SHM’s Hospital Quality and Patient Safety Committee, which she chaired for four years.

Undergraduate education: University of Hawaii, Honolulu.

Medical school: University of Hawaii.

Notable: In the early stages of the patient-safety movement, Dr. Nagamine worked with aviation-safety experts and Kaiser colleagues to develop innovative patient-safety programs. She has led numerous quality-improvement (QI) projects, including the development of a patient-safety curriculum for staff and anonymous reporting mechanisms that focus on identifying problems in the system rather than focusing simply on individuals. For her efforts, she was awarded SHM’s Clinical Award of Excellence in 2002.

After leading many other QI initiatives on a national level, she was named a Senior Fellow in Hospital Medicine in 2010. Dr. Nagamine has been with SHM’s Project BOOST since its inception, serving on the advisory board and as a mentor. She says the SFHM designation acknowledges that she has contributed to hospital medicine in a meaningful way.

FYI: A doctor who enjoys creative projects outside of the workplace, Dr. Nagamine is working on a documentary about her father’s struggles as a World War II soldier and a poor immigrant starting a new life in California.

Quotable: “Creating a culture of safety and transparency allows us to get real about the fact that we’re human and fallible. Ultimately, we get much more information about where the problems are and how to fix them.”

Dr. Nagamine is a hospitalist physician at Kaiser Permanente Medical Center in Santa Clara, Calif., where she previously was a quality chief and safety officer. She is a member of the National Quality Forum Patient Safety Complications Steering Committee, an SHM board member, and a member of SHM’s Hospital Quality and Patient Safety Committee, which she chaired for four years.

Undergraduate education: University of Hawaii, Honolulu.

Medical school: University of Hawaii.

Notable: In the early stages of the patient-safety movement, Dr. Nagamine worked with aviation-safety experts and Kaiser colleagues to develop innovative patient-safety programs. She has led numerous quality-improvement (QI) projects, including the development of a patient-safety curriculum for staff and anonymous reporting mechanisms that focus on identifying problems in the system rather than focusing simply on individuals. For her efforts, she was awarded SHM’s Clinical Award of Excellence in 2002.

After leading many other QI initiatives on a national level, she was named a Senior Fellow in Hospital Medicine in 2010. Dr. Nagamine has been with SHM’s Project BOOST since its inception, serving on the advisory board and as a mentor. She says the SFHM designation acknowledges that she has contributed to hospital medicine in a meaningful way.

FYI: A doctor who enjoys creative projects outside of the workplace, Dr. Nagamine is working on a documentary about her father’s struggles as a World War II soldier and a poor immigrant starting a new life in California.

Quotable: “Creating a culture of safety and transparency allows us to get real about the fact that we’re human and fallible. Ultimately, we get much more information about where the problems are and how to fix them.”

The care of hospitalized patients in the future rests with the young physicians of today. That’s the message of an upcoming presentation, “Target 1000: Creating the Pipeline to the Future,” by SHM President Eric Howell, MD, SFHM, set for Oct. 23 at Jefferson University Hospital in Philadelphia.

Intended for local and regional residents in the Philadelphia area, Dr. Howell will present the many benefits of becoming a career hospitalist and the resources available to medical students, residents, and early-career hospitalists. Exhibits and networking begin at 6 p.m., with Dr. Howell presenting at 7 p.m., followed by a question-and-answer session.

Attendees will be eligible to win an iPad. Medical students in attendance will receive a complimentary, one-year membership to SHM. Resident membership fees will be discounted to $100.

For more information, visit www.hospitalmedicine.org/events.

The care of hospitalized patients in the future rests with the young physicians of today. That’s the message of an upcoming presentation, “Target 1000: Creating the Pipeline to the Future,” by SHM President Eric Howell, MD, SFHM, set for Oct. 23 at Jefferson University Hospital in Philadelphia.

Intended for local and regional residents in the Philadelphia area, Dr. Howell will present the many benefits of becoming a career hospitalist and the resources available to medical students, residents, and early-career hospitalists. Exhibits and networking begin at 6 p.m., with Dr. Howell presenting at 7 p.m., followed by a question-and-answer session.

Attendees will be eligible to win an iPad. Medical students in attendance will receive a complimentary, one-year membership to SHM. Resident membership fees will be discounted to $100.

For more information, visit www.hospitalmedicine.org/events.

The care of hospitalized patients in the future rests with the young physicians of today. That’s the message of an upcoming presentation, “Target 1000: Creating the Pipeline to the Future,” by SHM President Eric Howell, MD, SFHM, set for Oct. 23 at Jefferson University Hospital in Philadelphia.

Intended for local and regional residents in the Philadelphia area, Dr. Howell will present the many benefits of becoming a career hospitalist and the resources available to medical students, residents, and early-career hospitalists. Exhibits and networking begin at 6 p.m., with Dr. Howell presenting at 7 p.m., followed by a question-and-answer session.

Attendees will be eligible to win an iPad. Medical students in attendance will receive a complimentary, one-year membership to SHM. Resident membership fees will be discounted to $100.

For more information, visit www.hospitalmedicine.org/events.

First, SHM’s new Learning Portal was the one-stop shop for free and discounted continuing medical education (CME) credits online. Now, the Learning Portal can help hospitalists report into the physician quality reporting system (PQRS) at a discounted individual rate.

And the time to start reporting measures in PQRS is now.

The PQRS was developed by the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) in 2007 as a voluntary reporting program that provides a financial incentive to physicians and other eligible professionals who report data on quality measures for covered services furnished to Medicare beneficiaries. Starting in 2013, reporting in PQRS becomes mandatory for all eligible professionals.

SHM has encouraged its members to participate in the PQRS since the system’s inception in 2007. With the exciting launch of the SHM Learning Portal, it is easier than ever to get started. If you or your group are not currently reporting, there are still incentive payments available in 2013 and 2014. Beginning in 2015, there will be a penalty for not reporting quality measures based on 2013 performance.

Access the PQRIwizard through the SHM Learning Portal

SHM has secured a significant discount for members to report PQRS through the PQRIwizard. Located within the SHM Learning Portal, this online tool is a fast, convenient, and cost-effective solution to help collect and report quality measures data for the PQRS program. Similar to online tax-preparation software, the PQRIwizard guides you through a few easy steps to help rapidly collect, validate, report, and submit your results to CMS. The tool is powered by the CECity Registry, a CMS-qualified registry for PQRS reporting.

What Measures Are Available?

The SHM PQRIwizard features six individual quality measures in the areas of stroke and stroke rehabilitation, including measures on screening for dysphagia and thrombolytic therapy. To report on any of these measures, simply select three measures and report on 80 percent of your Medicare Part B fee-for-services patients who apply to the measures you selected.

PQRIwizard has a built-in progress monitor that validates your report by checking for missing data. The monitor also tracks your data to provide you with continuous feedback regarding valid patients. The system even calculates your measures and provides a printable report of your measure results in real time.

First, SHM’s new Learning Portal was the one-stop shop for free and discounted continuing medical education (CME) credits online. Now, the Learning Portal can help hospitalists report into the physician quality reporting system (PQRS) at a discounted individual rate.

And the time to start reporting measures in PQRS is now.

The PQRS was developed by the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) in 2007 as a voluntary reporting program that provides a financial incentive to physicians and other eligible professionals who report data on quality measures for covered services furnished to Medicare beneficiaries. Starting in 2013, reporting in PQRS becomes mandatory for all eligible professionals.

SHM has encouraged its members to participate in the PQRS since the system’s inception in 2007. With the exciting launch of the SHM Learning Portal, it is easier than ever to get started. If you or your group are not currently reporting, there are still incentive payments available in 2013 and 2014. Beginning in 2015, there will be a penalty for not reporting quality measures based on 2013 performance.

Access the PQRIwizard through the SHM Learning Portal

SHM has secured a significant discount for members to report PQRS through the PQRIwizard. Located within the SHM Learning Portal, this online tool is a fast, convenient, and cost-effective solution to help collect and report quality measures data for the PQRS program. Similar to online tax-preparation software, the PQRIwizard guides you through a few easy steps to help rapidly collect, validate, report, and submit your results to CMS. The tool is powered by the CECity Registry, a CMS-qualified registry for PQRS reporting.

What Measures Are Available?

The SHM PQRIwizard features six individual quality measures in the areas of stroke and stroke rehabilitation, including measures on screening for dysphagia and thrombolytic therapy. To report on any of these measures, simply select three measures and report on 80 percent of your Medicare Part B fee-for-services patients who apply to the measures you selected.

PQRIwizard has a built-in progress monitor that validates your report by checking for missing data. The monitor also tracks your data to provide you with continuous feedback regarding valid patients. The system even calculates your measures and provides a printable report of your measure results in real time.

First, SHM’s new Learning Portal was the one-stop shop for free and discounted continuing medical education (CME) credits online. Now, the Learning Portal can help hospitalists report into the physician quality reporting system (PQRS) at a discounted individual rate.

And the time to start reporting measures in PQRS is now.

The PQRS was developed by the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) in 2007 as a voluntary reporting program that provides a financial incentive to physicians and other eligible professionals who report data on quality measures for covered services furnished to Medicare beneficiaries. Starting in 2013, reporting in PQRS becomes mandatory for all eligible professionals.

SHM has encouraged its members to participate in the PQRS since the system’s inception in 2007. With the exciting launch of the SHM Learning Portal, it is easier than ever to get started. If you or your group are not currently reporting, there are still incentive payments available in 2013 and 2014. Beginning in 2015, there will be a penalty for not reporting quality measures based on 2013 performance.

Access the PQRIwizard through the SHM Learning Portal

SHM has secured a significant discount for members to report PQRS through the PQRIwizard. Located within the SHM Learning Portal, this online tool is a fast, convenient, and cost-effective solution to help collect and report quality measures data for the PQRS program. Similar to online tax-preparation software, the PQRIwizard guides you through a few easy steps to help rapidly collect, validate, report, and submit your results to CMS. The tool is powered by the CECity Registry, a CMS-qualified registry for PQRS reporting.

What Measures Are Available?

The SHM PQRIwizard features six individual quality measures in the areas of stroke and stroke rehabilitation, including measures on screening for dysphagia and thrombolytic therapy. To report on any of these measures, simply select three measures and report on 80 percent of your Medicare Part B fee-for-services patients who apply to the measures you selected.

PQRIwizard has a built-in progress monitor that validates your report by checking for missing data. The monitor also tracks your data to provide you with continuous feedback regarding valid patients. The system even calculates your measures and provides a printable report of your measure results in real time.

Are you ready to shape the future of hospital medicine, collaborate with leaders in the field, and advance your career? Now is the time—by nominating yourself (or a colleague) for any one of dozens of SHM committees or the board of directors. But don’t delay: The deadline for nominations is Oct. 21.

To learn more about SHM’s 20-plus committees and submit a nomination, visit www.hospitalmedicine.org/committees.

To learn about board eligibility, visit the “About SHM” section at www.hospitalmedicine.org and select “Election Information.”

Why get involved in committees or SHM’s board of directors? Here are some of the reasons current leaders in the field got involved:

Eric Howell, MD, SFHM

Eric Howell, MD, SFHM, SHM president; chief of the division of hospital medicine, John Hopkins Bayview Hospital, Baltimore

The most valuable thing to me is interacting with the nation’s HM leaders, not just other board members. Serving on the board provides connections with many of the best and brightest in our field, from “masters” to brilliant staff, and many, many insightful and thoughtful members.

Serving on the board has been a huge help in my career. The networking is fabulous and absolutely cannot be understated. Plus, you learn a ton from serving on the board, from cutting-edge topics to being involved in areas of HM that might not be present at your home institution. There are multiple opportunities to grow and advance your own leadership skills, from running for a board of directors officer position (treasurer, secretary, president) to opportunities to participate in the Leadership Academy to the AHA to QSEA and more.

Nasim Afsar, MD, SFHM

Nasim Afsar, MD, SFHM, SHM board member; associate chief medical officer, assistant clinical professor, medicine and neurosurgery, executive director of quality and safety, medicine and neurosurgery, UCLA Hospitals, Los Angeles.

