Improving Early Discharge Using a Team-Based Structure for Discharge Multidisciplinary Rounds.

PURPOSE OF STUDY: Miscommunications during the complex process of discharging patients from acute care facilities can lead to adverse events, patient dissatisfaction, and delays in discharge. Brief multidisciplinary discharge rounds (MDRs) can increase communication between stakeholders and shorten a patient's length of stay (LOS). At our tertiary academic medical center, case managers (CMs) have historically been assigned patients by physical unit location rather than by provider teams caring for patients. As a result, medicine teams often interact with several unit-based CMs due to lack of geographically cohorted patients, leading to inefficiency and fragmentation in discharge planning communication. Our aim was to implement and evaluate the impact of multidisciplinary, team-based discharge planning rounds (MDR) for general medicine patients. PRIMARY PRACTICE SETTING: A tertiary academic medical center. METHODOLOGY AND SAMPLE: Using the model for continuous improvement, we implemented and optimized MDR on 2 of 4 internal medicine resident ward teams that care for general internal medicine patients, including creation of a multidisciplinary team, improving physician continuity. RESULTS: During the pilot, 1,584 patients were discharged from all medicine teams-825 from pilot teams and 759 from control teams. The proportion of patients with discharge before noon (DBN) orders was 41.2% on pilot versus 29.6% on control teams. Length of stay was 92.2 hr versus 97.2 hr, and 30-day readmission rate was 16.0% versus 18.3% for the pilot versus control teams, respectively. After the pilot concluded, we continued to have resident continuity on pilot teams but returned to the unit-based CM model. During this time, the proportion of DBN orders and LOS were similar between the pilot and control teams (29.0% vs. 24.3% and 95.8 hr vs. 96.6 hr, respectively). The 30-day readmission rate was 12.6% compared with 18.9% for the pilot versus control teams. IMPLICATIONS FOR CASE MANAGEMENT PRACTICE: Our team-based MDR pilot improved interdisciplinary relationships and communication and resulted in shorter LOS, earlier discharge times, and lower 30-day readmissions.

What Is Career Success for Academic Hospitalists? A Qualitative Analysis of Early-Career Faculty Perspectives.

BACKGROUND: Understanding the concept of career success is critical for hospital medicine groups seeking to create sustainably rewarding faculty positions. Conceptual models of career success describe both extrinsic (compensation and advancement) and intrinsic (career satisfaction and job satisfaction) domains. How hospitalists define career success for themselves is not well understood. In this study, we qualitatively explore perspectives on how early-career clinician-educators define career success. METHODS: We developed a semistructured interview tool of open-ended questions validated by using cognitive interviewing. Transcribed interviews were conducted with 17 early-career academic hospitalists from 3 medical centers to thematic saturation. A mixed deductiveinductive, qualitative, analytic approach was used to code and map themes to the theoretical framework. RESULTS: The single most dominant theme participants described was "excitement about daily work," which mapped to the job satisfaction organizing theme. Participants frequently expressed the importance of "being respected and recognized" and "dissemination of work," which were within the career satisfaction organizing theme. The extrinsic organizing themes of advancement and compensation were described as less important contributors to an individual's sense of career success. Ambivalence toward the "academic value of clinical work," "scholarship," and especially "promotion" represented unexpected themes. CONCLUSIONS: The future of academic hospital medicine is predicated upon faculty finding career success. Clinician-educator hospitalists view some traditional markers of career advancement as relevant to success. However, early-career faculty question the importance of some traditional external markers to their personal definitions of success. This work suggests that the selfconcept of career success is complex and may not be captured by traditional academic metrics and milestones.