Project BOOST implementation: lessons learned.

OBJECTIVES: Enhancing care coordination and reducing hospital readmissions have been a focus of multiple quality improvement (QI) initiatives. Project BOOST (Better Outcomes by Optimizing Safe Transitions) aims to enhance the discharge transition from hospital to home. Previous research indicates that QI initiatives originating externally often face difficulties gaining momentum or effecting lasting change in a hospital. We performed a qualitative evaluation of Project BOOST implementation by examining the successes and failures experienced by six pilot sites. We also evaluated the unique physician mentoring component of this program. Finally, we examined the impact of intensification of the physician mentoring model on adoption of BOOST interventions in two later Illinois cohorts (27 hospitals). METHODS: Qualitative analysis of six pilot hospitals used a process of methodological triangulation and analysis of the BOOST enrollment applications, the listserv, and content from telephone interviews. Evaluation of BOOST implementation at Illinois hospitals occurred via mid-year and year-end surveys. RESULTS: The identified common barriers included inadequate understanding of the current discharge process, insufficient administrative support, lack of protected time or dedicated resources, and lack of frontline staff buy-in. Facilitators of implementation included the mentor, a small beginning, teamwork, and proactive engagement of the patient. Notably, hospitals viewed their mentors as essential facilitators of change. Sites consistently commented that the individualized mentoring was extremely helpful and provided significant accountability and stimulated creativity. In the Illinois cohorts, the improved mentoring model showed more complete implementation of BOOST interventions. CONCLUSIONS: The implementation of Project BOOST was well received by hospitals, although sites faced substantial barriers consistent with other QI research reports. The unique mentorship element of Project BOOST proved extremely valuable in helping sites overcome their distinctive challenges and identify facilitators for success. The findings from this qualitative study should contribute to future BOOST implementation success and others' efforts to optimize hospital discharge transitions.

2011 John M. Eisenberg Patient Safety and Quality Awards. Mentored implementation: building leaders and achieving results through a collaborative improvement model. Innovation in patient safety and quality at the national level.

BACKGROUND: The Society of Hospital Medicine (SHM) created "Mentored Implementation" (MI) programs with the dual aims of educating and mentoring hospitalists and their quality improvement (QI) teams and accelerating improvement in the inpatient setting in three signature programs: Venous Thromboembolism (VTE) Prevention, Glycemic Control, and Project BOOST (Better Outcomes for Older adults through Safe Transitions). METHODS: More than 300 hospital improvement teams were enrolled in SHM MI programs in a series of cohorts. Hospitalist mentors worked with individual hospitals/health systems to guide local teams through the life cycle of a QI project. Implementation Guides and comprehensive Web-based "Resource Rooms," as well as the mentor's own experience, provided best-practice definitions, practical implementation tips, measurement strategies, and other tools. E-mail interactions and mentoring were augmented by regularly scheduled teleconferences; group webinars; and, in some instances, a site visit. Performance was tracked in a centralized data tracking center. RESULTS: Preliminary data on all three MI programs show significant improvement in patient outcomes, as well as enhancements of communication and leadership skills of the hospitalists and their QI teams. CONCLUSIONS: Although objective data on outcomes and process measures for the MI program's efficacy remain preliminary at this time, the maturing data tracking system, multiple awards, and early results indicate that the MI programs are successful in providing QI training and accelerating improvement efforts.

Transitions of Care Consensus Policy Statement American College of Physicians-Society of General Internal Medicine-Society of Hospital Medicine-American Geriatrics Society-American College of Emergency Physicians-Society of Academic Emergency Medicine.

The American College of Physicians (ACP), Society of Hospital Medicine (SHM), Society of General Internal Medicine (SGIM), American Geriatric Society (AGS), American College of Emergency Physicians (ACEP) and the Society for Academic Emergency Medicine (SAEM) developed consensus standards to address the quality gaps in the transitions between inpatient and outpatient settings. The following summarized principles were established: 1.) Accountability; 2) Communication; 3.) Timely interchange of information; 4.) Involvement of the patient and family member; 5.) Respect the hub of coordination of care; 6.) All patients and their family/caregivers should have a medical home or coordinating clinician; 7.) At every point of transitions the patient and/or their family/caregivers need to know who is responsible for their care at that point; 9.) National standards; and 10.) Standardized metrics related to these standards in order to lead to quality improvement and accountability. Based on these principles, standards describing necessary components for implementation were developed: coordinating clinicians, care plans/transition record, communication infrastructure, standard communication formats, transition responsibility, timeliness, community standards, and measurement.

The physician mentored implementation model: a promising quality improvement framework for health care change.

Quality improvement (QI) efforts hold great promise for improving care delivery. However, hospitals often struggle with QI implementation and fail to sustain improvement in either process changes or patient outcomes. Physician mentored implementation (PMI) is a novel approach that promotes the success and sustainability of QI initiatives at hospitals. It leverages the expertise of external physician mentors who coach QI teams to implement interventions at their local hospitals. The PMI model includes five core components: (1) a hospital self-assessment tool, (2) a face-to-face training session including direct interaction with a physician mentor, (3) a guided continuous quality improvement and systems approach, (4) yearlong individual physician mentoring, and (5) a learning community supported by a resource center, listserv, and webinars. Mentors provide content and process expertise, rather than offering "one-size-fits-all" technical assistance that might not be sustained after the mentoring year ends. Mentors support and motivate QI teams throughout the planning and implementation phases of their interventions, help to engage hospital leadership, garner local physician buy-in, and address institutional barriers. Mentors also guide hospitals to identify opportunities for the adaptation and customization of original evidence-based models of care while ensuring the fidelity of those models. More than 350 hospitals have used the PMI model to implement successful national and statewide QI initiatives. Academic medical centers are charged with improving the health of patients and reengineering care delivery; thus, they serve as the ideal source for physician mentors and can act as leaders in implementing QI projects using the PMI model.

Project BOOST: effectiveness of a multihospital effort to reduce rehospitalization.

BACKGROUND: Rehospitalization is a prominent target for healthcare quality improvement and performance-based reimbursement. The generalizability of existing evidence on best practices is unknown. OBJECTIVE: To determine the effect of Project BOOST (Better Outcomes for Older adults through Safe Transitions) on rehospitalization rates and length of stay. DESIGN: Semicontrolled pre-post study. SETTING/PARTICIPANTS: Volunteer sample of 11 hospitals varying in geography, size, and academic affiliation. INTERVENTION: Hospitals implemented Project BOOST-recommended tools supported by an external quality improvement physician mentor. METHODS: Pre-post changes in readmission rates and length of stay within BOOST units, and between BOOST units and site-designated control units. RESULTS: The average rate of 30-day rehospitalization in BOOST units was 14.7% prior to implementation and 12.7% 12 months later (P = 0.010), reflecting an absolute reduction of 2% and a relative reduction of 13.6%. Rehospitalization rates for matched control units were 14.0% in the preintervention period and 14.1% in the postintervention period (P = 0.831). The mean absolute reduction in readmission rates in BOOST units compared to control units was 2.0% (P = 0.054 for signed rank test comparing differences in readmission rate reduction in BOOST units compared to site-matched control units). CONCLUSIONS: Participation in Project BOOST appeared to be associated with a decrease in readmission rates.

Hospital quality and patient safety competencies: development, description, and recommendations for use.

BACKGROUND: Hospitalists are poised to have a tremendous impact on improving the quality of care for hospitalized patients. However, many hospitalists are inadequately prepared to engage in efforts to improve quality, because medical schools and residency programs have not traditionally emphasized healthcare quality and patient safety in their curricula. METHODS: Through a multistep process, the Society of Hospital Medicine (SHM) Quality Improvement Education (QIE) subcommittee developed the Hospital Quality and Patient Safety (HQPS) Competencies to provide a framework for developing and assessing curricula and other professional development experiences. This article describes the development, provides definitions, and makes recommendations on the use of the HQPS Competencies. RESULTS: The 8 areas of competence include: Quality Measurement and Stakeholder Interests, Data Acquisition and Interpretation, Organizational Knowledge and Leadership Skills, Patient Safety Principles, Teamwork and Communication, Quality and Safety Improvement Methods, Health Information Systems, and Patient Centeredness. Reflecting differing levels of hospitalist involvement in healthcare quality, 3 levels of expertise within each area of competence have been established: basic, intermediate, and advanced. Standards for each competency area use carefully selected action verbs to reflect educational goals for hospitalists at each level. CONCLUSIONS: Formal incorporation of the HQPS Competencies into professional development programs, and innovative educational initiatives and curricula, will help provide current hospitalists and the next generations of hospitalists with the needed skills to be successful.

Transitions of Care Consensus policy statement: American College of Physicians, Society of General Internal Medicine, Society of Hospital Medicine, American Geriatrics Society, American College Of Emergency Physicians, and Society for Academic Emergency Medicine.

The American College of Physicians, Society of Hospital Medicine, and Society of General Internal Medicine convened a multi-stakeholder consensus conference in July 2007 to address the quality gaps in the transitions between inpatient and outpatient settings and to develop consensus standards for these transitions. Over 30 organizations sent representatives to the Transitions of Care Consensus Conference. Participating organizations included medical specialty societies from internal medicine as well as family medicine and pediatrics, governmental agencies such as the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality and the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, performance measure developers such as the National Committee for Quality Assurance and the American Medical Association Physician Consortium on Performance Improvement, nurse associations such as the Visiting Nurse Associations of America and Home Care and Hospice, pharmacist groups, and patient groups such as the Institute for Family-Centered Care. The Transitions of Care Consensus Conference made recommendations for standards concerning the transitions between inpatient and outpatient settings for future implementation. The American College of Physicians, Society of Hospital Medicine, Society of General Internal Medicine, American Geriatric Society, American College of Emergency Physicians, and Society for Academic Emergency Medicine all endorsed this document.

