Dataset Information

Comparing patient outcomes of academician-preceptors, hospitalist-preceptors, and hospitalists on internal medicine services in an academic medical center.

ABSTRACT: Patient outcomes with hospitalist care have been studied in many settings, yet little is known about how hospitalist care interacts with trainee care to affect patient outcomes in teaching hospitals.The aim of this study was to compare patient outcomes between hospitalist-preceptors and hospitalists working alone (isolating the effect of housestaff involvement), and between hospitalist-preceptors and academician-preceptors (isolating the effect of attending type, given housestaff involvement).A four-year retrospective cohort study of patients (n?=?13,313) admitted to all internal medicine services at an academic medical center from July 2008 to June 2012.Using generalized estimating equations, we measured readmission within 30 days, hospital length of stay, cost of the index hospitalization, and cumulative cost including readmissions within 30 days.In the adjusted models, 30-day readmission odds were higher for academic-preceptors (OR, 1.14 [95% CI, 1.03?-?1.26]) and hospitalist-preceptors (OR, 1.10 [95% CI, 1.002?-?1.21]) than for hospitalists working alone. Compared with hospitalists working alone, academic-preceptors were associated with shorter length of stay (mean difference, 0.27 days [95% CI, 0.18?-?0.38]), lower index hospitalization costs (mean difference, $386 [95% CI, $192?-?$576]), but similar cumulative inpatient costs within 30 days of discharge. Compared with hospitalists working alone, hospitalist-preceptors were associated with shorter length of stay (mean difference, 0.34 days [95% CI, 0.26?-?0.42]), lower index hospitalization cost (mean difference, $570 [95% CI, $378?-?$760]), and a trend toward lower cumulative cost (mean difference, $1347 [95% CI, $254?-?$2,816]).Preceptor-led medicine services were associated with more readmissions within 30 days, shorter lengths of stay, and lower index admission-associated costs. However, when considering cumulative hospitalization costs, patients discharged by academician-preceptors incurred the highest cost and hospitalist-preceptors incurred the lowest cost.

SUBMITTER: Chin DL

PROVIDER: S-EPMC4242879 | biostudies-other | 2014 Dec

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-other

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Comparing patient outcomes of academician-preceptors, hospitalist-preceptors, and hospitalists on internal medicine services in an academic medical center.

Chin David L DL Wilson Michelle H MH Bang Heejung H Romano Patrick S PS

Journal of general internal medicine 20141201 12

<h4>Background</h4>Patient outcomes with hospitalist care have been studied in many settings, yet little is known about how hospitalist care interacts with trainee care to affect patient outcomes in teaching hospitals.<h4>Objectives</h4>The aim of this study was to compare patient outcomes between hospitalist-preceptors and hospitalists working alone (isolating the effect of housestaff involvement), and between hospitalist-preceptors and academician-preceptors (isolating the effect of attending ...[more]

PMID: 25112461

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundLarge scale implementation of new strategies and healthcare delivery standards in academic medical centers (AMCs) requires training of healthcare workforce at different stages of their medical career. The patient-centered medical home (PCMH) model for healthcare delivery involves adoption by all members of the healthcare workforce, including seasoned professionals and trainees. Though widely known, the PCMH model has been implemented sporadically at large AMCs and methods to implement the model across healthcare workforce have not been well-documented.MethodsTo meet all PCMH standards and achieve sustainable level 3 recognition, the authors implemented in 2014-2015 a multi-pronged approach that capitalized on existing educational infrastructure among faculty, residents, and medical students. Within 18 months, the authors applied new interdisciplinary practices and policies, redesigned residency training in continuity practices and extensively modified medical school curricula.ResultsThese innovative transformational education efforts addressed the six PCMH standards for faculty, residents, and undergraduate medical students. Faculty played a major role as system change agents and facilitators of learning. Residents learned to better understand patients' cultural needs, identify 'at-risk' patients, ensure continuity of care, and assess and improve quality of care. Medical students were exposed to PCMH core standards throughout their training via simulations, training in the community and with patients, and evaluation tasks. By implementing these changes across the healthcare workforce, the AMC achieved PCMH status in a short time, changed practice culture and improved care for patients and the community. Since then, the AMC has been able to maintain PCMH recognition annually with minimal effort.ConclusionsSuccessful strategies that capitalize on existing strengths in infrastructure complemented by innovative educational offerings and inter-professional partnerships can be adapted by other organizations pursuing similar transformation efforts. This widespread transformation across the healthcare workforce facilitate a deep-rooted change that enabled our academic medical center to sustain PCMH recognition.

