The Safety of Inpatient Health Care.

BACKGROUND: Adverse events during hospitalization are a major cause of patient harm, as documented in the 1991 Harvard Medical Practice Study. Patient safety has changed substantially in the decades since that study was conducted, and a more current assessment of harm during hospitalization is warranted. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective cohort study to assess the frequency, preventability, and severity of patient harm in a random sample of admissions from 11 Massachusetts hospitals during the 2018 calendar year. The occurrence of adverse events was assessed with the use of a trigger method (identification of information in a medical record that was previously shown to be associated with adverse events) and from review of medical records. Trained nurses reviewed records and identified admissions with possible adverse events that were then adjudicated by physicians, who confirmed the presence and characteristics of the adverse events. RESULTS: In a random sample of 2809 admissions, we identified at least one adverse event in 23.6%. Among 978 adverse events, 222 (22.7%) were judged to be preventable and 316 (32.3%) had a severity level of serious (i.e., caused harm that resulted in substantial intervention or prolonged recovery) or higher. A preventable adverse event occurred in 191 (6.8%) of all admissions, and a preventable adverse event with a severity level of serious or higher occurred in 29 (1.0%). There were seven deaths, one of which was deemed to be preventable. Adverse drug events were the most common adverse events (accounting for 39.0% of all events), followed by surgical or other procedural events (30.4%), patient-care events (which were defined as events associated with nursing care, including falls and pressure ulcers) (15.0%), and health care-associated infections (11.9%). CONCLUSIONS: Adverse events were identified in nearly one in four admissions, and approximately one fourth of the events were preventable. These findings underscore the importance of patient safety and the need for continuing improvement. (Funded by the Controlled Risk Insurance Company and the Risk Management Foundation of the Harvard Medical Institutions.).

The Safety of Outpatient Health Care : Review of Electronic Health Records.

BACKGROUND: Despite considerable emphasis on delivering safe care, substantial patient harm occurs. Although most care occurs in the outpatient setting, knowledge of outpatient adverse events (AEs) remains limited. OBJECTIVE: To measure AEs in the outpatient setting. DESIGN: Retrospective review of the electronic health record (EHR). SETTING: 11 outpatient sites in Massachusetts in 2018. PATIENTS: 3103 patients who received outpatient care. MEASUREMENTS: Using a trigger method, nurse reviewers identified possible AEs and physicians adjudicated them, ranked severity, and assessed preventability. Generalized estimating equations were used to assess the association of having at least 1 AE with age, sex, race, and primary insurance. Variation in AE rates was analyzed across sites. RESULTS: The 3103 patients (mean age, 52 years) were more often female (59.8%), White (75.1%), English speakers (90.8%), and privately insured (70.4%) and had a mean of 4 outpatient encounters in 2018. Overall, 7.0% (95% CI, 4.6% to 9.3%) of patients had at least 1 AE (8.6 events per 100 patients annually). Adverse drug events were the most common AE (63.8%), followed by health care-associated infections (14.8%) and surgical or procedural events (14.2%). Severity was serious in 17.4% of AEs, life-threatening in 2.1%, and never fatal. Overall, 23.2% of AEs were preventable. Having at least 1 AE was less often associated with ages 18 to 44 years than with ages 65 to 84 years (standardized risk difference, -0.05 [CI, -0.09 to -0.02]) and more often associated with Black race than with Asian race (standardized risk difference, 0.09 [CI, 0.01 to 0.17]). Across study sites, 1.8% to 23.6% of patients had at least 1 AE and clinical category of AEs varied substantially. LIMITATION: Retrospective EHR review may miss AEs. CONCLUSION: Outpatient harm was relatively common and often serious. Adverse drug events were most frequent. Rates were higher among older adults. Interventions to curtail outpatient harm are urgently needed. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE: Controlled Risk Insurance Company and the Risk Management Foundation of the Harvard Medical Institutions.

Effect of Automated Real-Time Feedback on Early-Sepsis Care: A Pragmatic Clinical Trial.

