Deanne T. Kashiwagi

Mentoring Programs for Physicians in Academic Medicine: A Systematic Review

Purpose Mentoring is vital to professional development in the field of medicine, influencing career choice and faculty retention; thus, the authors reviewed mentoring programs for physicians and aimed to identify key components that contribute to these programs’ success. Method The authors searched the MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Scopus databases for articles from January 2000 through May 2011 that described mentoring programs for practicing physicians. The authors reviewed 16 articles, describing 18 programs, extracting program objectives, components, and outcomes. They synthesized findings to determine key elements of successful programs. Results All of the programs described in the articles focused on academic physicians. The authors identified seven mentoring models: dyad, peer, facilitated peer, speed, functional, group, and distance. The dyad model was most common. The authors identified seven potential components of a formal mentoring program: mentor preparation, planning committees, mentor–mentee contracts, mentor–mentee pairing, mentoring activities, formal curricula, and program funding. Of these, the formation of mentor–mentee pairs received the most attention in published reports. Mentees favored choosing their own mentors; mentors and mentees alike valued protected time. One barrier to program development was limited resources. Written agreements were important to set limits and encourage accountability to the mentoring relationship. Program evaluation was primarily subjective, using locally developed surveys. No programs reported long-term results. Conclusions The authors identified key program elements that could contribute to successful physician mentoring. Future research might further clarify the use of these elements and employ standardized evaluation methods to determine the long-term effects of mentoring.

The Charlson Comorbidity Index Score as a Predictor of 30-Day Mortality After Hip Fracture Surgery

This study is a retrospective chart review to determine the association of Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI), age, body mass index (BMI), and admission glucose with the incidence of postoperative 30-day mortality in older patients undergoing hip fracture surgery from January 1, 2000, to June 30, 2002. A total of 40 (8%) of 485 eligible patients died within 30 days after hip fracture surgery. The factors associated with 30-day mortality were age > 90 years (odds ratio [OR] = 2.74; confidence interval [CI] = 1.27-5.95; P = .012), BMI < 18.5 (OR = 3.98; CI 1.48-10.65; P = .006), and CCI ≥ 6 (OR = 2.6; CI = 1.20-5.65; P = .015). There was no relationship between admission glucose concentration and 30-day mortality. Advanced age, low BMI, and high CCI can be identified prospectively and are independently associated with postoperative 30-day mortality in older, chronically ill patients.

Nutrition in the hospitalized patient

Almost 50% of patients are malnourished on admission; many others develop malnutrition during admission. Malnutrition contributes to hospital morbidity, mortality, costs, and readmissions. The Joint Commission requires malnutrition risk screening on admission. If screening identifies malnutrition risk, a nutrition assessment is required to create a nutrition care plan. The plan should be initiated early in the hospital course, as even patients with normal nutrition become malnourished quickly when acutely ill. While the Harris-Benedict equation is the most commonly used method to estimate calories, its accuracy may not be optimal in all patients. Calculating the caloric needs of acutely ill obese patients is particularly problematic. In general, a patients caloric intake should be slightly less than calculated needs to avoid the metabolic risks of overfeeding. However, most patients do not receive their goal calories or receive parenteral nutrition due to erroneous practices of awaiting return of bowel sounds or holding feeding for gastric residual volumes. Patients with inadequate intake over time may develop potentially fatal refeeding syndrome. The hospitalist must be able to recognize the risk factors for malnutrition, patients at risk of refeeding syndrome, and the optimal route for nutrition support. Finally, education of patients and their caregivers about nutrition support must begin before discharge, and include coordination of care with outpatient facilities. As with all other aspects of discharge, it is the hospitalists role to assure smooth transition of the nutrition care plan to an outpatient setting.

