Dataset Information

Implementing Resident Team Assistant Programs at Academic Medical Centers: Lessons Learned.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Excessive inpatient administrative tasks can lead to adverse consequences for residents and their patients. Furthermore, this burden has been linked to depersonalization, a major component of physician burnout.

Objective

To describe the development, implementation, feasibility, acceptability, and early outcomes of Resident Team Assistant (RTA) programs.

Methods

Three large academic medical centers created RTA programs in which administrative assistants are incorporated into inpatient medical teams. First steps included a needs assessment and driver diagram creation to identify key issues and to solidify goals. Program directors were assigned, and RTAs were hired, trained, and incorporated into inpatient teams at each institution (2003, 2016, 2018). Program leadership and institutional stakeholders met regularly to discuss development and quality assurance. Surveys and direct interviews were performed to evaluate impact and acceptability. Institutional goals in accordance to RTAs tasks were also investigated.

Results

Resident surveys and interviews have shown acceptability with RTAs completing a large percentage of resident administrative tasks while promoting time spent in direct clinical care and job satisfaction. Hospital-specific improvements have included increase in referring physician communication rate and decrease in work hour violations. The programs have maintained high feasibility and sustainability with a relatively low time commitment from leadership and cost for the institutions.

Conclusions

The RTA programs at the 3 institutions have continued to be sustained over time with perceived improvements in administrative task burden and job satisfaction for the residents. They have maintained high acceptability and feasibility in terms of effort and costs for the hospitals.

SUBMITTER: Takei R

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7771612 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:IntroductionStructural forces that drive health inequalities are magnified in crises. This was especially true during the COVID-19 pandemic, and minority communities were particularly affected. The University of California San Francisco and Health, Equity, Action, Leadership Initiative jointly sent volunteer teams of nurses and doctors to work in the Navajo Nation during the COVID-19 pandemic. This presented an opportunity to explore how academic medical centers (AMCs) could effectively partner with vulnerable communities to provide support during healthcare crises. Therefore, the aims of this study were to describe volunteers' perspectives of academic-community partnerships by exploring their personal, professional and societal insights and lessons learned based on their time in the Navajo Nation during COVID-19.MethodsWe recruited key informants using purposeful sampling of physicians and nurses who volunteered to go to the Navajo Nation during the spring 2020 COVID-19 surge, as well as hospital administrators and leaders involved in organizing the COVID-19 efforts. We used in-depth qualitative interviews to explore key informants' experiences pre-departure, during their stay, and after their return, as well as perspectives of the partnership between an AMC and the Navajo Nation. We used thematic analysis to systematically identify, analyze and report patterns (themes) within the data.ResultsIn total, 37 clinicians and hospital administrators were interviewed including 14 physicians, 16 nurses, and 7 health system leaders. Overall, we found 4 main themes each with several subthemes that defined the partnership between the AMC and the Navajo Nation. Mission and values incorporated civic duty, community engagement, leadership commitment and employee dedication. Solidarity, trust and humility encompassed pre-existing trust, workforce sustainability, humility and erasure of 'savior narratives.' Coordination included logistical coordination, flexibility, selectivity of who and what traveled to the response and coordination around media response. Workforce preparation and support encompassed understanding of historical context and providing healthcare in limited settings, dangers of inadequate preparation and the need for emotional support.ConclusionThis study provides guidelines which AMCs might use to develop and improve partnerships they have or would like to develop with vulnerable communities. These guidelines may even be broadly applied to partnerships outside of a pandemic response. Importantly, such partnerships need to be built with trust and with an eye towards sustainability and long-term relationships as opposed to 'medical missions'.

Project description:IntroductionThe effectiveness of mailed fecal immunochemical test outreach might be enhanced through an organized colorectal cancer screening program, yet published real-world experiences are limited. We synthesized the process of implementing a colorectal cancer screening program that used mailed fecal immunochemical test outreach in a large integrated academic-community practice.MethodsData from a pilot mailed fecal immunochemical test program were shared with healthcare system leadership, which inspired the creation of a cross-institutional organized colorectal cancer screening program. In partnership with a centralized population health team and primary care, we defined (1) the institutional approach to colorectal cancer screening, (2) the target population and method for screening, (3) the team responsible for implementation, (4) the healthcare team responsible for decisions and care, (5) a quality assurance structure, and (6) a method for identifying cancer occurrence.ResultsThe Fred Hutch/UW Medicine Population Health Colorectal Cancer Screening Program began in September 2021. The workflow for mailed fecal immunochemical test outreach included a mailed postcard, a MyChart message from the patient's primary care provider, a fecal immunochemical test kit with a letter signed by the primary care provider and program director, and up to 3 biweekly reminders. Patients without a colonoscopy 3 months after an abnormal fecal immunochemical test result received navigation through the program. In the first program year, we identified 9,719 patients eligible for outreach, and in an intention-to-treat analysis, 32% of patients completed colorectal cancer screening by fecal immunochemical test or colonoscopy.ConclusionsReal-world experiences detailing how to implement organized colorectal cancer screening programs might increase adoption. In our experience, broadly disseminating pilot data, early institutional support, robust data management, and strong cross-departmental relationships were critical to successfully implementing a colorectal cancer screening program that benefits all patients.

Project description:ProblemValue-added medical education (VAME) has been difficult to implement due to student and educator constraints. The COVID-19 pandemic caused mass transitions to online learning, removed students from clinical settings, and underscored students' desires for meaningful VAME opportunities. The authors introduced the Stanford Frontline COVID-19 Consult Service (SFCS), through which off-service medical and physician assistant (PA) students provided assistance to clinicians in the form of rapid research regarding COVID-19 clinical questions.ApproachThe SFCS, a student-derived VAME initiative, was implemented from March to May 2020 by Stanford University medical students, PA students, and faculty. SFCS aligned with not only the interests of clinicians and students but also national accreditation standards. Students attended weekly editorial meetings, didactic sessions on literature reviews and information management, and they underwent rigorous training on the peer review process. After 2 months, the authors expanded the service to local community clinicians.OutcomesThe SFCS enrolled 16 students, was supported by 13 faculty members, and produced 87 peer-reviewed evidence syntheses. Of the 16 SFCS students, 13 (81%) completed evaluations; of 128 Stanford Primary Care and Population Health clinicians, 48 (38%) completed evaluations. Overall student satisfaction with the SFCS was 4.9/5 (standard deviation [SD] 0.3). Self-assessed achievement of SFCS learning objectives exceeded 90% for all objectives. Overall faculty satisfaction with the SFCS was 4.4/5 (SD 0.8). Most faculty (40/46 [87%]) planned to use the database to answer future COVID-19 questions.Next stepsThe SFCS is a novel, student-initiated VAME curriculum focused on increasing students' meaningful contributions to patient care. The authors will track SFCS students throughout their clerkships to gauge clerkship performance/preparedness, and they will develop training for integrating VAME into preclerkship curricula at other institutions. Given its adaptive, student-driven design, the VAME framework used to develop the SFCS empowers students to create their own personalized, experiential learning.

Project description:BackgroundType 2 diabetes mellitus is preventable through lifestyle intervention. Diabetes prevention programmes (DPPs) aim to deliver prevention-based behaviour change interventions to reduce incidence. Such programmes vary from usual primary care in terms of where, how, and by whom they are delivered. Implementation is therefore likely to face new commissioning, incentive and delivery challenges. We report on the implementation of a national DPP in NHS England, and identify lessons learned in addressing the implementation challenges.MethodsIn 2017/18, we conducted 20 semi-structured telephone interviews covering 16 sampled case sites with the designated lead(s) responsible for local implementation of the programme. Interviews explored the process of implementation, including organisation of the programme, expectations and attitudes to the programme, funding, target populations and referral and clinical pathways. We drew on constant comparative methods to analyse the data and generate over-arching themes. We complemented our qualitative data with a survey focused on variation in the financial incentives used across sites to ensure usual primary care services recruited patients to new providers.ResultsWe identified five over-arching areas of learning for implementing this large-scale programme: 1) managing new providers; 2) promoting awareness of services; 3) recruiting patients; 4) incentive payments; and 5) mechanisms for sharing learning. In general, tensions appeared to be caused by a lack of clear roles/responsibilities between hierarchical actors, and lack of communication. Both local sites and the national NHS coordination team gained experience through learning by doing. Initial tensions with roles and expectations have been worked out during implementation.ConclusionsImplementing a national disease prevention programme is a major task, and one that will be increasingly faced by health systems globally as they aim to adjust to demand pressures. We provide practical learning opportunities for the wider uptake and sustainability of prevention programmes. Future implementers might wish to define clear responsibilities for each actor prior to implementation, ensure early engagement with new providers, offer mechanisms/forums for sharing learning, generate evidence and provide advice on incentive payments, and prioritise public and professional awareness of the programme.

