Promoting scholarship in improvement science: A model for academic clinical departments.

Introduction: Clinical departments at academic medical centers strive to deliver clinical care, provide education and training, support faculty development, and promote scholarship. These departments have experienced increasing demands to improve the quality, safety, and value of care delivery. However, many academic departments lack a sufficient number of clinical faculty members with expertise in improvement science to lead initiatives, teach, and generate scholarship. In this article, we describe the structure, activities, and early outcomes of a program within an academic department of medicine to promote scholarly improvement work. Methods: The Department of Medicine at the University of Vermont Medical Center launched a Quality Program with three primary goals: (a) improve care delivery, (b) provide education and training, and (c) promote scholarship in improvement science. The program serves as a resource center for students, trainees and faculty, offering education and training, analytic support, consultation in design and methodology, and project management. It strives to integrate education, research, and care delivery to learn, apply evidence and improve health care. Results: Over the first 3 years of full implementation, the Quality Program supported an average of 123 projects annually, including prospective clinical quality improvement initiatives, retrospective assessment of clinical programs and practices, and curriculum development and evaluation. The projects have yielded a total of 127 scholarly products, defined as peer-reviewed publications and abstracts, posters, and oral presentations at local, regional, and national conferences. Conclusions: The Quality Program may serve as a practical model for promoting care delivery improvement, training, and scholarship in improvement science while advancing the goals of a learning health system at the level of an academic clinical department. Dedicated resources within such departments offer the potential to enhance care delivery while promoting academic success for faculty and trainees in improvement science.

An Active-Learning Quality Improvement Curriculum for Faculty in Hospital Medicine.

INTRODUCTION: Despite the growing importance of quality improvement (QI) training in medical education, there is a lack of faculty with expertise in QI at many academic medical centers. In this report, we describe the design, implementation, and evaluation of a QI training program for faculty in hospital medicine at an academic medical center aimed at increasing faculty capacity in QI. METHODS: With input from an initial focus group of hospital medicine faculty, we developed a 12-session, active-learning curriculum incorporating core concepts in QI applied to a real-life QI problem. We used a survey instrument to assess changes in self-reported confidence, the Quality Improvement Knowledge Application Tool-Revised to assess changes in applied knowledge, and a second focus group to obtain qualitative feedback regarding the curriculum. RESULTS: Self-reported confidence in numerous QI skills increased after completion of the curriculum; however, concurrent improvement in applied knowledge was not observed. Qualitatively, participants not only described improved understanding of QI methodology and greater confidence contributing to QI initiatives but also a sense they were not prepared to lead a QI project independently. DISCUSSION: An active-learning faculty training program is feasible with limited resources and was associated with increased faculty confidence in QI skills.

Patient Experience on a Hospital Oncology Service Before and After Implementation of a No-Visitor Policy During COVID-19.

Hospital visitor restriction policies prompted by Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) may lead to a less comfortable or informed inpatient experience for oncology patients admitted for non-COVID-19 conditions. We surveyed oncology inpatients before (n = 47) and after (n = 65) implementation of a no-visitor policy using a validated questionnaire to measure patient experience. Results revealed no significant difference in the percentage of patients reporting "no problems" (P < .05) in all questions. Patient experience was not adversely impacted by visitor restrictions enacted in response to COVID-19 on an oncology service, as measured by a questionnaire capturing common concerns among inpatients.

Integrating DATA 2000 waiver training into undergraduate medical education: The time is now.

Background: Medications for opioid use disorder (MOUD) significantly reduce morbidity and mortality from opioid use disorder (OUD). To prescribe MOUD, physicians must obtain a DEA waiver through requirements outlined in the Drug Addiction Treatment Act of 2000 (DATA 2000). We developed an Addiction Medicine curriculum that features DATA 2000 waiver training at the Robert Larner, MD College of Medicine (LCOM). Methods: All third-year medical students completed a virtual DATA 2000 waiver training at the commencement of clinical clerkships. We conducted a curriculum needs assessment followed by pre- and post-training surveys to evaluate MOUD pharmacology knowledge and best prescribing practices. Results: Of LCOM students surveyed, 77.6% reported interest in being waivered to prescribed MOUD for OUD treatment. Third-year medical students demonstrated increases in both MOUD Pharmacology Knowledge from 64.2% to 84.8% (chi-squared = 40.8; p < .001) and MOUD Best Prescribing Practices from 55.9% to 75.2% (chi-squared = 29.9; p < .001). Discussion: Surveys showed the majority of students felt waiver training was relevant to their future practice. An online DATA 2000 waiver training format effectively improved student knowledge of MOUD. Conclusion: This curriculum exposed medical students to DATA 2000 waiver training, MOUD pharmacology and best practices, and increased the number of future physicians eligible to treat OUD using MOUD.

Identifying Barriers to Access and Utilization of Preventive Health-Care Services by Young Adults in Vermont.

PURPOSE: The objective of this study was to examine barriers to accessing and utilizing routine preventive health-care checkups for Vermont young adults. METHODS: A population-based analysis was conducted using aggregated data from the 2011-2014 Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System (BRFSS) surveys of Vermont young adults aged 18-25 years (N = 1,329). Predictors analyzed as barriers were classified county of residence, health-care coverage, and annual household income level, as well as covariates, with the outcome of the length of time since the last routine checkup. RESULTS: A total of 81.1% of Vermont young adults reported having a routine checkup in the past 2 years. Health-care coverage was a predictor of undergoing routine checkups within the past 2 years, with 85.2% of insured respondents undergoing checkups compared with 56.3% of uninsured respondents (p < .001). Additionally, 81.9% of respondents from Vermont counties classified as mostly rural reported undergoing a checkup within the past 2 years (p < .05). A total of 80.8% of respondents from the middle level (p < .05) and 89.0% of respondents from the highest level (p < .001) of annual household incomes reported undergoing a checkup in the past 2 years. Finally, age (p < .001) and sex (p < .01) were shown to indicate receipt of routine preventive checkups more often. CONCLUSIONS: For Vermont young adults, health-care coverage, classified county of residence, and household income level were shown to be indicators of undergoing routine preventive health care more often. Further investigation is needed to examine how these barriers may impede preventive screenings, thereby contributing to the ongoing development of health-care guidelines and policies for young adults in rural settings.