Do Timely Outpatient Follow-up Visits Decrease Hospital Readmission Rates?:

It is widely believed that timely follow-up decreases hospital readmissions; however, the literature evaluating time to follow-up is limited. The authors conducted a retrospective analysis of patients discharged from a tertiary care academic medical center and evaluated the relationship between outpatient follow-up appointments made and 30-day unplanned readmissions. Of 1044 patients discharged home, 518 (49.6%) patients had scheduled follow-up ≤14 days after discharge, 52 (4.9%) patients were scheduled ≥15 days after discharge, and 474 (45.4%) had no scheduled follow-up. There was no statistical difference in 30-day readmissions between patients with follow-up within 14 days and those with follow-up 15 days or longer from discharge (P = .36) or between patients with follow-up within 14 days and those without scheduled follow-up (P = .75). The timing of postdischarge follow-up did not affect readmissions. Further research is needed to determine such factors and to prospectively study time to outpatient follow-up after discharge and the decrease in readmission rates.

Gaining efficiency and satisfaction in the handoff process

BACKGROUND Handoffs, or transfers of patient care responsibility, occur frequently on hospitalist teams. The reliability and efficiency of the handoff process is a national and local concern. Most studies in the literature regard physicians-in-training. We studied the morning handoff process of hospitalist teams comprised of staff physicians and nurse practitioner and/or physician assistants. METHODS An improvement team observed morning handoffs. Four problems were identified: unpredictable start and finish times, inefficiency, poor environment (hallway noise and distracting in-room conversations), and poor communication. The team restructured the process and observed post-intervention behavior at 15 and 90 days. A participant-provider survey was conducted before and after the intervention regarding wasted time, total time-in-report, and satisfaction with the process. RESULTS Pre-intervention 60.5% of providers (23/38) believed morning handoff was performed in a timely fashion compared to 100% (15/15) post-intervention (P = 0.005). Average time spent in morning report was 11 minutes, compared to 5 minutes after the intervention (P < 0.0028). Pre-intervention 6.5 minutes were believed wasteful, compared to 0.5 minutes post-intervention (P < 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS This study identifies deficiencies in the handoff process that were addressed by enhancing the physical environment (smaller room, noise reduction, closed door), assigned seating (visual cues by table tent cards), non-clinicians providing printed materials, standardization of written updates, team times (consistent & precise daily time for each team report), culture change including deference of attention to team receiving report with opportunity for questions, and minimization of side conversations. This intervention package resulted in an improvement in satisfaction and timeliness of clinicians involved.

Information Transfer at Hospital Discharge: A Systematic Review.

Supplemental digital content is available in the text. Background Prompt, complete, and accurate information transfer at the time of discharge between hospital-based and primary care providers (PCPs) is needed for the provision of safe and effective care. Purpose of the Study To evaluate timeliness, quality, and interventions to improve timeliness and quality of hospital discharge summaries. Data Sources PubMed, MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, Web of Science, and Scopus database published in English between January 2007 and February 2014 were searched. We also hand-searched bibliographies of relevant articles. Study Selection Observational studies investigating transfer of information at hospital discharge (n = 7) and controlled studies evaluating interventions to improve timeliness and quality of discharge information (n = 12) were included. Data Extraction We extracted data on availability, timeliness, and content of hospital discharge summaries and on the effectiveness of interventions targeting discharge summaries. Results of studies are presented narratively and using descriptive statistics. Data Synthesis Across the studies, discharge summaries were completed within 48 hours in a median of 67% and were available to PCPs within 48 hours only 55% of the time. Most of the time, discharge summaries included demographics, primary diagnosis, hospital course, and discharge instructions. However, information was limited to pending test results (25%), diagnostic tests performed (60%), and postdischarge medications (78%). In 6 interventional studies, implementation of electronic discharge summaries was associated with improvement in timeliness but not quality. Conclusions Delayed or insufficient transfer of discharge information between hospital-based providers and PCPs remains common. Creation of electronic discharge summaries seems to improve timeliness and availability but does not consistently improve quality.

