Impact of geographical cohorting, multidisciplinary rounding and incremental case management support on hospital length of stay and readmission rates: a propensity weighted analysis.

Hospital length of stay (LOS) in the USA has been increasing since the start of the COVID-19 pandemic, with numerous negative outcomes, including decreased quality of care, worsened patient satisfaction and negative financial impacts on hospitals. While many proposed factors contributing to prolonged LOS are challenging to modify, poor coordination of care and communication among clinical teams can be improved.Geographical cohorting of provider teams, patients and other clinical staff is proposed as a solution to prolonged LOS and readmissions. However, many studies on geographical cohorting alone have shown no significant impact on LOS or readmissions. Other potential benefits of geographical cohorting include improved quality of care, learning experience, communication, teamwork and efficiency.This paper presents a retrospective study at Duke University Hospital (DUH) on the General Medicine service, deploying a bundled intervention of geographical cohorting of patients and their care teams, twice daily multidisciplinary rounds and incremental case management support. The quality improvement study found that patients in the intervention arm had 16%-17% shorter LOS than those in the control arms, and there was a reduction in 30-day hospital readmissions compared with the concurrent control arm. Moreover, there was some evidence of improved accuracy of estimated discharge dates in the intervention arm.Based on these findings, the health system at DUH recognised the value of geographical cohorting and implemented additional geographically based medicine units with multidisciplinary rounds. Future studies will confirm the sustained impact of these care transformations on hospital throughput and patient outcomes, aiming to reduce LOS and enhance the quality of care provided to patients.

A Trainee-Led Quality Improvement Project Using Change Management Theory to Improve Bedside Rounding.

OBJECTIVE: The coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic disrupted the practice of family-centered rounds. After the height of the pandemic, a trainee-led team identified a low percentage of bedside rounds on general pediatrics resident teams and combined a quality improvement framework and change management theory to increase bedside rounds. Initial efforts focused on a single general pediatrics team with the aim to increase bedside rounds from 18% to 50% within 6 months and sustain improvement for 12 months. A second aim was to increase bedside rounds from 7% to 50% for all general pediatrics resident teams within 6 months of spread. METHODS: The Model for Improvement informed the identification of 3 primary drivers of bedside rounds: knowledge, culture, and logistics. Twelve plan-do-study-act (PDSA) cycles were implemented. Measures included the percentage of bedside rounds (primary outcome), caregiver attendance (secondary outcome), and nurse attendance and rounding time (balancing measures). RESULTS: For the initial team, 13 522 patient days were analyzed for the primary outcome with the average percentage of weekly bedside rounds increasing from 18% to 89% with 12 months of sustained improvement. The spread of the intervention to all teams revealed an increase in bedside rounding from 7% to 54%. The most significant improvements occurred after PDSA cycle 2, a communication bundle, and PDSA cycle 5, when the project was spread to all teams. CONCLUSIONS: This trainee-led initiative reveals the strength of the incorporation of change management theory within a quality improvement framework, resulting in rapid and sustainable increase in bedside rounds.

Resident Communication With Patients and Families Preferring Languages Other Than English.

OBJECTIVES: Patients and families preferring languages other than English (LOE) often experience inequitable communication with their health care providers, including the underutilization of professional interpretation. This study had 2 aims: to characterize resident-perceived communication with families preferring LOE and to evaluate the impact of language preference on frequency of resident interactions with hospitalized patients and families. METHODS: This was a cross-sectional study at a quaternary care children's hospital. We developed a questionnaire for residents regarding their interactions with patients preferring LOE. We concurrently developed a communication tracking tool to measure the frequency of resident communication events with hospitalized patients. Data were analyzed with logistic and Poisson regression models. RESULTS: Questionnaire results demonstrated a high level of resident comfort with interpretation, though more than 30% of residents reported "sometimes" or "usually" communicating with families preferring LOE without appropriate interpretation (response rate, 47%). The communication tracking tool was completed by 36 unique residents regarding 151 patients, with a 95% completion rate. Results demonstrated that patients and families preferring LOE were less likely to be present on rounds compared with their counterparts preferring English (adjusted odds ratio, 0.17; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.07-0.39). Similarly, patients and families preferring LOE were less likely to receive a resident update after rounds (adjusted odds ratio, 0.29; 95% CI, 0.13-0.62) and received fewer resident updates overall (incidence rate ratio, 0.45; 95% CI, 0.30-0.69). CONCLUSIONS: Hospitalized patients and families preferring LOE experience significant communication-related inequities. Ongoing efforts are needed to promote equitable communication with this population and should consider the unique role of residents.

