A Multicenter Observational Study Comparing Virtual with In-Person Morning Reports during the COVID-19 Pandemic.

OBJECTIVES: The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic disrupted how educational conferences were delivered, leaving programs to choose between in-person and virtual morning report formats. The objective of our study was to describe morning reports during the COVID-19 pandemic, including the use of virtual formats, attendance, leadership, and content. METHODS: A prospective observational study of morning reports was conducted at 13 Internal Medicine residency programs between September 1, 2020 and March 30, 2021, including a follow-up survey of current morning report format in January 2023. RESULTS: In total, 257 reports were observed; 74% used virtual formats, including single hospital, multiple hospital, and a hybrid format with both in-person and virtual participants. Compared with in-person reports, virtual reports had more participants, with increased numbers of learners (median 21 vs 7; P < 0.001) and attendings (median 4 vs 2; P < 0.001), and they were more likely to involve medical students (83% vs 40%; P < 0.001), interns (99% vs 53%; P < 0.001), and program directors (68% vs 32%; P < 0.001). Attendings were less likely to lead virtual reports (3% vs 28%, P < 0.001). Virtual reports also were more likely to be case based (88% vs 69%; P < 0.001) and to use digital presentation slides (91% vs 36%; P < 0.001). There was a marked increase in the number of slides (median 20 vs 0; P < 0.001). As of January 2023, all 13 programs had returned to in-person reports, with only 1 program offering an option to participate virtually. CONCLUSIONS: During the COVID-19 pandemic, virtual morning report formats predominated. Compared with traditional in-person reports, virtual report increased attendance, favored resident leadership, and approached a similar range of patient diagnoses with a greater number of case-based presentations and slides. In spite of these characteristics, all programs returned to an in-person format for morning report as pandemic restrictions waned.

The Core Competencies in Hospital Medicine-Clinical Conditions 2023 Update Methodology.

As hospital medicine continues to evolve, the Society of Hospital Medicine (SHM) recognizes the importance of periodic re-evaluation and adaptation of The Core Competencies in Hospital Medicine to reflect and guide the continual expansion of hospitalists' scope of practice. Since its first publication in 2006, the Core Competencies were last revised in 2017 to reflect existing practice. The Core Competencies were initially developed to describe hospitalists' roles and expectations and identify growth opportunities. As hospital medicine has expanded, SHM seeks to maintain the Core Competencies as a framework to guide curricular development, enhance practice assessment, improve the quality of care, and cultivate systems-based practices. Additionally, it helps elucidate the clinical and systems-based aspects central to the field. Thus, the new chapters in the 2023 clinical conditions update focus on enhancing individual hospitalist practice in evaluating and managing common clinical conditions. The accompanying article describes the chapter review and revision process and the criteria for new chapter selection.

What internal medicine attendings talk about at morning report: a multicenter study.

BACKGROUND: Morning report is a core educational activity in internal medicine resident education. Attending physicians regularly participate in morning report and influence the learning environment, though no previous study has described the contribution of attending physicians to this conference. This study aims to describe attending comments at internal medicine morning reports. METHODS: We conducted a prospective, observational study of morning reports conducted at 13 internal medicine residency programs between September 1, 2020, and March 30, 2021. Each attending comment was described including its duration, whether the comment was teaching or non-teaching, teaching topic, and field of practice of the commenter. We also recorded morning report-related variables including number of learners, report format, program director participation, and whether report was scripted (facilitator has advance knowledge of the case). A regression model was developed to describe variables associated with the number of attending comments per report. RESULTS: There were 2,344 attending comments during 250 conferences. The median number of attendings present was 3 (IQR, 2-5). The number of comments per report ranged across different sites from 3.9 to 16.8 with a mean of 9.4 comments/report (SD, 7.4). 66% of comments were shorter than one minute in duration and 73% were categorized as teaching by observers. The most common subjects of teaching comments were differential diagnosis, management, and testing. Report duration, number of general internists, unscripted reports, and in-person format were associated with significantly increased number of attending comments. CONCLUSIONS: Attending comments in morning report were generally brief, focused on clinical teaching, and covered a wide range of topics. There were substantial differences between programs in terms of the number of comments and their duration which likely affects the local learning environment. Morning report stakeholders that are interested in increasing attending involvement in morning report should consider employing in-person and unscripted reports. Additional studies are needed to explore best practice models of attending participation in morning report.