If you want to work on challenges facing our specialty, with an incredibly insightful, dedicated, and thoughtful group, come on board. Participating as an SHM board member is invaluable. We have such a dedicated and accomplished group of colleagues focused on the challenges in health care, and we are working toward solutions for the future.

It has enabled me to have a broader perspective on the field of hospital medicine as well as the various roles hospitalists play locally and nationally.

Alexander Carbo, MD, SFHM

Alexander Carbo, MD, SFHM, SHM Membership Committee chair; assistant professor of medicine, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Boston

There are several benefits to serving on an SHM committee. It allows you to meet and collaborate with a fantastic group of individuals, and easily establishes connections that would otherwise take much longer to foster. It also allows you to participate in the field at a national level: If there is something that you are passionate about, committee service can provide a platform for that passion.

It is great fun to participate in SHM committees and to be a part of the process in which this society shapes policy and provides educational opportunities for hospitalists.

Serving on an SHM committee has certainly expanded my network of contacts within hospital medicine!

We are trying to listen to what front-line providers want and need to know about patient safety and quality improvement, and to provide that information for them.

Kim Dickinson, MA, RRT, SFHM

Kim Dickinson, MA, RRT, SFHM, SHM Administrators Committee chair; executive vice president, Acute Services Hospitalists Now Inc., Tucson, Ariz.

I have appreciated the opportunity for continued personal leadership development and the ability to interact closely with others in our industry. I have found hospitalists to be very transparent regarding improving patient care best practices.

It is fun. You meet a subset of people you may have never known. Deep friendships are formed. HM is a large specialty in a very small world. People I have worked with in past committees resurface in my life with regularity.

Our committee has been active in providing broad education about the best practices in HM administration, as well as providing a fellowship track for nonphysicians. This is a landmark achievement for us. Recognition for being part of the HM transformation of health care is immensely satisfying.

Tierza Stephan, MD, FACP, SFHM

Tierza Stephan, MD, FACP, SFHM, SHM Practice Analysis Committee member, hospitalist regional medical director, Allina Health, Minneapolis

Serving on the Practice Analysis Committee has helped me to be a more informed, credible source of hospitalist information for senior leaders in my organization. It has definitely provided me a set of knowledgeable hospitalist colleagues outside of my health system to whom I can turn to for advice and help with problem-solving.

Hospitalists across the country share an amazing number of similar issues despite every hospital having its own unique culture. It’s helpful to hear others talk about the solutions they’ve considered and tried, what went well, and what didn’t. I’ve learned more about the complexity of analyzing a hospitalist practice.

Kendall M. Rogers, MD, CPE, FACP, SFHM

Kendall M. Rogers, MD, CPE, FACP, SFHM, SHM IT Executive Committee chair, associate professor of medicine, chief of the division of hospital medicine, University of New Mexico Health Sciences Center, Albuquerque

My time on SHM committees has been one of the most professionally satisfying activities I have engaged in. In addition to meeting and working closely with national leaders and role models, it has expanded my local idea of what our HM group was capable of achieving by seeing the accomplishments of others and allowing me to incorporate many aspects of these practices without having to develop it from scratch. It also has given me a great sense of pride in our specialty, which has also added to my job satisfaction.

Much of this would not have been possible without the support structure I have built through SHM, which all began with serving on one committee. That has grown to chairing committees, serving as SHM faculty, being a mentee, then mentor, then lead mentor in SHM’s mentored implementation programs.

Committee membership gives you a source of professional satisfaction that is different from your local work. It ties you into a network of people with similar interests while also making you more effective in your local work.

As chair of the Information Technology (IT) Executive Committee, I received a message from my administrative assistant that stated: “The Society of Hospital Medicine called and they need you to go to the White House next week.” I was invited to represent SHM at a town hall meeting on IT with the ONC director at the White House with SHM’s senior advisor for advocacy and government affairs. I have traveled with the CEO, Larry Wellikson, to visit major [electronic medical records] vendors and advocate for the IT tools we need for our members to provide the highest quality of care.

Are you ready to shape the future of hospital medicine, collaborate with leaders in the field, and advance your career? Now is the time—by nominating yourself (or a colleague) for any one of dozens of SHM committees or the board of directors. But don’t delay: The deadline for nominations is Oct. 21.

To learn more about SHM’s 20-plus committees and submit a nomination, visit www.hospitalmedicine.org/committees.

To learn about board eligibility, visit the “About SHM” section at www.hospitalmedicine.org and select “Election Information.”

Why get involved in committees or SHM’s board of directors? Here are some of the reasons current leaders in the field got involved:

Eric Howell, MD, SFHM

Eric Howell, MD, SFHM, SHM president; chief of the division of hospital medicine, John Hopkins Bayview Hospital, Baltimore

The most valuable thing to me is interacting with the nation’s HM leaders, not just other board members. Serving on the board provides connections with many of the best and brightest in our field, from “masters” to brilliant staff, and many, many insightful and thoughtful members.

Serving on the board has been a huge help in my career. The networking is fabulous and absolutely cannot be understated. Plus, you learn a ton from serving on the board, from cutting-edge topics to being involved in areas of HM that might not be present at your home institution. There are multiple opportunities to grow and advance your own leadership skills, from running for a board of directors officer position (treasurer, secretary, president) to opportunities to participate in the Leadership Academy to the AHA to QSEA and more.

Nasim Afsar, MD, SFHM

Nasim Afsar, MD, SFHM, SHM board member; associate chief medical officer, assistant clinical professor, medicine and neurosurgery, executive director of quality and safety, medicine and neurosurgery, UCLA Hospitals, Los Angeles.

If you want to work on challenges facing our specialty, with an incredibly insightful, dedicated, and thoughtful group, come on board. Participating as an SHM board member is invaluable. We have such a dedicated and accomplished group of colleagues focused on the challenges in health care, and we are working toward solutions for the future.

It has enabled me to have a broader perspective on the field of hospital medicine as well as the various roles hospitalists play locally and nationally.

Alexander Carbo, MD, SFHM

Alexander Carbo, MD, SFHM, SHM Membership Committee chair; assistant professor of medicine, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Boston

There are several benefits to serving on an SHM committee. It allows you to meet and collaborate with a fantastic group of individuals, and easily establishes connections that would otherwise take much longer to foster. It also allows you to participate in the field at a national level: If there is something that you are passionate about, committee service can provide a platform for that passion.

It is great fun to participate in SHM committees and to be a part of the process in which this society shapes policy and provides educational opportunities for hospitalists.

Serving on an SHM committee has certainly expanded my network of contacts within hospital medicine!

We are trying to listen to what front-line providers want and need to know about patient safety and quality improvement, and to provide that information for them.

Kim Dickinson, MA, RRT, SFHM

Kim Dickinson, MA, RRT, SFHM, SHM Administrators Committee chair; executive vice president, Acute Services Hospitalists Now Inc., Tucson, Ariz.

I have appreciated the opportunity for continued personal leadership development and the ability to interact closely with others in our industry. I have found hospitalists to be very transparent regarding improving patient care best practices.

It is fun. You meet a subset of people you may have never known. Deep friendships are formed. HM is a large specialty in a very small world. People I have worked with in past committees resurface in my life with regularity.

Our committee has been active in providing broad education about the best practices in HM administration, as well as providing a fellowship track for nonphysicians. This is a landmark achievement for us. Recognition for being part of the HM transformation of health care is immensely satisfying.

Tierza Stephan, MD, FACP, SFHM

Tierza Stephan, MD, FACP, SFHM, SHM Practice Analysis Committee member, hospitalist regional medical director, Allina Health, Minneapolis

Serving on the Practice Analysis Committee has helped me to be a more informed, credible source of hospitalist information for senior leaders in my organization. It has definitely provided me a set of knowledgeable hospitalist colleagues outside of my health system to whom I can turn to for advice and help with problem-solving.

Hospitalists across the country share an amazing number of similar issues despite every hospital having its own unique culture. It’s helpful to hear others talk about the solutions they’ve considered and tried, what went well, and what didn’t. I’ve learned more about the complexity of analyzing a hospitalist practice.