Project description:BACKGROUND:Electronic medical records (EMRs) contain a wealth of information that can support data-driven decision making in health care policy design and service planning. Although research using EMRs has become increasingly prevalent, challenges such as coding inconsistency, data validity, and lack of suitable measures in important domains still hinder the progress. OBJECTIVE:The objective of this study was to design a structured way to process records in administrative EMR systems for health services research and assess validity in selected areas. METHODS:On the basis of a local hospital EMR system in Singapore, we developed a structured framework for EMR data processing, including standardization and phenotyping of diagnosis codes, construction of cohort with multilevel views, and generation of variables and proxy measures to supplement primary data. Disease complexity was estimated by Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI) and Polypharmacy Score (PPS), whereas socioeconomic status (SES) was estimated by housing type. Validity of modified diagnosis codes and derived measures were investigated. RESULTS:Visit-level (N=7,778,761) and patient-level records (n=549,109) were generated. The International Classification of Diseases, Tenth Revision, Australian Modification (ICD-10-AM) codes were standardized to the International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision, Clinical Modification (ICD-9-CM) with a mapping rate of 87.1%. In all, 97.4% of the ICD-9-CM codes were phenotyped successfully using Clinical Classification Software by Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality. Diagnosis codes that underwent modification (truncation or zero addition) in standardization and phenotyping procedures had the modification validated by physicians, with validity rates of more than 90%. Disease complexity measures (CCI and PPS) and SES were found to be valid and robust after a correlation analysis and a multivariate regression analysis. CCI and PPS were correlated with each other and positively correlated with health care utilization measures. Larger housing type was associated with lower government subsidies received, suggesting association with higher SES. Profile of constructed cohorts showed differences in disease prevalence, disease complexity, and health care utilization in those aged above 65 years and those aged 65 years or younger. CONCLUSIONS:The framework proposed in this study would be useful for other researchers working with EMR data for health services research. Further analyses would be needed to better understand differences observed in the cohorts.

Project description:With growing national focus on reducing readmissions, there is a need to comprehensively assess the quality of transitional care, including discharge practices, patient perspectives, and patient understanding.To conduct a multifaceted evaluation of transitional care from a patient-centered perspective.Prospective observational cohort study, May 2009 through April 2010.Urban, academic medical center.Patients 65 years and older discharged home after hospitalization for acute coronary syndrome, heart failure, or pneumonia.Discharge practices, including presence of follow-up appointment and patient-friendly discharge instructions; patient understanding of diagnosis and follow-up appointment; and patient perceptions of and satisfaction with discharge care.The 395 enrolled patients (66.7% of those eligible) had a mean age of 77.2 years. Although 349 patients (95.6%) reported understanding the reason they had been in the hospital, only 218 patients (59.6%) were able to accurately describe their diagnosis in postdischarge interviews. Discharge instructions routinely included symptoms to watch out for (98.4%), activity instructions (97.3%), and diet advice (89.7%) in lay language; however, 99 written reasons for hospitalization (26.3%) did not use language likely to be intelligible to patients. Of the 123 patients (32.6%) discharged with a scheduled primary care or cardiology appointment, 54 (43.9%) accurately recalled details of either appointment. During postdischarge interviews, 118 patients (30.0%) reported receiving less than 1 day’s advance notice of discharge, and 246 (66.1%) reported that staff asked whether they would have the support they needed at home before discharge.Patient perceptions of discharge care quality and self-rated understanding were high, and written discharge instructions were generally comprehensive although not consistently clear. However, follow-up appointments and advance discharge planning were deficient, and patient understanding of key aspects of postdischarge care was poor. Patient perceptions and written documentation do not adequately reflect patient understanding of discharge care.

Project description:ImportanceThe patient-centered medical home (PCMH) model holds promise for improving primary care delivery, but it has not been adequately tested in teaching settings.Design, setting, and participantsWe implemented an intervention guided by PCMH principles at a safety-net teaching clinic with resident physician providers. Two similar clinics served as controls.Main outcomes and measuresUsing a cross-sectional design, we measured the effect on patient and resident satisfaction using the Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems survey and a validated teaching clinic survey, respectively. Both surveys were conducted at baseline and 1 year after the intervention. We also measured the effect on emergency department and hospital utilization.ResultsFollowing implementation of our intervention, the clinic’s score on the National Committee for Quality Assurance’s PCMH certification tool improved from 35 to 53 of 100 possible points, although our clinic did not achieve all must-pass elements to qualify as a PCMH. During the 1-year study period, 4676 patients were exposed to the intervention; 39.9% of these used at least 1 program component. Compared with baseline, patient-reported access and overall satisfaction improved to a greater extent in the intervention clinic, and the composite satisfaction rating increased from 48% to 65% in the intervention clinic vs from 50% to 59% in the control sites (P = .04). The improvements were particularly notable for questions relating to access. For example, satisfaction with urgent appointment scheduling increased from 12% to 53% in the intervention clinic vs from 14% to 18% in the control clinics (P < .001). Resident satisfaction also improved in the intervention clinic: the composite satisfaction score increased from 39% to 51% in the intervention clinic vs a decrease from 46% to 42% in the control clinics (P = .01). Emergency department utilization did not differ significantly between the intervention and control clinics, and hospitalizations increased from 26 to 27 visits per 1000 patients per month in the intervention clinic vs a decrease from 28 to 25 in the control clinics (P = .02).Conclusions and relevanceOur PCMH-guided intervention, which represented a modest but substantive step toward the PCMH vision, had favorable effects on patient and resident satisfaction at a safety-net teaching clinic but did not reduce emergency department or hospital utilization in the first year. Our experience may provide lessons for other teaching clinics in safety-net settings hoping to implement PCMH-guided reforms.

Dataset Information

Comparing patient outcomes of academician-preceptors, hospitalist-preceptors, and hospitalists on internal medicine services in an academic medical center.

Publications

Comparing patient outcomes of academician-preceptors, hospitalist-preceptors, and hospitalists on internal medicine services in an academic medical center.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets