Medically ready for discharge: A multisite "point-in-time" assessment of hospitalized patients.

BACKGROUND: Time spent awaiting discharge after the acute need for hospitalization has resolved is an important potential contributor to hospital length of stay (LOS). OBJECTIVE: To measure the prevalence, impact, and context of patients who remain hospitalized for prolonged periods after completion of acute care needs. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: We conducted a cross-sectional "point-in-time" survey at each of 15 academic US hospitals using a structured data collection tool with on-service acute care medicine attending physicians in fall 2022. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Primary outcomes were number and percentage of patients considered "medically ready for discharge" with emphasis on those who had experienced a "major barrier to discharge" (medically ready for discharge for ≥1 week). Estimated LOS attributable to major discharge barriers, contributory discharge needs, and associated hospital characteristics were measured. RESULTS: Of 1928 patients sampled, 35.0% (n = 674) were medically ready for discharge including 9.8% (n = 189) with major discharge barriers. Many patients with major discharge barriers (44.4%; 84/189) had spent a month or longer medically ready for discharge and commonly (84.1%; 159/189) required some form of skilled therapy or daily living support services for discharge. Higher proportions of patients experiencing major discharge barriers were found in public versus private, nonprofit hospitals (12.0% vs. 7.2%; p = .001) and county versus noncounty hospitals (14.5% vs. 8.8%; p = .002). CONCLUSIONS: Patients experience major discharge barriers in many US hospitals and spend prolonged time awaiting discharge, often for support needs that may be outside of clinician control.

Hospital medicine in the internal medicine clerkship: results from a national survey.

BACKGROUND: Hospital medicine is growing rapidly. This changing inpatient work force has had consequences on medical education, with an increasing hospitalist presence in resident and student training. Initially met with apprehension, there is growing literature to suggest that hospitalists are perceived to be more effective clinical teachers than non-hospitalists. However, the extent to which hospitalists are involved in teaching Internal Medicine (IM) to medical students is not known. METHODS: In order to determine the role of hospitalists in medical student education within the United States and Canada, we queried clerkship directors in Internal Medicine as part of the 2010 annual Clerkship Directors in Internal Medicine (CDIM) survey. In June 2010, CDIM surveyed its North American institutional members, which represent 110 of 143 Departments of Medicine in the US and Canada. RESULTS: Eight-two of 107 departments responded to the survey (77%). Seventy-five (91%) indicated that hospitalists served as teaching attendings at their teaching hospital. In twenty-two (27%) IM departments, 75% to 100% of students rotate with a hospitalist during their IM clerkships. Thirty-three (42%) departments report that students are directly supervised by in-house hospitalists during their nighttime call requirements. Sixty-six (81%) indicated that academic hospitalists hold educational administrative positions. Hospitalists are significantly less likely to have additional clinical commitment as compared to non-hospitalist teaching attendings (16% vs 53%, (χ 21df = 33.1; P < 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: Hospitalists are involved in medical student education in the large majority of Departments of Internal Medicine throughout the US and Canada, reflecting the growth of hospital medicine nationally.