A Clinical Deterioration Prediction Tool for Internal Medicine Patients

Many early warning models for hospitalized patients use variables measured on admission to the hospital ward; few have been rigorously derived and validated. The objective was to create and validate a clinical deterioration prediction tool using routinely collected clinical and nursing measurements. Multivariate regression analysis was used to determine clinical variables statistically associated with clinical deterioration; subsequently, the model tool was retrospectively validated using a different cohort of medical inpatients. The Braden Scale (P = .01; odds ratio [OR] = 0.91; confidence interval [CI] = 0.84-0.98), respiratory rate (P < .01; OR = 1.08; CI = 1.04-1.13), oxygen saturation (P < .01; OR = 0.97; CI = 0.96-0.99), and shock index (P < .01; OR = 2.37; CI = 1.14-3.98) were predictive of clinical deterioration 2-12 hours in the future. When applied to the validation cohort, the tool demonstrated fair concordance with actual outcomes. This tool created using routinely collected clinical measurements can serve as a very early warning system for hospitalized medical patients.

Multiple admissions for alcohol withdrawal.

OBJECTIVE The objective was to identify risk factors for multiple admissions for alcohol withdrawal syndrome (AWS) in patients admitted to a general medicine service. METHODS A retrospective study was performed examining records of patients admitted for AWS between January 1, 2006 and December 31, 2008 to an academic tertiary referral hospital. Patients with a single admission were compared to patients with multiple admissions with respect to demographic and clinical variables. RESULTS Three hundred and twenty-two patients accounted for 788 admissions. Of the 322 patients, 142 (44%) had multiple admissions. Compared to patients with a single admission, patients with multiple admissions were more likely to have a high school education or less (p=0.0071), a higher Charlson comorbidity index score (p=0.0010), a positive urine drug screen for non-alcohol drug (p=0.0002), psychiatric comorbidity (p=0.0303) and a higher CIWA-Ar maximum total score (p<0.0001). CONCLUSION In patients with AWS, we identified demographic and clinical variables associated with multiple admissions to a general medicine service. Our results indicate areas for a targeted multidisciplinary and multispecialty approach at initial intervention, which is especially important given the high rates of recidivism in this patient population.

Association of face‐to‐face handoffs and outcomes of hospitalized internal medicine patients

BACKGROUND Failures in communication at the time of patient handoff have been implicated as contributing factors to preventable adverse events. OBJECTIVE Examine the relationship between face-to-face handoffs and the rate of patient outcomes, including adverse events. DESIGN Retrospective cohort. SETTING A 1157-bed academic tertiary referral hospital. PATIENTS There were 805 adult patients admitted to general internal medicine services. INTERVENTION Retrospective comparison of clinical outcomes, including the rate of adverse events, of patients whose care was transitioned with and without face-to-face handoffs. MEASUREMENTS Rapid response team calls, code team calls, transfers to a higher level of care, death in hospital, 30-day readmission rate, length of stay, and adverse events (as identified using the Global Trigger Tool). RESULTS There was no significant difference with respect to the frequency of rapid response team calls, code team calls, transfers to a higher level of care, deaths in hospital, length of stay, 30-day readmission rate, or adverse events between patients whose care was transitioned with or without a face-to-face handoff. CONCLUSIONS Face-to-face handoff of patients admitted to general medical services at a large academic tertiary referral hospital was not associated with a significant difference in measured patient outcomes, including the rate of adverse events, compared to a non-face-to-face handoff. Additional study is needed to determine the qualities of patient handoff that optimize efficiency and safety.

Reflective Practice: A Tool for Readmission Reduction.

Factors intrinsic to local practice, but not captured by the medical record, contribute to readmissions. Frontline providers familiar with their practice systems can identify these. The objective was to decrease 30-day hospital readmissions. The intervention involved retrospective review by hospitalists of their own patients’ readmissions, using reflective practice guided by a chart review tool. Subjects were patients discharged by hospitalists and readmitted to a tertiary care academic medical center. Hospitalists reviewed 193 readmissions of 170 patients. Factors contributing to readmission were grouped under patient characteristics, operational factors, and care transition. After reflection, physicians scheduled earlier follow-up appointments while nurse practitioners and physician assistants improved discharge instructions. Readmissions decreased during the review period, and the decrease sustained for one year after the review period. Hospitalists reflected on and identified local practice factors that contributed to their own patients’ 30-day readmissions. Reflective practice may be an effective strategy to decrease hospital readmissions.