Consensus Guidelines for Facilities Performing Outpatient Procedures: Evidence Over Ideology.

In policy and law, regulation of abortion is frequently treated differently from other health services. The safety of abortion is similar to that of other types of office- and clinic-based procedures, and facility requirements should be based on assuring high-quality, safe performance of all such procedures. False concerns for patient safety are being used as a justification for promoting regulations that specifically target abortion. The Project on Facility Guidelines for the Safe Performance of Primary Care and Gynecology Procedures in Offices and Clinics was undertaken by clinicians, consumers, and representatives from accrediting bodies to review the available evidence and guidelines that inform safe delivery of outpatient care. Our overall objective was to develop evidence-informed consensus guidelines to promote health care quality, safety, and accessibility. Our consensus determined that requiring facilities performing office-based procedures, including abortion, to meet standards beyond those currently in effect for all general medical offices and clinics is unjustified based on an analysis of available evidence. No safety concerns were identified.

Principles for Patient and Family Partnership in Care: An American College of Physicians Position Paper.

In this position paper, the American College of Physicians (ACP) examines the rationale for patient and family partnership in care and reviews outcomes associated with this concept, including greater adherence to care plans, improved satisfaction, and lower costs. The paper also explores and acknowledges challenges associated with implementing patient- and family-centered models of care. On the basis of a comprehensive literature review and a multistakeholder vetting process, the ACP's Patient Partnership in Healthcare Committee developed a set of principles that form the foundation for authentic patient and family partnership in care. The principles position patients in their rightful place at the center of care while acknowledging the importance of partnership between the care team and patient in improving health care and reducing harm. The principles state that patients and families should be treated with dignity and respect, be active partners in all aspects of their care, contribute to the development and improvement of health care systems, and be partners in the education of health care professionals. This paper also recommends ways to implement these principles in daily practice.

Higher Priced Older Pharmaceuticals: How Should We Respond?

We and our patients have been aware of the high cost of medications in the United States for decades; however, we are now witnessing a relatively new phenomenon: exponential price increases for some older pharmaceuticals that have been available for years. To assist practitioners in how to respond to the issue of higher priced pharmaceuticals, an interprofessional session was developed and held at CHEST 2016 in Los Angeles. The session proceedings and a few updates are presented here to summarize what pulmonologists; a sarcoidosis expert; a retired executive of a medical society, an executive of a pharmaceutical company and of a pharmacy; and an ethicist advise that we do about the problem. Because the comments presented at the session and in this manuscript represent the opinions of each author, this commentary in essence is a compilation of nine editorials. It does not represent a comprehensive discussion of the field of pricing of drugs. In reflecting upon the answers to the questions posed, and regardless of their sector of health care, all participants stated that they focused on the patient. However, actually providing patient-focused care (ie, the care defined from the patient's perspective) is another matter. To significantly improve patient satisfaction and health-care outcomes, patient-focused care needs to embody the 3 Cs of (1) communication, (2) continuity of care, and (3) concordance of expectations (ie, finding the common ground). Therefore, we discuss how the 3 Cs apply to responses to higher priced pharmaceuticals.

Change, Challenge and Opportunity: Departments of Medicine and Their Leaders.

Academic Health Centers are evolving to larger and more complex Academic Health Systems (AHS), reflecting financial stresses requiring them to become nimble, efficient, and patient (consumer) and faculty (employee) focused. The evolving AHS organization includes many positive attributes: unity of purpose, structural integration, collaboration and teamwork, alignment of goals with resource allocation, and increased financial success. The organization, leadership, and business acumen of the AHS influence directly opportunities for Departments of Medicine. Just as leadership capabilities of the AHS affect its future success, the same is true for departmental leadership. The Department of Medicine is no longer a quasi- autonomous entity, and the chairperson is no longer an independent decision-maker. Departments of Medicine will be most successful if they maintain internal unity and cohesion by not fragmenting along specialty lines. Departments with larger endowments or those with public financial support have more flexibility when investing in the academic missions. The chairpersons of the future should serve as change agents while simultaneously adopting a "servant leadership" model. Chairpersons with executive and team building skills, and business acumen and experience, are more likely to succeed in managing productive and lean departments. Quality of patient care and service delivery enhance the department's effectiveness and credibility and assure access to additional financial resources to subsidize the academic missions. Moreover, the drive for excellence, high performance and growth will fuel financial solvency.

Meeting the milestones. Strategies for including high-value care education in pulmonary and critical care fellowship training.

Physician decision making is partially responsible for the roughly 30% of U.S. healthcare expenditures that are wasted annually on low-value care. In response to both the widespread public demand for higher-quality care and the cost crisis, payers are transitioning toward value-based payment models whereby physicians are rewarded for high-value, cost-conscious care. Furthermore, to target physicians in training to practice with cost awareness, the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education has created both individual objective milestones and institutional requirements to incorporate quality improvement and cost awareness into fellowship training. Subsequently, some professional medical societies have initiated high-value care educational campaigns, but the overwhelming majority target either medical students or residents in training. Currently, there are few resources available to help guide subspecialty fellowship programs to successfully design durable high-value care curricula. The resource-intensive nature of pulmonary and critical care medicine offers unique opportunities for the specialty to lead in modeling and teaching high-value care. To ensure that fellows graduate with the capability to practice high-value care, we recommend that fellowship programs focus on four major educational domains. These include fostering a value-based culture, providing a robust didactic experience, engaging trainees in process improvement projects, and encouraging scholarship. In doing so, pulmonary and critical care educators can strive to train future physicians who are prepared to provide care that is both high quality and informed by cost awareness.

Firearm-related injury and death in the United States: a call to action from 8 health professional organizations and the American Bar Association.

Deaths and injuries related to firearms constitute a major public health problem in the United States. In response to firearm violence and other firearm-related injuries and deaths, an interdisciplinary, interprofessional group of leaders of 8 national health professional organizations and the American Bar Association, representing the official policy positions of their organizations, advocate a series of measures aimed at reducing the health and public health consequences of firearms. The specific recommendations include universal background checks of gun purchasers, elimination of physician "gag laws," restricting the manufacture and sale of military-style assault weapons and large-capacity magazines for civilian use, and research to support strategies for reducing firearm-related injuries and deaths. The health professional organizations also advocate for improved access to mental health services and avoidance of stigmatization of persons with mental and substance use disorders through blanket reporting laws. The American Bar Association, acting through its Standing Committee on Gun Violence, confirms that none of these recommendations conflict with the Second Amendment or previous rulings of the U.S. Supreme Court.