Economic evaluation of the hospitalist care model in an acute medical unit: a benefit-cost analysis.

OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to assess the economic efficiency of the acute medical unit (AMU) hospitalist care model, utilising patient outcomes (length of hospital stay, emergency department (ED)-length of hospital stay, in-hospital mortality) from a previous investigation. DESIGN: A retrospective cohort study was conducted using benefit-cost analysis from a societal perspective. Data relating to clinical factors, outcomes and medical costs were obtained from the electronic medical record database at our institution. Literature-based costing was applied to determine direct non-medical costs and indirect costs that could not be obtained directly. SETTING: A tertiary care hospital in the Republic of Korea. PARTICIPANTS: We evaluated 6391 medical inpatients admitted through the ED from 1 June 2016 to 31 May 2017. INTERVENTIONS: The study compared multiple types of costs and benefits among inpatients from the ED between a non-hospitalist group and an AMU hospitalist group. Results This investigation found a significant reduction in medical costs and total costs in the AMU hospitalist group compared to the non-hospitalist group (30% reduction, 95% CI: 27.6-32.1%, P=0.000; 29.3% reduction, 95% CI: 27.0-31.5%, P=0.000; respectively). Furthermore, significant reductions in direct and indirect costs were found in the AMU hospitalist group compared to the non-hospitalist group (28.6% reduction, 95% CI: 26.6-30.5%, P=0.000; 23.3% reduction, 95% CI: 20.9-25.5%, P=0.000; respectively). The net-benefit and benefit-cost ratio (BCR) of the AMU hospitalist care group were US $6846 and 1.33 per patient admission, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The AMU hospitalist care model was associated with remarkable reductions in multiple costs. The results of the sensitivity analysis indicated that the net-benefit estimates of AMU hospitalist care were similar to the baseline estimates. Thus, the overall net-benefit of AMU hospitalist care was found to be largely positive.

Association Between Gender and Salary Among Pediatric Hospital Medicine Physicians.

OBJECTIVES: Gender-based disparities in salary exist in multiple fields of medicine. However, there is limited data examining gender inequities in salary in pediatric hospital medicine (PHM). Our primary objective was to assess whether gender-based salary differences exist in PHM. The secondary objective was to assess if, among women, the differences in salary varied on the basis of leadership positions or self-identified race and ethnicity. METHODS: We conducted a survey-based, cross-sectional study of pediatric hospitalists in December 2021. Our primary outcomes were base and total salary, adjusted for the reported number of average weekly work hours. We performed subanalyses by presence of a leadership position, as well as race. We used a weighted t test using inverse probability weighting to compare the outcomes between genders. RESULTS: A total of 559 eligible people responded to our survey (51.0%). After propensity score weighting, women's mean base salary was 87.7% of men's base (95% confidence interval [CI] 79.8%-96.4%, P < .01), and women's total salary was 85.6% of men's total (95% CI 73.2%-100.0%, P = .05) salary. On subgroup analysis of respondents with a leadership position, women's total salary was 80.6% of men's total salary (95% CI 68.7%-94.4%, P < .01). Although women who identified as white had base salaries that were 86.6% of white men's base salary (95% CI 78.5%-95.5%, P < .01), there was no gender-based difference noted between respondents that identified as nonwhite (88.4% [69.9%-111.7%] for base salary, 80.3% [57.2% to 112.7%]). CONCLUSIONS: Gender-based discrepancies in salary exists in PHM, which were increased among those with leadership roles. Continued work and advocacy are required to achieve salary equity within PHM.