Improvement in Multidisciplinary Provider Rounding (Surgical Rounds) in the Pediatric Cardiac ICU: An Application of Lean Methodology.

OBJECTIVES: Provider-only, combined surgical, and medical multidisciplinary rounds ("surgical rounds") are essential to achieve optimal outcomes in large pediatric cardiac ICUs. Lean methodology was applied with the aims of identifying areas of waste and nonvalue-added work within the surgical rounds process. Thereby, the goals were to improve rounding efficiency and reduce rounding duration while not sacrificing critical patient care discussion nor delaying bedside rounds or surgical start times. DESIGN: Single-center improvement science study with observational and interventional phases from February 2, 2021, to July 31, 2021. SETTING: Tertiary pediatric cardiac ICU. PARTICIPANTS: Cardiothoracic surgery and cardiac intensive care team members participating in daily "surgical" rounds. INTERVENTIONS: Implementation of technology automation, creation of work instructions, standardization of patient presentation content and order, provider training, and novel role assignment. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Sixty-one multidisciplinary rounds were observed (30 pre, 31 postintervention). During the preintervention period, identified inefficiencies included prolonged preparation time, redundant work, presentation variability and extraneous information, and frequent provider transitions. Application of targeted interventions resulted in a 26% decrease in indexed rounds duration (2.42 vs 1.8 min; p = 0.0003), 50% decrease in indexed rounds preparation time (0.53 vs 0.27 min; p < 0.0001), and 66% decrease in transition time between patients (0.09 vs 0.03 min; p < 0.0001). The number of presenting provider changes also decreased (9 vs 4; p < 0.0001). Indexed discussion duration did not change (1 vs 0.98 min; p = 0.08) nor did balancing measures (bedside rounds and surgical start times) change (8.5 vs 9 min; p = 0.89 and 38 vs 22 min; p = 0.09). CONCLUSIONS: Lean methodology can be effectively applied to multidisciplinary rounds in a joint cardiothoracic surgery/cardiac intensive care setting to decrease waste and inefficiency. Interventions resulted in decreased preparation time, transition time, presenting provider changes, total rounds duration indexed to patient census, and anecdotal improvements in provider satisfaction.

Increasing Nurse-Physician Family-Centered Rounds Communication: A Quality Improvement Pilot Project.

BACKGROUND: High-quality nurse-physician communication during family-centered rounds (FCRs) can increase patient safety. LOCAL PROBLEM: In our hospital, interdisciplinary team members perceived that nurse-physician communication during FCRs declined during the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: Using quality improvement methodology, we measured nurses' perceived awareness of components of the shared mental model, nurses' attendance during FCRs, compliance with completing FCR summaries, and average time spent per FCR encounter. INTERVENTIONS: A structured resident huddle took place prior to an FCR. Residents used a tool to send individualized alerts to bedside nurses to prepare them for an FCR. Residents developed comprehensive summaries after each FCR encounter and sent a summary text to nurses who were unable to attend the FCR. RESULTS: We assessed 40 FCRs over 16 weeks. Nurses' perceived awareness increased from 70% to 87%. Nurse attendance increased from 53% to 75%. CONCLUSIONS: We successfully piloted multiple interventions to improve nurse perceived awareness after an FCR.

'Every patient, every day': a daily ward round tool to improve patient safety and experience.

INTRODUCTION: Many essential interventions are required to ensure in-patients receive safe and effective care with a good experience. In addition, healthcare organisations are assessed on numerous performance indicators, including the aforementioned interventions, where underperformance can lead to lower publicly reported ratings, loss of income and reputational damage. Most importantly, underperformance can lead to compromised patient experience and outcomes. We created a prompt card as a service improvement tool to be used on the daily ward rounds at the bedside of every patient, entitled 'every patient, every day' to improve documentation, antibiotic prescribing, venous thromboembolism (VTE) prophylaxis, coding and patient communication. METHOD: Preimplementation data around these interventions and patient experience factors were collected by shadowing ward rounds. The 'every patient, every day' tool was then implemented. The ward rounds were shadowed by the same individual to collect post-implementation data. Effect of implementation was assessed via Poisson regression models conducted on the documentation, antibiotics and VTE measures, and logistic regression models conducted on the communication and coding measures. RESULTS: The corresponding rate ratios for the effect of the implementation of the service improvement tool were found to be 1.53 (95% CI 1.38 to 1.69) for improved documentation. Antibiotics prescribing improved by 1.44 (95% CI 1.06 to 1.94). VTE prescribing and documentation improved by a rate ratio 1.25 (95% 1.04 to 1.50). For communication, the effect of the implementation was significant at the 5% significance level (p<0.001), with an OR of 18.6 (95% CI 8.41 to 41.09). Coding effect was non-significant at the 5% significance level (p=0.113) but was substantive. Implementation of the tool resulted in substantive improvements in all outcomes and shows corrected significance with the documentation and communication outcomes. CONCLUSION: The 'every patient, every day' ward round prompt card is an extraordinarily simple tool shown to increase compliance with a number of safety and quality indicators to improve an organisation's performance, and hopefully be a facet contributing to enhanced patient experience and outcomes.

Patient and Family-Centered I-PASS SCORE Program: Resident and Advanced Care Provider Training Materials.

Introduction: Patient and family-centered rounds (PFCRs) are an important element of family-centered care often used in the inpatient pediatric setting. However, techniques and best practices vary, and faculty, trainees, nurses, and advanced care providers may not receive formal education in strategies that specifically enhance communication on PFCRs. Methods: Harnessing the use of structured communication, we developed the Patient and Family-Centered I-PASS Safer Communication on Rounds Every Time (SCORE) Program. The program uses a standardized framework for rounds communication via the I-PASS mnemonic, principles of health literacy, and techniques for patient/family engagement and bidirectional communication. The resident and advanced care provider training materials, a component of the larger SCORE Program, incorporate a flipped classroom approach as well as interactive exercises, simulations, and virtual learning options to optimize learning and retention via a 90-minute workshop. Results: Two hundred forty-six residents completed the training and were evaluated on their knowledge and confidence regarding key elements of the curriculum. Eighty-eight percent of residents agreed/strongly agreed that after training they could activate and engage families and all members of the interprofessional team to create a shared mental model; 90% agreed/strongly agreed that they could discuss the roles/responsibilities of various team members during PFCRs. Discussion: The Patient and Family-Centered I-PASS SCORE Program provides a structured framework for teaching advanced communication techniques that can improve provider knowledge of and confidence with engaging and communicating with patients/families and other members of the interprofessional team during PFCRs.

Pediatric Schwartz Rounds: Influencing Provider Insights and Emotional Connectedness.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Schwartz Rounds (SR) is an interdisciplinary program that focuses on compassionate care by allowing the formation of an interprofessional community around the human and emotional testimonies of caregivers. The purpose of this study was to examine the impact of implementing departmental SR on pediatric care providers at a tertiary care children's hospital in New York. METHODS: We applied the logic outcomes model for program evaluation to examine the impact of SR on pediatric providers. The standard evaluation form provided by the Schwartz Center was used to collect data after every SR. Descriptive statistics and qualitative data content analysis methods were used to analyze the evaluation data from the SR. RESULTS: A total of 820 standard evaluation forms were collected from 17 of the 23 SR sessions offered (response rate: 74.8%). Most participants felt that, during the SR sessions, challenging social and emotional aspects of patient care were discussed and that they gained better perspectives of their coworkers and their patients/families. They reported less isolation and more openness to express their feelings about patient care to their coworkers. The analysis of 299 written comments identified 5 themes: understanding other people's perspectives, the importance of communication, empathy and compassion, awareness of personal biases, and maintaining boundaries. CONCLUSIONS: Schwartz Rounds can provide an effective venue for pediatric care providers to gain insights into coworker and patient/family perspectives and process emotional experiences while providing patient care in a variety of circumstances.

Extended Reality International Grand Rounds: An Innovative Approach to Medical Education in the Pandemic Era.