Impact of Society of Hospital Medicine workshops on hospitalists' knowledge and perceptions of health care-associated infections and antimicrobial resistance.

BACKGROUND: Health care-associated infections and antimicrobial resistance threaten the safety of hospitalized patients. New prevention strategies are necessary to address these problems. In response, the Society of Hospital Medicine (SHM) in collaboration with the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention developed and conducted workshops to educate hospitalists about conducting quality improvement programs to address antimicrobial resistance and health care-associated infections in hospitalized patients. METHODS: SHM collected and analyzed data from pretests and posttests administered to physicians who attended SHM workshops in 2005 in 1 of 3 major cities: Denver, Colorado; Boston, Massachusetts; or Portland, Oregon. RESULTS: A total of 69 SHM members attended the workshops, and 50 completed both a pretest and a posttest. Scores on the knowledge-based questions increased significantly from pretest to posttest (x = 48% vs. 63%, P < .0001); however, perceptions of the problem of antimicrobial resistance did not change. Most participants (85%) rated the quality of the workshop as "very good" or "excellent" and rated the workshop sessions as "useful" (x = 3.9 on a 5.0 scale). CONCLUSIONS: Hospitalists who attended the SHM workshop increased their knowledge of health care-associated infections, antimicrobial resistance, and quality improvement programs related to these issues. Similar workshops should be considered in efforts to prevent health care-associated infections and antimicrobial resistance.

Spreading the word, not the infection: reaching hospitalists about the prevention of antimicrobial resistance.

BACKGROUND: To reach and engage hospitalists in the prevention of antimicrobial resistance, the Society of Hospital Medicine and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention developed and conducted a quality improvement workshop based on the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's Campaign to Prevent Antimicrobial Resistance in Healthcare Settings. METHODS: We aimed to examine motivating factors, perceived barriers, and cues to action for hospitalists to learn about and engage in the prevention of antimicrobial resistance and to determine whether a workshop can facilitate the implementation of a quality improvement project. Using the Health Belief Model as a theoretical framework, we interviewed hospitalists who attended (attendees) and did not attend (nonattendees) the workshop. Data were qualitatively coded and analyzed. RESULTS: Nine attendees and 10 nonattendees participated in interviews. Motivating factors for attending the workshop included an interest in the topic of quality improvement and antimicrobial resistance prevention, the promotion of the workshop by institutions and colleagues, the opportunity to network with colleagues, and the qualifications of the presenter. Barriers to involvement in quality improvement efforts and the prevention of antimicrobial resistance for both attendees and nonattendees included perceived lack of time, other institutional priorities, and lack of administrative and institutional support. Attendees and nonattendees also identified perceived effective and preferred methods for receiving information about antimicrobial resistance, such as workshops and presentations, e-mail, institutional involvement, and the Internet. Overall, attendees thought that the workshop could be effective in facilitating the implementation of a quality improvement project. CONCLUSION: By considering factors that influence behavioral change, interventions, such as the Society of Hospital Medicine workshop, have the ability to reach and engage clinicians such as hospitalists in quality improvement efforts to prevent antimicrobial resistance and improve adherence to infection control strategies. Furthermore, this study demonstrated that the Health Belief Model can provide an applicable framework for examining factors that influence clinician behavior.

Core competencies in hospital medicine: development and methodology.

BACKGROUND: The hospitalist model of inpatient care has been rapidly expanding over the last decade, with significant growth related to the quality and efficiency of care provision. This growth and development have stimulated a need to better define and characterize the field of hospital medicine. Training and developing curricula specific to hospital medicine are the next step in the evolution of the field. METHODS: The Core Competencies in Hospital Medicine: A Framework for Curriculum Development (the Core Competencies), by the Society of Hospital Medicine, introduces the expectations of hospitalists and provides an initial structural framework to guide medical educators in developing curricula that incorporate these competencies into the training and evaluation of students, clinicians-in-training, and practicing hospitalists. This article outlines the process that was undertaken to develop the Core Competencies, which included formation of a task force and editorial board, development of a topic list, the solicitation for and writing of chapters, and the execution of multiple reviews by the editorial board and both internal and external reviewers. RESULTS: This process culminated in the Core Competencies document, which is divided into three sections: Clinical Conditions, Procedures, and Healthcare Systems. The chapters in each section delineate the core knowledge, skills, and attitudes necessary for effective inpatient practice while also incorporating a systems organization and improvement approach to care coordination and optimization. CONCLUSIONS: These competencies should be a common reference and foundation for the creation of hospital medicine curricula and serve to standardize and improve inpatient training practices.