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.

Models of Intermediate Care Organization and Staffing at an Academic Medical Center: Considerations of an Inpatient Planning Committee.

Rationale: Geographic co-localization of patients and provider teams (geography) may improve care efficiency and quality. Patients requiring intermediate care present a unique challenge to the geographic model. Objective: Identify the best organizational and staffing model for intermediate care at our academic medical center. Methods: A modified nominal group technique was employed to assess the benefits and limitations of an existing model of intermediate care, identify and review potential alternative models, and choose a new model. Results: In addition to the institution's current model, the benefits and limitations of six alternative organizational and staffing models were characterized. The anticipated impact of each model on nurse: provider communication, maintenance of nursing competencies, nurse satisfaction, efficient utilization of technical and human resources, triage of patients to the unit, care continuity, and the impact on trainee education are described. After considering these features, stakeholders ranked a closed provider staffing model on a unit dedicated to intermediate care highest of the six alternative models. Important outcomes to monitor following transition to a closed staffing model included patient outcomes, nursing job satisfaction and retention, provider and trainee experience, unexpected patient transfers to higher or lower levels of care, and administrative costs. Conclusions: After considering six alternative staffing models for intermediate care, stakeholders ranked a closed provider staffing model highest. Further qualitative and quantitative comparisons to determine optimal models of intermediate care are needed.

A Department of Medicine Infrastructure for Patient Safety and Clinical Quality Improvement.

Payers, providers, and patients increasingly recognize the importance of quality and safety in health care. Academic Departments of Medicine can advance quality and safety given the large populations they serve and the broad spectrum of diseases they treat. However, there are only few detailed examples of how quality and safety can be organized. This article describes a practical model at The Johns Hopkins Hospital Department of Medicine and details its structure and operation within a large academic health system. It is based on a fractal model that integrates multiple smaller units similar in structure (composition of faculty/staff), process (use of similar tools), and approach (using a common framework to address issues). This organization stresses local, multidisciplinary leadership, facilitates horizontal connections for peer learning, and maintains vertical connections for broader accountability.