Kendall M. Rogers, MD, CPE, FACP, SFHM

Kendall M. Rogers, MD, CPE, FACP, SFHM, SHM IT Executive Committee chair, associate professor of medicine, chief of the division of hospital medicine, University of New Mexico Health Sciences Center, Albuquerque

My time on SHM committees has been one of the most professionally satisfying activities I have engaged in. In addition to meeting and working closely with national leaders and role models, it has expanded my local idea of what our HM group was capable of achieving by seeing the accomplishments of others and allowing me to incorporate many aspects of these practices without having to develop it from scratch. It also has given me a great sense of pride in our specialty, which has also added to my job satisfaction.

Much of this would not have been possible without the support structure I have built through SHM, which all began with serving on one committee. That has grown to chairing committees, serving as SHM faculty, being a mentee, then mentor, then lead mentor in SHM’s mentored implementation programs.

Committee membership gives you a source of professional satisfaction that is different from your local work. It ties you into a network of people with similar interests while also making you more effective in your local work.

As chair of the Information Technology (IT) Executive Committee, I received a message from my administrative assistant that stated: “The Society of Hospital Medicine called and they need you to go to the White House next week.” I was invited to represent SHM at a town hall meeting on IT with the ONC director at the White House with SHM’s senior advisor for advocacy and government affairs. I have traveled with the CEO, Larry Wellikson, to visit major [electronic medical records] vendors and advocate for the IT tools we need for our members to provide the highest quality of care.

Are you ready to shape the future of hospital medicine, collaborate with leaders in the field, and advance your career? Now is the time—by nominating yourself (or a colleague) for any one of dozens of SHM committees or the board of directors. But don’t delay: The deadline for nominations is Oct. 21.

To learn more about SHM’s 20-plus committees and submit a nomination, visit www.hospitalmedicine.org/committees.

To learn about board eligibility, visit the “About SHM” section at www.hospitalmedicine.org and select “Election Information.”

Why get involved in committees or SHM’s board of directors? Here are some of the reasons current leaders in the field got involved:

Eric Howell, MD, SFHM

Eric Howell, MD, SFHM, SHM president; chief of the division of hospital medicine, John Hopkins Bayview Hospital, Baltimore

The most valuable thing to me is interacting with the nation’s HM leaders, not just other board members. Serving on the board provides connections with many of the best and brightest in our field, from “masters” to brilliant staff, and many, many insightful and thoughtful members.

Serving on the board has been a huge help in my career. The networking is fabulous and absolutely cannot be understated. Plus, you learn a ton from serving on the board, from cutting-edge topics to being involved in areas of HM that might not be present at your home institution. There are multiple opportunities to grow and advance your own leadership skills, from running for a board of directors officer position (treasurer, secretary, president) to opportunities to participate in the Leadership Academy to the AHA to QSEA and more.

Nasim Afsar, MD, SFHM

Nasim Afsar, MD, SFHM, SHM board member; associate chief medical officer, assistant clinical professor, medicine and neurosurgery, executive director of quality and safety, medicine and neurosurgery, UCLA Hospitals, Los Angeles.

If you want to work on challenges facing our specialty, with an incredibly insightful, dedicated, and thoughtful group, come on board. Participating as an SHM board member is invaluable. We have such a dedicated and accomplished group of colleagues focused on the challenges in health care, and we are working toward solutions for the future.

It has enabled me to have a broader perspective on the field of hospital medicine as well as the various roles hospitalists play locally and nationally.

Alexander Carbo, MD, SFHM

Alexander Carbo, MD, SFHM, SHM Membership Committee chair; assistant professor of medicine, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Boston

There are several benefits to serving on an SHM committee. It allows you to meet and collaborate with a fantastic group of individuals, and easily establishes connections that would otherwise take much longer to foster. It also allows you to participate in the field at a national level: If there is something that you are passionate about, committee service can provide a platform for that passion.

It is great fun to participate in SHM committees and to be a part of the process in which this society shapes policy and provides educational opportunities for hospitalists.

Serving on an SHM committee has certainly expanded my network of contacts within hospital medicine!

We are trying to listen to what front-line providers want and need to know about patient safety and quality improvement, and to provide that information for them.

Kim Dickinson, MA, RRT, SFHM

Kim Dickinson, MA, RRT, SFHM, SHM Administrators Committee chair; executive vice president, Acute Services Hospitalists Now Inc., Tucson, Ariz.

