A survey-based study: assessing inpatient attending perspectives on teaching learners, feeling valued, and symptoms of burnout.

BACKGROUND: Physician burnout is rising, especially among academic physicians facing pressures to increase their clinical workload, lead administrative tasks and committees, and be active in research. There is a concern this could have downstream effects on learners' experiences and academic physician's ability to teach learners on the team. METHODS: A 29-question RedCap survey was electronically distributed to 54 attending physicians within an academic learning health system who oversaw the General Medicine inpatient teaching services during the 2022-2023 academic year. The aims were to assess this cohort of attending physicians' experiences, attitudes, and perceptions on their ability to effectively teach learners on the team, feeling valued, contributors to work-life balance and symptoms of burnout, Fisher's Exact Tests were used for data analysis. RESULTS: Response rate was 56%. Attendings splitting time 50% inpatient / 50% outpatient felt that team size and type of admissions model affected their ability to effectively teach learners (p = 0.022 and p = 0.049). Attendings with protected administrative time felt that non-patient care obligations affected their ability to effectively teach the learners (p = 0.019). Male attendings and attendings with ≤ 5 years of General Medicine inpatient teaching experience felt less valued by residency leadership (p = 0.019 and p = 0.026). 80% of attendings experienced emotional exhaustion, and those with > 10 weeks on a General Medicine inpatient teaching service were more likely to experience emotional exhaustion (p = 0.041). Attendings with > 10 weeks on a General Medicine inpatient teaching service and those who were a primary caregiver were more likely to experience depersonalization (p = 0.012 and p = 0.031). 57% of attendings had reduced personal achievement. CONCLUSIONS: Institutions should seek an individual and organizational approach to professional fulfillment. Special attention to these certain groups is warranted to understand how they can be better supported. Further research, such as with focus groups, is needed to address these challenges.

Predicting short-term adverse outcomes in the geriatric population presenting with syncope: a comparison of existing syncope rules and beyond.

OBJECTIVES: Syncope at age 65+ is associated with increased mortality, irrespective of cause. Syncope rules were designed to aid in risk-stratification but were only validated in the general adult population. Our objective was to determine if they can be applied to a geriatric population in predicting short-term adverse outcomes. METHODS: In this single-center retrospective study, we evaluated 350 patients aged 65+ presenting with syncope. Exclusion criteria included confirmed non-syncope, active medical condition, drug or alcohol-related syncope. Patients were stratified into high or low risk based on Canadian Syncope Risk Score (CSRS), Evaluation of Guidelines in Syncope Study (EGSYS), San Francisco Syncope Rule (SFSR), and Risk Stratification of Syncope in the Emergency Department (ROSE). Composite adverse outcomes at 48-hour and 30-day included all-cause mortality, major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events (MACCE), return emergency department visit, hospitalization, or medical intervention. We assessed each score's ability to predict the outcomes using logistic-regression and compared performances using receiver-operator curves. Multivariate analyses were performed to study the associations between recorded parameters and outcomes. RESULTS: CSRS outperformed with AUC of 0.732 (95% CI: 0.653-0.812) and 0.749 (95% CI: 0.688-0.809) for 48-h and 30-day outcomes, respectively. Sensitivities for CSRS, EGSYS, SFSR, and ROSE for 48-hour outcomes were 48%, 65%, 42% and 19%; and for 30-day outcomes were 72%, 65%, 30% and 55%, respectively. Atrial fibrillation/flutter on EKG, congestive heart failure, antiarrhythmics, systolic blood-pressure < 90 at triage, and associated chest pain highly correlated with 48-h outcomes. An EKG abnormality, heart disease history, severe pulmonary hypertension, BNP > 300, vasovagal predisposition, and antidepressants highly correlated with 30-day outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: Performance and accuracy of four prominent syncope rules were suboptimal in identifying high-risk geriatric patients with short-term adverse outcomes. We identified some significant clinical and laboratory information that may play a role in predicting short-term adverse events in a geriatric cohort.

Impact of structured interdisciplinary bedside rounding on patient outcomes at a large academic health centre.

BACKGROUND: Effective communication between healthcare providers and patients and their family members is an integral part of daily care and discharge planning for hospitalised patients. Several studies suggest that team-based care is associated with improved length of stay (LOS), but the data on readmissions are conflicting. Our study evaluated the impact of structured interdisciplinary bedside rounding (SIBR) on outcomes related to readmissions and LOS. METHODS: The SIBR team consisted of a physician and/or advanced practice provider, bedside nurse, pharmacist, social worker and bridge nurse navigator. Outcomes were compared in patients admitted to a hospital medicine unit using SIBR (n=1451) and a similar control unit (n=770) during the period of October 2016 to September 2017. Multivariable negative binomial regression analysis was used to compare LOS and logistic regression analysis was used to calculate 30-day and 7-day readmission in patients admitted to SIBR and control units, adjusting for covariates. RESULTS: Patients admitted to SIBR and control units were generally similar (p≥0.05) with respect to demographic and clinical characteristics. Unadjusted readmission rates in SIBR patients were lower than in control patients at both 30 days (16.6% vs 20.3%, p=0.03) and 7 days (6.3% vs 9.0%, p=0.02) after discharge, while LOS was similar. After adjusting for covariates, SIBR was not significantly related to the odds of 30-day readmission (OR 0.81, p=0.07) but was lower for 7-day readmission (OR 0.70, p=0.03); LOS was similar in both groups (p=0.58). CONCLUSION: SIBR did not reduce LOS and 30-day readmissions but had a significant impact on 7-day readmissions.