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.

Internal Medicine Residents' Perceptions of Morning Report: a Multicenter Survey.

BACKGROUND: Residents rate morning report (MR) as an essential educational activity. Little contemporary evidence exists to guide medical educators on the optimal content or most effective delivery strategies, particularly in the era of resident duty-hour limitations and shifts towards learner-centric pedagogy in graduate medical education. OBJECTIVE: Assess resident views about MR content and teaching strategies. DESIGN: Anonymous, online survey. PARTICIPANTS: Internal medicine residents from 10 VA-affiliated residency programs. MAIN MEASURES: The 20-item survey included questions on demographics; frequency and reason for attending; opinions on who should attend, who should teach, and how to prioritize the teaching; and respondents' comfort level with participating in MR. The survey included a combination of Likert-style and multiple-choice questions with the option for multiple responses. KEY RESULTS: A total of 497 residents (46%) completed the survey, with a balanced sample of R1s (33%), R2s (35%), and R3s (31%). Self-reported MR attendance was high (31% always attend; 39% attend > 50% of the time), with clinical duties being the primary barrier to attendance (85%). Most respondents felt that medical students (89%), R1 (96%), and R2/R3s (96%) should attend MR; there was less consensus regarding including attendings (61%) or fellows (34%). Top-rated educational topics included demonstration of clinical reasoning (82%), evidence-based medicine (77%), and disease pathophysiology (53%). Respondents valued time spent on diagnostic work-up (94%), management (93%), and differential building (90%). Overall, 82% endorsed feeling comfortable speaking; fewer R1s reported comfort (76%) compared with R2s (87%) or R3s (83%, p = 0.018). Most (81%) endorsed that MR was an inclusive learning environment (81%), with no differences by level of training. CONCLUSIONS: MR remains a highly regarded, well-attended educational conference. Residents value high-quality cases that emphasize clinical reasoning, diagnosis, and management. A supportive, engaging learning environment with expert input and concise, evidence-based teaching is desired.

Teaching Students to Transform: The Health Innovations Scholars Program 6 Years Later.

Training in leadership and health system transformation is increasingly important in undergraduate medical education in order to develop a pipeline of engaged physicians dedicated to transforming health care. Despite this growing need, it is unclear whether current leadership training methods have long-term impact on students' career trajectory. The authors analyzed career outcomes from 6 years of the Health Innovations Scholars Program (HISP) to better understand how the program affected the 46 graduates' future involvement in health system transformation and leadership. Eighty-eight percent of the graduates remained involved in quality improvement, 70% held leadership positions, 31% participated in health innovation, and 15% participated in patient safety initiatives. Project involvement of the graduates represented both primary and secondary catalysts for health system change, leading to 28 unique catalyst events. HISP is a model for directing trainees' career trajectory toward engagement in health system leadership and redesign.

Characterizing Hospitalist Practice and Perceptions of Critical Care Delivery.

BACKGROUND: Intensivist shortages have led to increasing hospitalist involvement in critical care delivery. OBJECTIVE: To characterize the practice of hospitalists practicing in the intensive care unit (ICU) setting. DESIGN: Survey of hospital medicine physicians. SETTING: This survey was conducted as a needs assessment for the ongoing efforts of the Critical Care Task Force of the Society of Hospital Medicine Education Committee. PARTICIPANTS: Hospitalists in the United States. INTERVENTION: An iteratively developed, 25-item, webbased survey. MEASUREMENTS: Results were compiled from all respondents then analyzed in subgroups. Various items were examined for correlations. RESULTS: A total of 425 hospitalists completed the survey. Three hundred and twenty-five (77%) provided critical care services, and 280 (66%) served as primary physicians in the ICU. Hospitalists were significantly more likely to serve as primary physicians in rural ICUs (85% of rural respondents vs 62% of nonrural; P < .001 for association). Half of the rural hospitalists who were primary physicians for ICU patients felt obliged to practice beyond their scope, and 90% at least occasionally perceived that they had insufficient support from board-certified intensivists. Among respondents serving as primary physicians for ICU patients, 67% reported at least moderate difficulty transferring patients to higher levels of ICU care. Difficulty transferring patients was the only item significantly correlated with the perception of being expected to practice beyond one's scope (P < .05 for association). CONCLUSIONS: Hospitalists frequently deliver critical care services without adequate training or support, most prevalently in rural hospitals. Without major changes in intensivist staffi ng or patient distribution, this is unlikely to change.

Residents' Exposure to Educational Experiences in Facilitating Hospital Discharges.

BACKGROUND: There is an incomplete understanding of the most effective approaches for motivating residents to adopt guideline-recommended practices for hospital discharges. OBJECTIVE: We evaluated internal medicine (IM) residents' exposure to educational experiences focused on facilitating hospital discharges and compared those experiences based on correlations with residents' perceived responsibility for safely transitioning patients from the hospital. METHODS: A cross-sectional, multi-center survey of IM residents at 9 US university- and community-based training programs in 2014-2015 measured exposure to 8 transitional care experiences, their perceived impact on care transitions attitudes, and the correlation between experiences and residents' perceptions of postdischarge responsibility. RESULTS: Of 817 residents surveyed, 469 (57%) responded. Teaching about care transitions on rounds was the most common educational experience reported by residents (74%, 327 of 439). Learning opportunities with postdischarge patient contact were less common (clinic visits: 32%, 142 of 439; telephone calls: 12%, 53 of 439; and home visits: 4%, 18 of 439). On a 1-10 scale (10 = highest impact), residents rated postdischarge clinic as having the highest impact on their motivation to ensure safe transitions of care (mean = 7.61). Prior experiences with a postdischarge clinic visit, home visit, or telephone call were each correlated with increased perceived responsibility for transitional care tasks (correlation coefficients 0.12 [P = .004], 0.1 [P = .012], and 0.13 [P = 001], respectively). CONCLUSIONS: IM residents learn to facilitate hospital discharges most often through direct patient care. Opportunities to interact with patients across the postdischarge continuum are uncommon, despite correlating with increased perceived responsibility for ensuring safe transitions of care.

Hospital Medicine Resident Training Tracks: Developing the Hospital Medicine Pipeline.

BACKGROUND: Hospital medicine (HM) is rapidly evolving into new clinical and nonclinical roles. Traditional internal medicine (IM) residency training likely does not optimally prepare residents for success in HM. Hospital medicine residency training tracks may offer a preferred method for specialized HM education. METHODS: Internet searches and professional networks were used to identify HM training tracks. Information was gathered from program websites and discussions with track directors. RESULTS: The 11 HM tracks at academic medical centers across the United States focus mostly on senior residents. Track structure and curricular content are determined largely by the structure and curricula of the IM residency programs in which they exist. Almost all tracks feature experiential quality improvement projects. Content on healthcare economics and value is common, and numerous track leaders report this content is expanding from HM tracks into entire residency programs. Tracks also provide opportunities for scholarship and professional development, such as workshops on abstract creation and job procurement skills. Almost all tracks include HM preceptorships as well as rotations within various disciplines of HM. CONCLUSIONS: HM residency training tracks focus largely on quality improvement, health care economics, and professional development. The structures and curricula of these tracks are tightly linked to opportunities within IM residency programs. As HM continues to evolve, these tracks likely will expand to bridge clinical and extra-clinical gaps between traditional IM training and contemporary HM practice. Journal of Hospital Medicine 2017;12:173-176.

Rare case of losartan-induced cough complicated by rectus sheath haematoma: in a patient on rivaroxaban therapy.

Spontaneous rectus sheath haematomas and cough secondary to losartan are individually rare conditions. Abdominal wall haematomas present with abdominal pain and abdominal mass. Most patients are managed conservatively; Surgery or embolisation is indicated for shock, infection, rupture into the peritoneum or intractable pain. This is a man aged 65 years presented with dry cough and right-sided abdominal pain. He started losartan a few weeks prior to the onset of cough and had been on rivaroxaban for prior deep venous thrombosis. The right side of his abdomen was distended, bruised and tender. His haemoglobin dropped from 13.3to 9.5 g/dL. CT abdomen/pelvis showed a large 14.5×9.1×4.5 cm haematoma within the right lateral rectus muscle. His only risk factor for developing rectus sheath haematoma was cough in the setting of anticoagulation. Dry cough due to angiotensin receptor blockers is rare, but can have very serious consequences.