PROBLEM: While bedside training has always presented its own unique challenges, the COVID-19 pandemic era has intensified barriers to suitable provider and trainee experiences for both patient care and medical education. APPROACH: This project introduced an innovative solution with the Extended Reality International Grand Rounds, a collaboration between the University of Michigan Center for Medical and Surgical Extended Reality and Imperial College London. Three complex cases were presented to trainees through a wireless, extended reality (XR) headset and augmented by holographic visual aids and expert commentary. This pilot rounding experience was performed through the first-person view of one clinician at the bedside. OUTCOMES: In 2020, 140 attendees participated in XR International Grand Rounds, and 82 (59%) and 61 (44%) completed pre- and postsurveys, respectively. Survey analysis showed that the majority of respondents (65, 79.3%) had very little to no baseline experience with XR technologies and nearly all (75, 91.5%) agreed that the development and implementation of XR curricula are important in medical training, indicating an unmet need. Nearly all respondents (59, 96.7%) found value in the ability to visualize patients' clinical findings in the XR rounding experience and 60 (98.4%) found value in the ability to visualize patient-specific imaging and test findings in an XR format. Limiting exposure to high-risk patients and care team members with this innovative format was believed to be important to 79 (96.3%) respondents at baseline and that perception was unchanged following the event. NEXT STEPS: This solution to a long-standing dilemma, newly stressed by a unique era in medicine, was a successful collaboration using state-of-the-art XR technology. Next steps will include introducing more advanced physical exam visualization and detection and comprehensive evaluation of the patient experience, as well as expanding the international experience in a format that is scalable to other interested institutions.

Improving Efficiency on a Pediatric Hospital Medicine Service With Schedule-Based Family-Centered Rounds.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Inconsistencies in the timing and process of family-centered rounds can contribute to inefficiencies in patient care, inconsistent nursing participation, and variable end times. Through the implementation of schedule-based rounds, our aims were to (1) start 90% of rounds encounters within 30 minutes of the scheduled time, (2) increase nursing presence from 79% to >90%, and (3) increase the percentage of rounds completed by 11:20 am from 0% to 80% within 1 year. METHODS: We used quality improvement methods to implement and evaluate a scheduled rounds process on a pediatric hospital medicine service at a university-affiliated children's hospital. Interventions included customization of an electronic health record-linked scheduling tool, daily schedule management by the senior resident, real-time rounds notification to nurses, improved education on rounding expectations, streamlined rounding workflow, and family notification of rounding time. Data were collected daily and run charts were used to track metrics. RESULTS: One year after implementation, a median of 96% of rounds encounters occurred within 30 minutes of scheduled rounding time, nursing presence increased from a median of 79% to 94%, and the percentage of rounds completed by 11:20 am increased from a median of 0% to 86%. Rounds end times were later with a higher patient census. CONCLUSIONS: We improved the efficiency of our rounding workflow and bedside nursing presence through a scheduled rounds process facilitated by an electronic health record-linked scheduling tool.

Facilitating Engagement on Family-Centered Rounds for Families With Limited Comfort With English.

OBJECTIVE: Conducting family-centered rounds (FCR) for families with limited comfort with English (LCE) presents communication challenges. The objective of this study was to characterize the preferences of Spanish-speaking parents with LCE around interpretation and communication with the medical team during FCR to promote family engagement during rounds. METHODS: This qualitative study was conducted at a tertiary care children's hospital in New York, New York. Eighteen Spanish-speaking parents of patients admitted to the hospital medicine service participated. Bilingual investigators conducted semistructured interviews over a secure virtual platform. Interview transcriptions were coded and analyzed by using a grounded theory approach and constant comparative method. Parents were recruited until thematic saturation was achieved. RESULTS: Most participants were mothers (72%) from the Dominican Republic (61%). Responses from participants yielded a conceptual model depicting parents' perspectives on family engagement and bidirectional communication during FCR. Three major themes emerged: (1) importance of interpreter use, (2) understanding of medical information, and (3) participation in FCR. Within each theme, factors that facilitate or impede engagement in FCR were identified. Interpreters facilitated information sharing and parent understanding of medical care, increasing parent appreciation of FCR. Lack of language-concordant care and parents' perceived responsibility for the language barrier limited engagement. CONCLUSIONS: Families with LCE value involvement during FCR, but face difficulties due to language barriers. Providers can support these families by empowering families' participation and by consistently using an interpreter. Understanding the preferences of families with LCE for participation in FCR will help providers deliver more equitable family-centered care.

