Dataset Information

On the same page: a novel interprofessional model of patient-centered perinatal consultation visits.

ABSTRACT: To plan and implement an interprofessional collaborative care clinic for women in midwifery care needing a consultation with a maternal-fetal medicine specialist.A community-engaged design was used to develop a new model of collaborative perinatal consultation, which was tested with 50 women. Participant perinatal outcomes and semistructured interviews with 15 women (analyzed using qualitative descriptive analysis) and clinic providers were used to evaluate the model.Participant perinatal outcomes following a simultaneous consultation visit involving a nurse-midwife and maternal-fetal medicine specialist were similar to practice and hospital averages. Women's comments on their experience were positive and had the theme 'on the same page' with six subcategories: clarity, communication, collaboration, planning, validation and 'above and beyond'. Providers also were pleased with the model.A simultaneous consultation involving the woman, a nurse-midwife and a maternal-fetal medicine specialist improved communication and satisfaction among women and providers.

SUBMITTER: Phillippi JC

PROVIDER: S-EPMC5079800 | biostudies-literature | 2016 Nov

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

On the same page: a novel interprofessional model of patient-centered perinatal consultation visits.

Phillippi J C JC Holley S L SL Schorn M N MN Lauderdale J J Roumie C L CL Bennett K K

Journal of perinatology : official journal of the California Perinatal Association 20160818 11

<h4>Objective</h4>To plan and implement an interprofessional collaborative care clinic for women in midwifery care needing a consultation with a maternal-fetal medicine specialist.<h4>Study design</h4>A community-engaged design was used to develop a new model of collaborative perinatal consultation, which was tested with 50 women. Participant perinatal outcomes and semistructured interviews with 15 women (analyzed using qualitative descriptive analysis) and clinic providers were used to evaluate ...[more]

PMID: 27537857

Similar Datasets

Project description:BACKGROUND: Medical care delivered in hospital-based medicine units requires interprofessional collaborative care (IPCC) to improve quality. However, models such as bedside interprofessional rounds, or encounters that include the team of physician and nurse providers discussing medical care at the patient's bedside, are not well studied. OBJECTIVE: To examine the incidence of and time spent in bedside interprofessional rounds on internal medicine teaching services in one academic medical center. DESIGN AND PARTICIPANTS: Observational descriptive study of internal medicine faculty serving as inpatient medicine attending physicians. Participants completed a daily electronic survey following team rounding sessions to assess rounding characteristics (November 2012-June 2013); variables such as resident level-of-training, attending physician years' of experience, house staff call day and clinic schedule were obtained from administrative data. Descriptive, Kruskal-Wallis, and multivariable logistic regression statistics were used to evaluate the study objectives. MAIN MEASURES: Primary outcomes were: (1) incidence of bedside interprofessional rounds, (2) time spent with patients during bedside interprofessional rounding encounters, and, (3) factors associated with increased occurrence of and time spent with patients during bedside interprofessional rounds. Covariates included resident level-of-training, attending physician years' of experience, census size, and call day. KEY RESULTS: Of 549 rounding sessions, 412 surveys were collected (75 % response) from 25 attending physicians. Bedside interprofessional rounds occurred with 64 % of patients (median 8.0 min/encounter), differing by unit (intermediate care 81 %, general medicine 63 %, non-medicine 57 %, p < 0.001). Factors independently associated with increased occurrence of bedside interprofessional rounds were senior resident (OR 2.67, CI 1.75-4.06, PGY-3/PGY-4 vs. PGY-2), weekdays (OR 1.74, CI 1.13-2.69), team census size ≤ 11 (OR 2.36, CI 1.37-4.06), and attending physicians with ≤ 4 years' experience (OR 2.15, CI 1.31-3.55). Factors independently associated with increased time spent during encounters were attending physicians with ≤ 4 years (OR 2.38, CI 1.44-3.95), 5-15 years of experience (OR 1.82, CI 1.10-3.02), and weekdays (OR 1.71, CI 1.10-2.65). CONCLUSIONS: These findings highlight factors associated with increasing or decreasing occurrence and time spent in bedside interprofessional collaborative care delivery. Systematic changes to census size caps, resident scheduling, and attending physician education and staffing may be required to increase the occurrence of interprofessional collaborative care.