Project description:BackgroundElectronic consultation (eConsult), which involves primary care provider (PCP)-to-specialist asynchronous consultation, is increasingly used in health care systems to streamline care and to improve patient access. The Association of American Medical Colleges (AAMC) formed a collaborative to support the implementation of an electronic medical record (EMR)-based, opt-in eConsult program across multiple academic medical centers (AMCs). In this model, PCPs can elect to send either an eConsult or a traditional referral.ObjectiveWe sought to understand the PCP experience with eConsult to identify facilitators of and barriers to the successful adoption of the model.Design and participantsWe conducted 35 semi-structured interviews and 6 focus groups with a range of primary care providers at 7 AMCs participating in the AAMC collaborative.ApproachInterviews were recorded and transcribed or detailed field notes were taken. We used the constant comparative method to identify recurring themes within and across sites, and resolve interpretive discrepancies.Key resultsWe identified three major themes related to the eConsult program: (1) eConsult increases the comprehensiveness of primary care and fills PCPs' knowledge gaps through case-based learning. (2) Factors that influence PCPs to order an eConsult rather than a traditional referral include patient preference, case complexity, and need for expert guidance. (3) Implementation challenges included increasing PCPs' awareness of the program, addressing PCPs' concerns about increased workload, recruiting engaged specialist consultants, and ensuring high quality eConsult responses. Implementation success relied on PCP ownership of the consultation process, mitigating unintended consequences, ongoing education about the program, and mechanisms for providing feedback to clinicians.ConclusionsOur findings demonstrate that an opt-in eConsult program at AMCs has the potential to increase PCP knowledge and enhance the comprehensiveness of primary care. For these benefits to be realized, program implementation requires sustained efforts to overcome barriers to use and establish norms guiding eConsult communication.

Project description:BackgroundDrug overdose has become a leading cause of accidental death in the United States. Between 2000 and 2015, the rate of deaths from drug overdoses increased 137%, including a 200% increase in the rate of overdose deaths involving opioids (including opioid pain relievers and heroin). Unnecessary opioid prescribing is one of the factors driving this epidemic.ObjectivesThe primary objective of this paper is to share lessons learned while conducting a randomized trial to de-implement opioids for post-extraction pain management utilizing clinical decision support (CDS) with and without patient education. The lessons learned from conducting this trial in a real-world setting can be applied to future dissemination and implementation oral health research.MethodsThe sources informing lessons learned were generated from qualitative interviews conducted with 20 of the forty-nine dental providers involved in the study following the implementation phase of the trial. Ongoing policy, social and environmental factors were tracked throughout the study.ResultsDental providers in the trial identified the impact of training that involved health professionals sharing information about the personal impact of pain and opioid use. Additionally, they found utility in being presented with a dashboard detailing their prescribing patterns related to other dentists. For the 30 general dentists with access to the CDS, use of its portal varied widely, with most using it 10%-49% of the time related to extractions.ConclusionsIn the context of a downward trend in opioid prescribing and considering the influence of the COVID pandemic during the trial, dental providers indicated benefit in training about negative personal impacts of prescribing opioids, and personally relevant feedback about their prescribing patterns. Only modest use of the CDS was realized. Implementation of this trial was impacted by governmental and health system policies and the COVID pandemic, prompt the consideration of implications regarding continuing ways to limit opioid prescribing among dental providers.