Impact of Bedside Rounding on Attending Teaching Evaluations.

OBJECTIVE: To examine associations between bedside rounding (BSR) and other rounding strategies (ORS) with resident evaluations of teaching attendings and self-reported attending characteristics. METHODS: Faculty from three academic medical centers who attended resident teaching services for ≥4 weeks during the 2018-2019 academic year were invited to complete a survey about personal and rounding characteristics. The survey instrument was iteratively developed to assess rounding strategy as well as factors that could affect choosing one rounding strategy over another. Survey results and teaching evaluation scores were linked, then deidentified and analyzed in aggregate. Included evaluation items assessed resident perceptions of autonomy, time management, professionalism, and teaching effectiveness, as well as a composite score (the numeric average of each attending's scores for all of the items at his or her institution). BSR was defined as spending >50% of rounding time in patients' rooms with the team. Hallway rounding and conference room rounding were combined into the ORS category and defined as >50% of rounding time in these settings. All of the scores were normalized to a 10-point scale to allow aggregation across sites. RESULTS: A total of 105 attendings were invited to participate, and 65 (62%) completed the survey. None of the resident evaluation scores significantly differed based on rounding strategy. Composite scores were similar for BSR and ORS (difference of <0.1 on a 10-point scale). Spearman correlation coefficients identified no statistically significant correlation between rounding strategy and evaluation scores. An exploratory analysis of variance model identified no single factor that was significantly associated with composite teaching scores (P > 0.45 for all) or the domains of teaching efficacy, professionalism, or autonomy (P > 0.13 for all). Having a formal educational role was significantly associated with better evaluation scores for time management, and the number of lectures delivered per year approached statistical significance for the same domain. CONCLUSIONS: Conducting BSR did not significantly affect resident evaluations of teaching attendings. Resident perception of teaching effectiveness based on rounding strategy should be neither a motivator nor a barrier to widespread institution of BSR.

Variation in Family Involvement on Rounds Between English-Speaking and Spanish-Speaking Families.

BACKGROUND: Family-centered rounds (FCR) is the standard of care in inpatient pediatrics. Results of studies have revealed that Spanish-speaking families can experience communication challenges and decreased empowerment on rounds. In our study, we aim to identify variation in FCR practices for Spanish-speaking compared to English-speaking families and factors contributing to these disparities. METHODS: This is a cross-sectional observational study performed by secondary analysis of a quality improvement initiative conducted at a quaternary children's hospital. Data were collected from June 2019 to March 2020 by using observational audits. Encounters were analyzed to compare key elements of FCR (including rounds location, elicitation of family questions, involvement in discharge planning) for English-speaking and Spanish-speaking families. Multivariable logistic regression was used to compare family involvement in FCR. A sensitivity analysis was conducted to evaluate unmeasured confounding. RESULTS: Rounding encounters included 394 families (261 English-speaking and 133 Spanish-speaking). Fewer Spanish-speaking families were included in the medical team's discussion on rounds (64.7% vs 76.3%, P = .017), were asked about questions at the start of rounds (44.4% vs 56.3%, P = .025), or were involved in discussion of discharge criteria (72.2% vs 82.8%, P = .018) when compared to English-speaking families. These differences were magnified for resident teams rounding with subspecialists. The finding of decreased family involvement in the discussion on rounds persisted after adjusting for patient age and team type. CONCLUSIONS: Spanish-speaking families were less likely to be involved in FCR compared to English-speaking families. Further investigation is needed to explore the root causes of this practice variation and to develop interventions to address disparities.

Perception of physicians and nursing staff members regarding outside versus bedside ward rounds: ancillary analysis of the randomised BEDSIDE-OUTSIDE trial.