Project description:BACKGROUND:Same-day discharge (SDD) after elective percutaneous coronary intervention is safe, less costly, and preferred by patients, but it is usually performed in low-risk patients, if at all. To increase the appropriate use of SDD in more complex patients, we implemented a "patient-centered" protocol based on risk of complications at Barnes-Jewish Hospital. METHODS AND RESULTS:Our objectives were as follows: (1) to evaluate time trends in SDD; (2) to compare (a) mortality, bleeding, and acute kidney injury, (b) patient satisfaction, and (c) hospital costs by SDD versus no SDD (NSDD); and (3) to compare SDD eligibility by our patient-centered approach versus Society for Cardiovascular Angiography and Interventions guidelines. Our patient-centered approach was based on prospectively identifying personalized bleeding, mortality, and acute kidney injury risks, with a personalized safe contrast limit and mitigating those risks. We analyzed Barnes-Jewish Hospital's National Cardiovascular Data Registry CathPCI Registry data from July 1, 2009 to September 30, 2015 (N=1752). SDD increased rapidly from 0% to 77% (P<0.001), independent of radial access. Although SDD patients were comparable to NSDD patients, SDD was not associated with adverse outcomes (0% mortality, 0% bleeds, and 0.4% acute kidney injury). Patient satisfaction was high with SDD. Propensity score-adjusted costs were $7331 lower/SDD patient (P<0.001), saving an estimated $1.8 million annually. Only 16 patients (6.95%) met the eligibility for SDD by Society for Cardiovascular Angiography and Interventions guidelines, implying our patient-centered approach markedly increased SDD eligibility. CONCLUSIONS:With a patient-centered approach, SDD rapidly increased and was safe in 75% of patients undergoing elective percutaneous coronary intervention, despite patient complexity. Patient satisfaction was high, and hospital costs were lower. Patient-centered decision making to facilitate SDD is an important opportunity to improve the value of percutaneous coronary intervention.

Project description:BackgroundEstablishing priorities for discussion during time-limited primary care visits is challenging in the care of patients with cognitive impairment. These patients commonly attend primary care visits with a family companion.ObjectiveTo examine whether a patient-family agenda setting intervention improves primary care visit communication for patients with cognitive impairment DESIGN: Two-group pilot randomized controlled study PARTICIPANTS: Patients aged 65 + with cognitive impairment and family companions (n = 93 dyads) and clinicians (n = 14) from two general and one geriatrics primary care clinic INTERVENTION: A self-administered paper-pencil checklist to clarify the role of the companion and establish a shared visit agenda MEASUREMENTS: Patient-centered communication (primary); verbal activity, information disclosure including discussion of memory, and visit duration (secondary), from audio recordings of visit discussion RESULTS: Dyads were randomized to usual care (n = 44) or intervention (n = 49). Intervention participants endorsed an active communication role for companions to help patients understand what the clinician says or means (90% of dyads), remind patients to ask questions or ask clinicians questions directly (84% of dyads), or listen and take notes (82% of dyads). Intervention dyads identified 4.4 health issues for the agenda on average: patients more often identified memory (59.2 versus 38.8%; p = 0.012) and mood (42.9 versus 24.5%; p = 0.013) whereas companions more often identified safety (36.7 versus 18.4%; p = 0.039) and personality/behavior change (32.7 versus 16.3%; p = 0.011). Communication was significantly more patient-centered in intervention than in control visits at general clinics (p < 0.001) and in pooled analyses (ratio of 0.86 versus 0.68; p = 0.046). At general clinics, intervention (versus control) dyads contributed more lifestyle and psychosocial talk (p < 0.001) and less biomedical talk (p < 0.001) and companions were more verbally active (p < 0.005). No intervention effects were found at the geriatrics clinic. No effect on memory discussions or visit duration was observed.ConclusionPatient-family agenda setting may improve primary care visit communication for patients with cognitive impairment.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov : NCT02986958.

Dataset Information

On the same page: a novel interprofessional model of patient-centered perinatal consultation visits.

Publications

On the same page: a novel interprofessional model of patient-centered perinatal consultation visits.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets