Bassam Kadry

Analysis of 4999 online physician ratings indicates that most patients give physicians a favorable rating.

Background Many online physician-rating sites provide patients with information about physicians and allow patients to rate physicians. Understanding what information is available is important given that patients may use this information to choose a physician. Objectives The goals of this study were to (1) determine the most frequently visited physician-rating websites with user-generated content, (2) evaluate the available information on these websites, and (3) analyze 4999 individual online ratings of physicians. Methods On October 1, 2010, using Google Trends we identified the 10 most frequently visited online physician-rating sites with user-generated content. We then studied each site to evaluate the available information (eg, board certification, years in practice), the types of rating scales (eg, 1–5, 1–4, 1–100), and dimensions of care (eg, recommend to a friend, waiting room time) used to rate physicians. We analyzed data from 4999 selected physician ratings without identifiers to assess how physicians are rated online. Results The 10 most commonly visited websites with user-generated content were HealthGrades.com, Vitals.com, Yelp.com, YP.com, RevolutionHealth.com, RateMD.com, Angieslist.com, Checkbook.org, Kudzu.com, and ZocDoc.com. A total of 35 different dimensions of care were rated by patients in the websites, with a median of 4.5 (mean 4.9, SD 2.8, range 1–9) questions per site. Depending on the scale used for each physician-rating website, the average rating was 77 out of 100 for sites using a 100-point scale (SD 11, median 76, range 33–100), 3.84 out of 5 (77%) for sites using a 5-point scale (SD 0.98, median 4, range 1–5), and 3.1 out of 4 (78%) for sites using a 4-point scale (SD 0.72, median 3, range 1–4). The percentage of reviews rated ≥75 on a 100-point scale was 61.5% (246/400), ≥4 on a 5-point scale was 57.74% (2078/3599), and ≥3 on a 4-point scale was 74.0% (740/1000). The patient’s single overall rating of the physician correlated with the other dimensions of care that were rated by patients for the same physician (Pearson correlation, r = .73, P < .001). Conclusions Most patients give physicians a favorable rating on online physician-rating sites. A single overall rating to evaluate physicians may be sufficient to assess a patient’s opinion of the physician. The optimal content and rating method that is useful to patients when visiting online physician-rating sites deserves further study. Conducting a qualitative analysis to compare the quantitative ratings would help validate the rating instruments used to evaluate physicians.

Challenges that limit meaningful use of health information technology.

Purpose Health information technology (HIT) is perceived as an essential component for addressing inefficiencies in healthcare. Without understanding the challenges that limit meaningful use of HIT, there is a high chance that institutions will convert complex paper-based systems to expensive digital chaos. Recent findings Clinical information systems do not communicate with each other automatically because integration of existing data standards is lacking. Data standards for medical specialties need further development. Database architectures are often designed to support single clinical applications and are not easily modified to meet the enterprise-wide needs desired by all end-users. Despite the improvements in charge capture and better access to health information the realized savings and impact on patient throughput is not enough to cover the cost of the technology, maintenance, and support. HIT is necessary for improved quality of care but it increases the cost of doing business. Poor user interface and system design hinders clinical workflow and can result in wasted time, poor data collection, misleading data analysis, and potentially negative clinical outcomes. Healthcare organizations have little recourse if a vendor fails to deliver as intended once the vendors system becomes embedded into the organization. Decisions on technology acquisitions and implementations are often made by individuals or groups that lack clinical informatics expertise. Summary Government incentives to increase HIT will likely result in a more computerized clinical environment. Understanding the challenges can help avoid costly mistakes. The future looks promising but caution is warranted, as achievement of full benefits of HIT requires addressing significant challenges.

Nothing about us without us-patient partnership in medical conferences.

Using their experience at Medicine X, Larry Chu and colleagues discuss the benefits of involving patients as partners at medical meetings

Obesity increases operating room times in patients undergoing primary hip arthroplasty: a retrospective cohort analysis

Background. Obesity impacts utilization of healthcare resources. The goal of this study was to measure the relationship between increasing body mass index (BMI) in patients undergoing total hip arthroplasty (THA) with different components of operating room (OR) time. Methods. The Stanford Translational Research Integrated Database Environment (STRIDE) was utilized to identify all ASA PS 2 or 3 patients who underwent primary THA at Stanford Medical Center from February 1, 2008 through January 1, 2013. Patients were divided into five groups based on the BMI weight classification. Regression analysis was used to quantify relationships between BMI and the different components of total OR time. Results. 1,332 patients were included in the study. There were no statistically significant differences in age, gender, height, and ASA PS classification between the BMI groups. Normal-weight patients had a total OR time of 138.9 min compared 167.9 min (P < 0.001) for morbidly obese patients. At a BMI > 35 kg/m2 each incremental BMI unit increase was associated with greater incremental total OR time increases. Conclusion. Morbidly obese patients required significantly more total OR time than normal-weight patients undergoing a THA procedure. This increase in time is relevant when scheduling obese patients for surgery and has an important impact on health resource utilization.

Scheduling of Procedures and Staff in an Ambulatory Surgery Center

For ambulatory surgical centers (ASC) to succeed financially, it is critical for ASC managers to schedule surgical procedures in a manner that optimizes operating room (OR) efficiency. OR efficiency is maximized by using historical data to accurately predict future OR workload, thereby enabling OR time to be properly allocated to surgeons. Other strategies to maintain a well-functioning ASC include recruiting and retaining the right staff and ensuring patients and surgeons are satisfied with their experience. This article reviews different types of procedure scheduling systems. Characteristics of well-functioning ASCs are also discussed.

The Heart of the Matter: Increasing Quality and Charge Capture from Intraoperative Transesophageal Echocardiography.

Although transesophageal echocardiography is routinely performed at our institution, there is no easy way to document the procedure in the electronic medical record and generate a bill compliant with reimbursement requirements. We present the results of a quality improvement project that used agile development methodology to incorporate intraoperative transesophageal echocardiography into the electronic medical record. We discuss improvements in the quality of clinical documentation, technical workflow challenges overcome, and cost and time to return on investment. Billing was increased from an average of 36% to 84.6% when compared with the same time period in the previous year. The expected recoupment of investment for this project is just 18 weeks.

Commentary: How Should Hospitals Respond to Surgeons’ Requests to Schedule Overlapping Surgeries?

∗Stanford Health Care, Department of Anesthesiology, Stanford, California; ‡Stanford Law School and Department of Health Research and Policy, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, California; §University of Arkansas for Medical Sciences, Department of Anesthesiology, Little Rock, Arkansas; ¶JohnMuir Health -Walnut CreekMedical Center, Department of Anesthesiology, Walnut Creek, California

Overlapping Surgery: A Case Study in Operating Room Throughput and Efficiency

A keystone of operating room (OR) management is proper OR allocation to optimize access, safety, efficiency, and throughput. Access is important to surgeons, and overlapping surgery may increase patient access to surgeons with specialized skill sets and facilitate the training of medical students, residents, and fellows. Overlapping surgery is commonly performed in academic medical centers, although recent public scrutiny has raised debate about its safety, necessitating monitoring. This article introduces a system to monitor overlapping surgery, providing a surgeon-specific Key Performance Indicator, and discusses overlapping surgery as an approach toward OR management goals of efficiency and throughput.

Operating Room Management, Measures of OR Efficiency, and Cost-Effectiveness

Proper management of the operating room (OR) suite is important so that patients can get safe and efficient care. Much of the decision-making by the OR manager needs to be done prior to the day of surgery in order to appropriately allocate OR time, assign staffing, and estimate case durations. OR managers are also responsible for last-minute decisions on the day of surgery, such as determining which OR should perform add-on cases and emergencies. This chapter reviews key aspects of OR management including basic definitions, case duration predictions, OR time allocation and utilization, staffing, and measures of OR efficiency. These variables can help the OR manager make the best use of OR time and staff to maximize throughput of cases. Leadership ability is also a key component of OR suite management whereby teamwork and cooperation are encouraged so that OR personnel enjoy a healthy work environment.

A Case Illustrating the Costs of Quality Improvement: Nine Months to Move Needles and Syringes on the Anesthesia Cart

Powerful entities are pushing physicians to become more involved with quality improvement (QI). We report a QI project to standardize and improve the ergonomics of the anesthesia medication and supply cart. Simply obtaining approval to make minor changes to the cart involved 54 phone calls, 164 e-mails, 4 presentations, 2 forms, 9 meetings, and 4 months of time. Confusion over fiscal matters further delayed the project by an additional 3 months. A combination of competing regulations, administrative overprocessing, and the lack of dedicated QI financial resources made simple improvements a challenge. The costs of participating in QI deserve attention.