Wall-mounted folding chairs to promote resident physician sitting at the hospital bedside.

BACKGROUND: Sitting at the bedside may improve patient-clinician communication; however, many clinicians do not regularly sit during inpatient encounters. OBJECTIVE: To determine the impact of adding wall-mounted folding chairs inside patient rooms, beyond any impact from a resident education campaign, on the patient-reported frequency of sitting at the bedside by internal medicine resident physicians. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Prospective, controlled pre-post trial between 2019 and 2022 (data collection paused 2020-2021 due to COVID-19) at an academic hospital in Baltimore, Maryland. Folding chairs were installed in two of four internal medicine units and educational activities were delivered equally across all units. MAIN OUTCOME AND MEASURES: Patient-reported frequency of sitting at bedside, assessed as means on Likert-type items with 1 being "never" and 5 being "every single time." We also examined the frequency of other patient-reported communication behaviors. RESULTS: Two hundred fifty six and 206 patients enrolled in the pre and post-intervention periods, respectively. The mean frequency of patient-reported sitting by resident physicians increased from 1.8 (SD 1.2) to 2.3 (1.2) on education-only units (absolute difference 0.48 [95% CI: 0.21-0.75]) and from 2.0 (1.3) to 3.2 (1.4) on units receiving chairs (1.16, [0.87-1.45]). Comparing differences between groups using ordered logistic regression adjusting for clustering within residents, units with added chairs had greater increases in sitting (odds ratio 2.05 [1.10-3.82]), spending enough time at the bedside (2.43 [1.32-4.49]), and checking for understanding (3.04 [1.44-6.39]). Improvements in sitting and other behaviors were sustained on both types of units. CONCLUSIONS: Adding wall-mounted folding chairs may help promote effective patient-clinician communication.

Sitting at the Bedside: Patient and Internal Medicine Trainee Perceptions.

BACKGROUND: Sitting at the bedside may strengthen physician-patient communication and improve patient experience. Yet despite the potential benefits of sitting, hospital physicians, including resident physicians, may not regularly sit down while speaking with patients. OBJECTIVE: To examine the frequency of sitting by internal medicine residents (including first post-graduate year [PGY-1] and supervising [PGY-2/3] residents) during inpatient encounters and to assess the association between patient-reported sitting at the bedside and patients' perceptions of other physician communication behaviors. We also assessed residents' attitudes towards sitting. DESIGN: In-person survey of patients and email survey of internal medicine residents between August 2019 and January 2020. PARTICIPANTS: Patients admitted to general medicine teaching services and internal medicine residents at The Johns Hopkins Hospital. MAIN MEASURES: Patient-reported frequency of sitting at the bedside, patients' perceptions of other communication behaviors (e.g., checking for understanding); residents' attitudes regarding sitting. KEY RESULTS: Of 334 eligible patients, 256 (76%) completed a survey. Among these 256 respondents, 198 (77%) and 166 (65%) reported recognizing the PGY-1 and PGY-2/3 on their care team, respectively, for a total of 364 completed surveys. On most surveys (203/364, 56%), patients responded that residents "never" sat. Frequent sitting at the bedside ("every single time" or "most of the time," together 48/364, 13%) was correlated with other positive behaviors, including spending enough time at the bedside, checking for understanding, and not seeming to be in a rush (p < 0.01 for all). Of 151 residents, 77 (51%) completed the resident survey; 28 of the 77 (36%) reported sitting frequently. The most commonly cited barrier to sitting was that chairs were not available (38 respondents, 49%). CONCLUSIONS: Patients perceived that residents sit infrequently. However, sitting was associated with other positive communication behaviors; this is compatible with the hypothesis that promoting sitting could improve overall patient perceptions of provider communication.

What matters to patients? A timely question for value-based care.

BACKGROUND: Our healthcare system is moving towards patient-centered and value-based care models that prioritize health outcomes that matter to patients. However, little is known about what aspects of care patients would prioritize when presented with choices of desirable attributes and whether these patient priorities differ based on certain demographics. OBJECTIVE: To assess patients' priorities for a range of attributes in ambulatory care consultations across five key health service delivery domains and determine potential associations between patient priorities and certain demographic profiles. METHODS: Using a What Matters to You survey patients ranked in order of importance various choices related to five health service domains (patient-physician relationship, personal responsibility, test/procedures, medications, and cost). Subjects were selected from two Johns Hopkins affiliated primary care clinics and a third gastroenterology subspecialty clinic over a period of 11 months. We calculated the percentage of respondents who selected each quality as their top 1-3 choice. Univariate and multivariate analyses determined demographic characteristics associated with patient priorities. RESULTS: Humanistic qualities of physicians, leading a healthy lifestyle, shared decision making (SDM) for medications and tests/procedures as well as knowledge about insurance coverage were the most frequently ranked choices. Privately insured and more educated patients were less likely to rank humanistic qualities highly. Those with younger age, higher educational attainment and private insurance had higher odds of ranking healthy lifestyle as a top choice. Those with more education had higher odds of ranking SDM as a top choice. CONCLUSIONS: Identifying what matters most to patients is useful as we move towards patient-centered and Value Based Care Models. Our findings suggest that patients have priorities on qualities they value across key health service domains. Multiple factors including patient demographics can be predictors of these priorities. Elucidating these preferences is a challenging but a valuable step in the right direction.

Association of common KIBRA variants with episodic memory and AD risk.

KIBRA single nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) rs17070145 was identified in a genome-wide association study (GWAS) of memory performance, with some but not all follow-up studies confirming association of its T allele with enhanced memory. This allele was associated with reduced Alzheimer's disease (AD) risk in 1 study, which also found overexpression of KIBRA in memory-related brain regions of AD. We genotyped rs17070145 and 14 additional SNPs in 2571 late onset Alzheimer's disease (LOAD) patients vs. 2842 controls, including African-Americans. We found significantly reduced risk for rs17070145 T allele in the older African-American subjects (p = 0.007) and a suggestive effect in the older Caucasian series. Meta-analysis of this allele in > 8000 subjects from our and published series showed a suggestive protective effect (p = 0.07). Analysis of episodic memory in control subjects did not identify associations with rs17070145, though other SNPs showed significant associations in 1 series. KIBRA showed evidence of overexpression in the AD temporal cortex (p = 0.06) but not cerebellum. These results suggest a modest role for KIBRA as a cognition and AD risk gene, and also highlight the multifactorial complexity of its genetic associations.