BACKGROUND: We recently compared the effects of bedside and outside the room ward rounds on patients' knowledge about their medical care. Here, we report preferences of medical and nursing staff members regarding outside versus bedside ward rounds. METHODS: Within this ancillary project of a large multicentre randomised controlled trial, we prospectively conducted a survey of medical and nursing staff members participating in the weekly consultant ward rounds in the internal medicine division of three Swiss teaching hospitals between July 2017 and October 2019. Participants were asked about their preferences on outside versus bedside ward rounds. The primary endpoint was satisfaction of healthcare workers with the ward round measured with a visual analogue scale from 0 to 100. RESULTS: Between July 2017 and October 2019, 919 patients were included in the trial, and we received 891 survey responses (nurses 15.6%, residents 26.8%, attending physicians 29.6%, consultants 7.8% and chief physicians 20.2%. In the overall analysis, mean (± standard deviation) satisfaction of healthcare workers was higher with outside the room than bedside ward rounds (78.03 ± 16.96 versus 68.25 ± 21.10 respectively; age-, gender- and centre-adjusted difference of -10.46, 95% confidence interval [CI] -12.73 to -8.19; p <0.001). Healthcare workers reported better time management, more discussion of sensitive topics and less discomfort when case presentations were conducted outside the room. A stratified subgroup analysis considering the profession, however, showed strong differences, with nurses being more satisfied with bedside rounds (69.20 ± 20.32 versus 65.32 ± 20.92, respectively; adjusted difference 4.35, 95% CI -1.79 to 10.51; p <0.001), whereas attending physicians showed higher satisfaction with outside the room rounds (82.63 ± 13.87 versus 66.59 ± 21.82; adjusted difference -16.51, 95% CI -20.29 to -12.72; p = 0.002). CONCLUSIONS: While bedside ward rounds are considered more patient centred and are preferred by the nursing staff, physicians prefer outside the room presentation of patients during ward rounds because of the perceived better discussion of sensitive topics, better time management and less staff discomfort. Continuous training including medical communication techniques may help to increase satisfaction of physicians with bedside ward rounds. Trial registration: https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03210987.

A Longitudinal Study of the Impact of Schwartz Center Rounds on Moral Distress.

Moral distress occurs when moral integrity is compromised and can affect any healthcare professional. This study examined the impact of Schwartz Center Rounds (SCRs) on moral distress using a longitudinal, quasi-experimental design to examine SCR attendees from 2015 to 2019. Data were collected via a 2-part survey composed of demographics and Moral Distress Thermometer (MDT) readings before rounds and immediately after rounds. Most participants experienced either no change in moral distress (50.6%) or a decrease in moral distress (33.7%) after attending one of the SCRs. Participants who worked with adult populations had higher moral distress after participation for most topics. An increase in moral distress was associated with a longer time in the current position. Fifty percent of the physicians had a decrease in their moral distress immediately after the rounds. Schwartz Center Rounds is a promising approach to foster high-functioning teams while promoting wellness and mitigating moral distress among employees.

Teaching on Rounds and in Small Groups.

Bedside teaching plays a vital role the training future physicians, allowing for instruction in history taking, physical examination skills, differential diagnosis development, professionalism, teamwork integration, effective communication, and discussions of medical ethics. Due to changes in the health care system, accreditation bodies, and shortened admittance of patients, rates of bedside teaching have declined. Attending surgeons feel increased external pressures to meet performance metrics while resident physicians adhere to duty hour restrictions. This article highlights popular methods, including bedside rounds, near-peer teaching, and resident versus attending preceptors, and discusses how teaching on rounds has an impact on patients.

Virtual Peer-to-Peer Learning to Enhance and Accelerate the Health System Response to COVID-19: The HHS ASPR Project ECHO COVID-19 Clinical Rounds Initiative.

Tasked with identifying digital health solutions to support dynamic learning health systems and their response to COVID-19, the US Department of Health and Human Services Office of the Assistant Secretary for Preparedness and Response partnered with the University of New Mexico's Project ECHO and more than 2 dozen other organizations and agencies to create a real-time virtual peer-to-peer clinical education opportunity: the COVID-19 Clinical Rounds Initiative. Focused on 3 "pressure points" in the COVID-19 continuum of care-(1) the out-of-hospital and/or emergency medical services setting, (2) emergency departments, and (3) inpatient critical care environments-the initiative has created a massive peer-to-peer learning network for real-time information sharing, engaging participants in all 50 US states and more than 100 countries. One hundred twenty-five learning sessions had been conducted between March 24, 2020 and February 25, 2021, delivering more than 58,000 total learner-hours of contact in the first 11 months of operation.

Randomized Study of Bedside vs Hallway Rounding: Neurology Rounding Study.

Over the last century, attending rounds have shifted away from the bedside. Despite evidence for greater patient satisfaction rates and improved nursing perception of teamwork with bedside presentations, residents and attending physicians are apprehensive of the bedside approach. There is lack of data to guide rounding practices within neurology, and therefore, optimal rounding methods remain unclear. The objective of this study was to compare bedside rounding with hallway rounding on an academic neurology inpatient service and assess efficiency, trainee education, and satisfaction among patients and staff. We conducted a single-center prospective randomized study of bedside vs hallway rounding on new inpatient neurology admissions over 1-week blocks. The bedside team presented patients at the bedside, whereas the hallway team presented patients outside of the patient's room. We evaluated the 2 approaches with time-motion analysis, which investigated the rounding style's effect on composition and timing of rounds (primary outcome) and surveys of patients, nurses, residents, and attending physicians on both teams (secondary outcomes). The mean rounding time per newly admitted patient in the bedside group (n = 38 patients) and hallway group (n = 41 patients) was 23 minutes and 23.2 minutes, respectively (p = 0.93). The bedside group spent on average 56.4% of patient rounding time in the patient's room, whereas the hallway group spent 39.5% of rounding time in the patient's room (p = 0.036). Residents perceived hallway rounding to be more efficient and associated it with a superior educational experience and more effective data review. Nurses had improved perception of their participation in bedside rounds. Although patients' views of bedside and hallway rounds were similar, patients who had experienced bedside rounds preferred it. In conclusion, bedside rounding was perceived less favorably by most residents but was as efficient as hallway rounding. Although bedside rounding limited the use of technology for data review, it promoted nursing participation and resulted in more time spent with the patient. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: Registered retrospectively per the editors' suggestion (NCT04754828).

Virtual Team Rounding: A Cross-Specialty Inpatient Care Staffing Program to Manage COVID-19 Surges.

PROBLEM: The SARS-CoV-2 (COVID-19) pandemic presented numerous challenges to inpatient care, including overtaxed inpatient medicine services, surges in patient censuses, disrupted patient care and educational activities for trainees, underused providers in certain specialties, and personal protective equipment shortages and new requirements for physical distancing. In March 2020, as the COVID-19 surge began, an interdisciplinary group of administrators, providers, and trainees at Brigham and Women's Hospital created an inpatient virtual staffing model called the Virtual Team Rounding Program (VTRP). APPROACH: The conceptual framework guiding VTRP development was rapid-cycle innovation. The VTRP was designed iteratively using feedback from residents, physician assistants, attendings, and administrators from March to June 2020. The VTRP trained and deployed a diverse set of providers across specialties as "virtual rounders" to support inpatient teams by joining and participating in rounds via videoconference and completing documentation tasks during and after rounds. The program was rapidly scaled up from March to June 2020. OUTCOMES: In a survey of inpatient providers at the end of the pilot phase, 10/10 (100%) respondents reported they were getting either "a lot" or "a little" benefit from the VTRP and did not find the addition of the virtual rounder burdensome. During the scaling phase, the program grew to support 24 teams. In a survey at the end of the contraction phase, 117/187 (62.6%) inpatient providers who worked with a virtual rounder felt the rounder saved them time. VTRP leadership collaboratively and iteratively developed best practices for challenges encountered during implementation. NEXT STEPS: Virtual rounding provides a valuable extension of inpatient teams to manage COVID-19 surges. Future work will quantitatively and qualitatively assess the impact of the VTRP on inpatient provider satisfaction and well-being, virtual rounders' experiences, and patient care outcomes.

Simulated ward round training in the medical curriculum Munich.

Conducting a ward round in a structured and goal-oriented manner is one of the central competencies of a physician's work. Despite its relevance, ward round competence was only addressed in an unstructured way in the Medical Curriculum Munich (MeCuM) prior to 2011. Therefore, the project's aim was to implement an evidence-based course on medical ward round competence. This project report provides a guideline for developing such a training course. Project planning and development was guided by the steps of the "Kern cycle", beginning with needs assessment, learning objectives definition, and selection of appropriate teaching methods, and ending with implementation and evaluation.