Internal Medicine Residents' Perceived Responsibility for Patients at Hospital Discharge: A National Survey.

BACKGROUND: Medical residents are routinely entrusted with transitions of care, yet little is known about the duration or content of their perceived responsibility for patients they discharge from the hospital. OBJECTIVE: To examine the duration and content of internal medicine residents' perceived responsibility for patients they discharge from the hospital. The secondary objective was to determine whether specific individual experiences and characteristics correlate with perceived responsibility. DESIGN: Multi-site, cross-sectional 24-question survey delivered via email or paper-based form. PARTICIPANTS: Internal medicine residents (post-graduate years 1-3) at nine university and community-based internal medicine training programs in the United States. MAIN MEASURES: Perceived responsibility for patients after discharge as measured by a previously developed single-item tool for duration of responsibility and novel domain-specific questions assessing attitudes towards specific transition of care behaviors. KEY RESULTS: Of 817 residents surveyed, 469 responded (57.4 %). One quarter of residents (26.1 %) indicated that their responsibility for patients ended at discharge, while 19.3 % reported perceived responsibility extending beyond 2 weeks. Perceived duration of responsibility did not correlate with level of training (P = 0.57), program type (P = 0.28), career path (P = 0.12), or presence of burnout (P = 0.59). The majority of residents indicated they were responsible for six of eight transitional care tasks (85.1-99.3 % strongly agree or agree). Approximately half of residents (57 %) indicated that it was their responsibility to directly contact patients' primary care providers at discharge. and 21.6 % indicated that it was their responsibility to ensure that patients attended their follow-up appointments. CONCLUSIONS: Internal medicine residents demonstrate variability in perceived duration of responsibility for recently discharged patients. Neither the duration nor the content of residents' perceived responsibility was consistently associated with level of training, program type, career path, or burnout, suggesting there may be unmeasured factors such as professional role modeling that shape these perceptions.

Hepatic encephalopathy for the hospitalist.

The care of patients with advanced liver disease is often complicated by episodes of acute decline in alertness and cognition, termed hepatic encephalopathy (HE). Hospitalists must be familiar with HE, as it is a common reason for hospitalization in this population and is associated with significantly increased mortality. This narrative review addresses common issues related to diagnosis and classification, precipitants, inpatient management, and transitions of care for patients with HE. The initial presentation can be variable, and HE remains a clinical diagnosis. The spectrum of HE manifestations spans from mild, subclinical cognitive deficits to overt coma. The West Haven scoring system is the most widely used classification system for HE. Various metabolic insults may precipitate HE, and providers must specifically seek to rule out infection and bleeding in cirrhotic patients presenting with altered cognition. This is consistent with the 4-pronged approach of the American Association for the Study of Liver Disease practice guidelines. Patients with HE are typically treated primarily with nonabsorbable disaccharide laxatives, often with adjunctive rifaximin. The evidence for these agents is discussed, and available support for other treatment options is presented. Management issues relevant to general hospitalists include those related to acute pain management, decisional capacity, and HE following transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt placement. These issues are examined individually. Successfully transitioning patients recovering from HE to outpatient care requires open communication with multiple role players including patients, caregivers, and outpatient providers. Journal of Hospital Medicine 2016;11:591-594. © 2016 Society of Hospital Medicine.

The Health Innovations Scholars Program: A Model for Accelerating Preclinical Medical Students' Mastery of Skills for Leading Improvement of Clinical Systems.

Dramatic changes in health care require physician leadership. Efforts to instill necessary skills often occur late in training. The Heath Innovations Scholars Program (HISP) provided preclinical medical students with experiential learning focused on process improvement. Students led initiatives to improve the discharge process for stroke patients. All students completed an aptitude survey and Quality Improvement Knowledge Assessment Test (QIKAT) before and after the program. Significant improvements occurred across subject areas of leadership (18.4%, P < .001), quality and safety (14.7%, P < .001), and health care systems operations (21.2%, P < .008), and in the domains of knowledge (25.9%, P < .001) and skills (25.2%, P < .001). Average cumulative QIKAT results improved significantly (8.33 to 9.83, P = .04). Three of 4 recommended interventions were implemented. Furthermore, students engaged in other process improvement work on return to their home institutions. The HISP successfully advanced preclinical medical students' ability to lead clinical systems improvement.