Past, present and future of university hospitals.

Objectives: Health care systems worldwide are changing and taking new forms. The old, more hierarchically oriented, model with individual institutional and bilateral interactions between primary, secondary, tertiary and quaternary care is being replaced by an integrated and dynamic network model. We aim to look at what role university hospitals will play in this future organization of health care.Method: In this paper, we look at the relevant literature on the history of academic medicine and university hospitals. Subsequently, we look at the challenges university hospitals are facing according to contemporary literature on the topic.Results: Our current model of academic medicine with its university hospitals finds its origin in the institutionalization of the academic mission in the late 18th century. Currently, the sustainability of the model is under immense pressure. University hospitals are facing economic challenges, teaching challenges and research challenges. However, there is reason to believe that they can continue to play a role of importance in tomorrow's medicine. The organization of health care is undergoing two important changes. The first is the evolution towards a more dynamic and integrated network model. University hospitals can become an important hub within this network. The second change is an evolution towards evidence based medicine and translational research.Conclusion: Due to their unique tripartite mission, we argue that university hospitals can continue to play an important and critical role in promoting evidence-based medicine and speedy translation of new evidence.

[Four stages in the history of the Centro Médico Nacional Siglo XXI of the IMSS]. / Cuatro etapas en la historia del Centro Médico Nacional Siglo XXI del IMSS.

This document presents four stages in the history of the Centro Médico Nacional Siglo XXI (Centro Médico Nacional XXI Century) of the Instituto Mexicano del Seguro Social. The first stage started at the end of the third decade of the twentieth century and ended in 1961, it corresponded to the conception, planning and construction of what was to be the Centro Médico del Distrito Federal (Centro Médico of the Distrito Federal) belonging to the Secretaría de Salubridad y Asistencia (Ministry of Health and Assistance). The second stage began when the Center was acquired by the Institute, then was known like Centro Médico Nacional (Centro Médico Nacional ), being put into full operation in 1963, more than twenty-two years later, in 1985, an earthquake virtually ended it, immediately began its reconstruction, finishing the second stage. In 1989 began the third stage, different and new buildings complemented or replaced the structures damaged or destroyed by the earthquake which formed the now Centro Médico Nacional Siglo XXI (Centro Médico Nacional XXI Century). In 2004 the fourth stage opened when the four hospitals of the Center were categorized like Unidades Médicas de Alta Especialidad (High Specialized Medical Units).

En este documento se presenta en cuatro etapas la historia del hoy Centro Médico Nacional Siglo XXI del IMSS. La primera etapa se inició a fines de los años treinta del siglo XX y terminó en 1961, correspondió a la concepción, planeación y construcción de lo que iba a ser el Centro Médico del Distrito Federal que pertenecía a la Secretaría de Salubridad y Asistencia. La segunda etapa inició cuando el Centro fue adquirido por el Instituto Mexicano del Seguro Social, conociéndose como Centro Médico Nacional, el cual fue puesto en funcionamiento completamente en 1963; más de veintidós años después, en 1985, un sismo prácticamente lo acabó, aunque de inmediato se inició su reconstrucción, la cual terminó en 1989, año en que comenzó la tercera etapa. Fue entonces cuando diferentes y nuevas construcciones complementaron o sustituyeron a las edificaciones dañadas o destruidas por el temblor, que son las que hasta el día de hoy conforman el Centro Médico Nacional Siglo XXI. En el año 2004 se abrió la cuarta etapa, al categorizarse a los cuatro hospitales que configuran el Centro Médico Nacional Siglo XXI como Unidades Médicas de Alta Especialidad (UMAE).

A history of innovation: cardiac surgery in Minnesota.

For centuries, the heart was believed to be an inoperable organ. Through the development of new technologies and techniques, the initial difficulties inherent with operating on a moving organ began to fade. But as surgeons in the last century pushed the boundaries of cardiac repair, new problems arose. To solve them, they enlisted the help of physiologists, residents and engineers. By taking a multidisciplinary approach, sharing information and ideas, and working collaboratively, University of Minnesota and Mayo Clinic investigators found themselves at the forefront of cardiac surgery. This article reviews Minnesota's contributions to the field.

A white dean and black physicians at the epicenter of the civil rights movement.

Robert Q. Marston, MD, a gregarious Rhodes and Markel Scholar, native Virginian, and well-connected National Institutes of Health-trained medical scientist found himself the new dean and hospital director of a promising academic medical center at age 38. It was 1961 and the University of Mississippi Medical Center (UMMC) in Jackson was, unknown to him, about to be at the geographic center of the struggle for African American civil rights. That struggle would entangle UMMC in a national search for social justice and change the course of American history and American medicine. Shortly after his arrival, the new dean received and refused a written request from the Secretary of the Mississippi Chapter of the National Medical Association (NMA) to make educational venues at the segregated medical center available to black physicians. The same year, UMMC became the primary medical provider for sick and injured Freedom Riders, sit-in and demonstration participants, and others who breached the racial divide defined by the state's feared Sovereignty Commission. That divide was violently enforced by collaboration among law enforcement, Citizens' Councils, and the Ku Klux Klan. The crescendo of the civil rights struggle that attended Marston's arrival included a deadly riot following James Meredith's integration of the Ole Miss campus in Oxford in 1962, the death of National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP) Field Secretary Medgar Evers at UMMC in 1963, a national controversy over UMMC's role in the autopsies of 3 civil rights workers murdered in Neshoba County, an attempt at limited compliance to Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, and a federal civil rights complaint against UMMC by the NAACP Legal and Educational Fund in 1965. That complaint noted that UMMC was out of compliance with the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and seriously threatened its federal funding and academic operations. Marston developed a compliance strategy that included the hiring of the first black faculty member, a request for an immediate federal civil rights inspection, and secretive overnight integration of the hospitals and clinics. A key to his strategy was engagement of support from the black community, with whom he had previously developed no relationship. Marston asked NAACP Field Director Charles Evers for support, and met with 5 black Mississippi physicians. Among the 5 was Robert Smith, MD, a founding member of the Medical Committee for Human Rights, the NMA officer whose request for NMA membership-access to the medical center was ignored. He was unaware of their local and national civil rights roles and active dialogue with the federal government on implementation of Title VI. The desire of the black physicians to see UMMC become an equal opportunity health resource resulted in their quiet assistance that aided UMMC compliance initiatives and played a major role in the successful outcome of the 1965 investigation of the charges of Title VI violations. This success established Marston as a national figure in academic medicine and contributed to his selection for positions as Director of The National Institutes of Health and President of the University of Florida. As commemorations of the 50(th) anniversary of Freedom Summer of 1964 proceed, UMMC has become arguably the most racially integrated academic health center in the United States.

Academic-industrial relations before the blockbuster drugs: lessons from the Harvard Committee on Pharmacotherapy, 1939-1943.

Increasing discussion has developed in recent years over the nature of the relationship between academic medicine and the pharmaceutical industry. This article narrates the history of a little-known attempt at Harvard Medical School between 1939 and 1943 to establish an interdisciplinary, academic-industrial Committee on Pharmacotherapy to enhance and rationalize the relationship between the field of academic research in pharmacotherapeutics and the pharmaceutical industry. Using original archival materials, the authors depict the functioning of the committee, which was headed by Soma Weiss and included such members as Fuller Albright, Henry Beecher, and Walter Cannon. The committee would be collectively funded by seven pharmaceutical companies and was to be predicated on collaboration, both across the entire university and between academia and industry. It was expected to transform the bench-to-bedside study and testing of therapeutic compounds, to redefine the teaching of pharmacotherapy, and to create a unified forum through which to discuss the overall academic-industrial relationship and more specific issues such as patents. Unfortunately, the program proved to be short-lived, the victim of such contingent factors as the untimely death of Soma Weiss and America's entry into World War II, as well as such more fundamental factors as the inadequate and temporary nature of the funding stream and unresolved tensions regarding the goals of the committee on the part of both the medical school and its industry supporters. Nevertheless, these early forays into collaborative bench-to-bedside translational research and the rationalization of academic-industrial relations remain instructive today.

The development of cardiac surgery in West Africa--the case of Ghana.

West Africa is one of the poorest regions of the world. The sixteen nations listed by the United Nations in this sub-region have some of the lowest gross domestic products in the world. Health care infrastructure is deficient in most of these countries. Cardiac surgery, with its heavy financial outlay is unavailable in many West African countries. These facts notwithstanding, some West African countries have a proud history of open heart surgery not very well known even in African health care circles. Many African health care givers are under the erroneous impression that the cardiovascular surgical landscape of West Africa is blank. However, documented reports of open-heart surgery in Ghana dates as far back as 1964 when surface cooling was used by Ghanaian surgeons to close atrial septal defects. Ghana's National Cardiothoracic Center is still very active and is accredited by the West African College of Surgeons for the training of cardiothoracic surgeons. Reports from Nigeria indicate open-heart surgery taking place from 1974. Cote D'Ivoire had reported on its first 300 open-heart cases by 1983. Senegal reported open-heart surgery from 1995 and still runs an active center. Cameroon started out in 2009 with work done by an Italian group that ultimately aims to train indigenous surgeons to run the program. This review traces the development and current state of cardiothoracic surgery in West Africa with Ghana's National Cardiothoracic Center as the reference. It aims to dispel the notion that there are no major active cardiothoracic centers in the West African sub-region.

The political economy of U.S. primary care.

Compelling evidence suggests that the United States lags behind other developed nations in the health of its population and the performance of its health care system, partly as a result of a decades-long decline in primary care. This paper outlines the political, economic, policy, and institutional factors behind this decline. A large-scale, multifaceted effort--a new Charter for Primary Care--is required to overcome these forces. There are grounds for optimism for the success of this effort, which is essential to achieving health outcomes and health system performance comparable to those of other industrialized nations.

Allied against reform: pharmaceutical industry-academic physician relations in the United States, 1945-1970.

During the 1960s, the drug industry was the subject of two congressional investigations into its business practices and pricing policies, and in 1962, passage of the Drug Amendments mandated greater Food and Drug Administration authority over pharmaceutical development. In this article, I examine the industry's efforts to circumvent these political challenges by drawing on its longstanding relationship with academic physicians and the American Medical Association. Using the medical profession's shared concern about expanding government oversight over therapeutic practice, the industry called on academic physicians to join forces with it and establish an expert advisory body to guide government officials on pharmaceutical policy. Drawing on research in the archives of the University of Pennsylvania and the National Academy of Sciences and a careful reading of the trade and biomedical literature and congressional documents, I argue that by positioning themselves as pharmaceutical experts, the members of this industry-academic alliance gave industry a seat at the policy table and enabled it to challenge the efforts of pharmaceutical reformers to further increase the government's role in drug development.

Learning from history: the legacy of Title VII in academic family medicine.

The current renaissance of interest in primary care could benefit from reviewing the history of federal investment in academic family medicine. The authors review 30 years of experience with the Title VII, Section 747 Training in Primary Care Medicine and Dentistry (Title VII) grant program, addressing three questions: (1) What Title VII grant programs were available to family medicine, and what were their goals? (2) How did Title VII change the discipline? and (3) What impact did Title VII family medicine programs have outside the discipline?Title VII grant programs evolved from broad support for the new discipline of family medicine to a sharper focus on specific national workforce objectives such as improving care for underserved and vulnerable populations and increasing diversity in the health professions. Grant programs were instrumental in establishing family medicine in nearly all medical schools and in supporting the educational underpinnings of the field. Title VII grants helped enhance the social capital of the discipline. Outside family medicine, Title VII fostered the development of innovative ambulatory education, institutional initiatives focusing on underserved and vulnerable populations, and primary care research capacity. Adverse effects include relative inattention to clinical and research missions in family medicine academic units and, institutionally, the development of medical education initiatives without core institutional support, which has put innovation and extension of education to communities at risk as grant funding has decreased. Reinvestment in academic family medicine can yield substantial benefits for family medicine and help reorient academic health centers. This article is part of a theme issue of Academic Medicine on the Title VII health professions training programs.

Two decades of Title VII support of a primary care residency: process and outcomes.

PURPOSE: To assess 23 years of Health Resources and Services Administration (HRSA) Title VII Training in Primary Care Medicine and Dentistry funding to the New York University School of Medicine/Bellevue Primary Care Internal Medicine Residency Program. The program, begun in 1983 within a traditional, inner-city, subspecialty-oriented internal medicine program, evolved into a crucible of systematic innovation, catalyzed and made feasible by initiatives funded by the HRSA. The curriculum stressed three pillars of generalism: psychosocial medicine, clinical epidemiology, and health policy. It developed tight, objectives-driven, effective, nonmedical specialty blocks and five weekly primary care activities that created a paradigm-driven, community-based, role-modeling matrix. Innovation was built in. Every block and activity was evaluated immediately and in an annual, program-wide retreat. Evaluation evolved from behavioral checklists of taped interviews to performance-based, systematic, annual objective structured clinical examinations. METHOD: The authors reviewed eight grant proposals, project reports, and curriculum and program evaluations. They also quantitatively and qualitatively surveyed the 122 reachable graduates from the first 20 graduating classes of the program. RESULTS: Analysis of program documents revealed recurring emphases on the use of proven educational models, strategic innovation, and assessment and evaluation to design and refine the program. There were 104 respondents (85%) to the survey. A total of 87% of the graduates practice as primary care physicians, 83% teach, and 90% work with the underserved; 54% do research, 36% actively advocate on health issues for their patients, programs, and other constituencies, and 30% publish. Graduates cited work in the community and faculty excitement and energy as essential elements of the program's impact; overall, graduates reported high personal and career satisfaction and low burnout. CONCLUSIONS: With HRSA support, a focused, innovative program evolved which has already met each of the six recommendations for future innovation of the Alliance for Academic Internal Medicine Education Redesign Task Force. This article is part of a theme issue of Academic Medicine on the Title VII health professions training programs.

The history of SHSAAMc: Student Health Services at Academic Medical Centers.

This article presents an historical review of the organization known as Student Health Services at Academic Medical Centers (SHSAAMc). The authors discuss characteristics of health service directors as well as the history of meetings, discussion, and leadership. The focus of the group is the healthcare needs of health professions students at academic medical centers.