I have appreciated the opportunity for continued personal leadership development and the ability to interact closely with others in our industry. I have found hospitalists to be very transparent regarding improving patient care best practices.

It is fun. You meet a subset of people you may have never known. Deep friendships are formed. HM is a large specialty in a very small world. People I have worked with in past committees resurface in my life with regularity.

Our committee has been active in providing broad education about the best practices in HM administration, as well as providing a fellowship track for nonphysicians. This is a landmark achievement for us. Recognition for being part of the HM transformation of health care is immensely satisfying.

Tierza Stephan, MD, FACP, SFHM

Tierza Stephan, MD, FACP, SFHM, SHM Practice Analysis Committee member, hospitalist regional medical director, Allina Health, Minneapolis

Serving on the Practice Analysis Committee has helped me to be a more informed, credible source of hospitalist information for senior leaders in my organization. It has definitely provided me a set of knowledgeable hospitalist colleagues outside of my health system to whom I can turn to for advice and help with problem-solving.

Hospitalists across the country share an amazing number of similar issues despite every hospital having its own unique culture. It’s helpful to hear others talk about the solutions they’ve considered and tried, what went well, and what didn’t. I’ve learned more about the complexity of analyzing a hospitalist practice.

Kendall M. Rogers, MD, CPE, FACP, SFHM

Kendall M. Rogers, MD, CPE, FACP, SFHM, SHM IT Executive Committee chair, associate professor of medicine, chief of the division of hospital medicine, University of New Mexico Health Sciences Center, Albuquerque

My time on SHM committees has been one of the most professionally satisfying activities I have engaged in. In addition to meeting and working closely with national leaders and role models, it has expanded my local idea of what our HM group was capable of achieving by seeing the accomplishments of others and allowing me to incorporate many aspects of these practices without having to develop it from scratch. It also has given me a great sense of pride in our specialty, which has also added to my job satisfaction.

Much of this would not have been possible without the support structure I have built through SHM, which all began with serving on one committee. That has grown to chairing committees, serving as SHM faculty, being a mentee, then mentor, then lead mentor in SHM’s mentored implementation programs.

Committee membership gives you a source of professional satisfaction that is different from your local work. It ties you into a network of people with similar interests while also making you more effective in your local work.

As chair of the Information Technology (IT) Executive Committee, I received a message from my administrative assistant that stated: “The Society of Hospital Medicine called and they need you to go to the White House next week.” I was invited to represent SHM at a town hall meeting on IT with the ONC director at the White House with SHM’s senior advisor for advocacy and government affairs. I have traveled with the CEO, Larry Wellikson, to visit major [electronic medical records] vendors and advocate for the IT tools we need for our members to provide the highest quality of care.

Robert Wachter, MD, MHM

Robert Wachter, MD, MHM, has been named to the board of directors and chair of the quality committee for IPC: The Hospitalist Company, based in North Hollywood, Calif. Dr. Wachter currently serves as director of the division of hospital medicine and associate chair of the department of medicine at the University of California at San Francisco. A well-known and respected authority on quality and safety, he was recognized with the John M. Eisenberg Award for excellence in patient safety in 2004. He also pens the Wachter’s World blog at www.wachtersworld.com.

Raffi Hodikian, MD

Raffi Hodikian, MD, a hospitalist and longtime member of SHM, was named the 2013 Physician of the Year at Foothill Presbyterian Hospital in Glendora, Calif. “Not only was this the greatest honor of my career, but I thought it further reaffirmed the vital role hospitalists play in our community hospitals,” Dr. Hodikian said of the award.

Kimberly A. Bell, MD, is the new associate vice president of hospital medicine for Franciscan Health System (FHS) in Tacoma, Wash. In her new role, Dr. Bell will oversee hospitalist services at five of FHS’ seven area hospitals. FHS employs nearly 100 hospital medicine providers, including physicians and physician extenders.

Felix T. Cabrera, MD, has been named associate medical director at Guam Memorial Hospital (GMH) in Tamuning, Guam, after working as a hospitalist at GMH for more than two years. In his new role, Dr. Cabrera hopes to improve the technological infrastructure within the hospital. He will continue with his regular hospitalist rounds and private practice at International Health Providers Medical Group in Dededo, Guam. GMH is a 158-bed acute-care facility and the only hospital dedicated to civilian care on the island.

Troy Martin, MD, has been appointed chief medical officer for Questcare Hospitalists, based in Dallas. Dr. Martin comes to the Questcare executive team from the Medical Center of McKinney in McKinney, Texas, where he served as medical director of Questcare’s hospitalist program.

Robert Wachter, MD, MHM

Robert Wachter, MD, MHM, has been named to the board of directors and chair of the quality committee for IPC: The Hospitalist Company, based in North Hollywood, Calif. Dr. Wachter currently serves as director of the division of hospital medicine and associate chair of the department of medicine at the University of California at San Francisco. A well-known and respected authority on quality and safety, he was recognized with the John M. Eisenberg Award for excellence in patient safety in 2004. He also pens the Wachter’s World blog at www.wachtersworld.com.

Raffi Hodikian, MD

Raffi Hodikian, MD, a hospitalist and longtime member of SHM, was named the 2013 Physician of the Year at Foothill Presbyterian Hospital in Glendora, Calif. “Not only was this the greatest honor of my career, but I thought it further reaffirmed the vital role hospitalists play in our community hospitals,” Dr. Hodikian said of the award.

Kimberly A. Bell, MD, is the new associate vice president of hospital medicine for Franciscan Health System (FHS) in Tacoma, Wash. In her new role, Dr. Bell will oversee hospitalist services at five of FHS’ seven area hospitals. FHS employs nearly 100 hospital medicine providers, including physicians and physician extenders.

Felix T. Cabrera, MD, has been named associate medical director at Guam Memorial Hospital (GMH) in Tamuning, Guam, after working as a hospitalist at GMH for more than two years. In his new role, Dr. Cabrera hopes to improve the technological infrastructure within the hospital. He will continue with his regular hospitalist rounds and private practice at International Health Providers Medical Group in Dededo, Guam. GMH is a 158-bed acute-care facility and the only hospital dedicated to civilian care on the island.

Troy Martin, MD, has been appointed chief medical officer for Questcare Hospitalists, based in Dallas. Dr. Martin comes to the Questcare executive team from the Medical Center of McKinney in McKinney, Texas, where he served as medical director of Questcare’s hospitalist program.

Robert Wachter, MD, MHM

Robert Wachter, MD, MHM, has been named to the board of directors and chair of the quality committee for IPC: The Hospitalist Company, based in North Hollywood, Calif. Dr. Wachter currently serves as director of the division of hospital medicine and associate chair of the department of medicine at the University of California at San Francisco. A well-known and respected authority on quality and safety, he was recognized with the John M. Eisenberg Award for excellence in patient safety in 2004. He also pens the Wachter’s World blog at www.wachtersworld.com.

Raffi Hodikian, MD

Raffi Hodikian, MD, a hospitalist and longtime member of SHM, was named the 2013 Physician of the Year at Foothill Presbyterian Hospital in Glendora, Calif. “Not only was this the greatest honor of my career, but I thought it further reaffirmed the vital role hospitalists play in our community hospitals,” Dr. Hodikian said of the award.

Kimberly A. Bell, MD, is the new associate vice president of hospital medicine for Franciscan Health System (FHS) in Tacoma, Wash. In her new role, Dr. Bell will oversee hospitalist services at five of FHS’ seven area hospitals. FHS employs nearly 100 hospital medicine providers, including physicians and physician extenders.

Felix T. Cabrera, MD, has been named associate medical director at Guam Memorial Hospital (GMH) in Tamuning, Guam, after working as a hospitalist at GMH for more than two years. In his new role, Dr. Cabrera hopes to improve the technological infrastructure within the hospital. He will continue with his regular hospitalist rounds and private practice at International Health Providers Medical Group in Dededo, Guam. GMH is a 158-bed acute-care facility and the only hospital dedicated to civilian care on the island.

Troy Martin, MD, has been appointed chief medical officer for Questcare Hospitalists, based in Dallas. Dr. Martin comes to the Questcare executive team from the Medical Center of McKinney in McKinney, Texas, where he served as medical director of Questcare’s hospitalist program.