OBJECTIVES: To determine if a real-time monitoring system with automated clinician alerts improves 3-hour sepsis bundle adherence. DESIGN: Prospective, pragmatic clinical trial. Allocation alternated every 7 days. SETTING: Quaternary hospital from December 1, 2020 to November 30, 2021. PATIENTS: Adult emergency department or inpatients meeting objective sepsis criteria triggered an electronic medical record (EMR)-embedded best practice advisory. Enrollment occurred when clinicians acknowledged the advisory indicating they felt sepsis was likely. INTERVENTION: Real-time automated EMR monitoring identified suspected sepsis patients with incomplete bundle measures within 1-hour of completion deadlines and generated reminder pages. Clinicians responsible for intervention group patients received reminder pages; no pages were sent for controls. The primary analysis cohort was the subset of enrolled patients at risk of bundle nonadherent care that had reminder pages generated. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: The primary outcome was orders for all 3-hour bundle elements within guideline time limits. Secondary outcomes included guideline-adherent delivery of all 3-hour bundle elements, 28-day mortality, antibiotic discontinuation within 48-hours, and pathogen recovery from any culture within 7 days of time-zero. Among 3,269 enrolled patients, 1,377 had reminder pages generated and were included in the primary analysis. There were 670 (48.7%) at-risk patients randomized to paging alerts and 707 (51.3%) to control. Bundle-adherent orders were placed for 198 intervention patients (29.6%) versus 149 (21.1%) controls (difference: 8.5%; 95% CI, 3.9-13.1%; p = 0.0003). Bundle-adherent care was delivered for 152 (22.7%) intervention versus 121 (17.1%) control patients (difference: 5.6%; 95% CI, 1.4-9.8%; p = 0.0095). Mortality was similar between groups (8.4% vs 8.3%), as were early antibiotic discontinuation (35.1% vs 33.4%) and pan-culture negativity (69.0% vs 68.2%). CONCLUSIONS: Real-time monitoring and paging alerts significantly increased orders for and delivery of guideline-adherent care for suspected sepsis patients at risk of 3-hour bundle nonadherence. The trial was underpowered to determine whether adherence affected mortality. Despite enrolling patients with clinically suspected sepsis, early antibiotic discontinuation and pan-culture negativity were common, highlighting challenges in identifying appropriate patients for sepsis bundle application.

What Went Right? A Mixed-Methods Study of Positive Feedback Data in a Hospital-Wide Mortality Review Survey.

BACKGROUND: Toxic work culture contributes to healthcare worker burnout and attrition, but little is known about how healthcare organizations can systematically create and promote a culture of civility and collegiality. OBJECTIVE: To analyze peer-to-peer positive feedback collected as part of a systematized mortality review survey to identify themes and recognition dynamics that can inform positive organizational culture change. DESIGN: Convergent mixed-methods study design. PARTICIPANTS: A total of 388 physicians, 212 registered nurses, 64 advanced practice providers, and 1 respiratory therapist at four non-profit hospitals (2 academic and 2 community). INTERVENTION: Providing optional positive feedback in the mortality review survey. MAIN MEASURES: Key themes and subthemes that emerged from positive feedback data, associations between key themes and positive feedback respondent characteristics, and recognition dynamics between positive feedback respondents and recipients. KEY RESULTS: Approximately 20% of healthcare workers provided positive feedback. Three key themes emerged among responses with free text comments: (1) providing extraordinary patient and family-centered care; (2) demonstrating self-possession and mastery; and (3) exhibiting empathic peer support and effective team collaboration. Compared to other specialties, most positive feedback from medicine (70.2%), neurology (65.2%), hospice and palliative medicine (64.3%), and surgery (58.8%) focused on providing extraordinary patient and family-centered care (p = 0.02), whereas emergency medicine (59.1%) comments predominantly focused on demonstrating self-possession and mastery (p = 0.06). Registered nurses (40.2%) provided multidirectional positive feedback more often than other clinician types in the hospital hierarchy (p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Analysis of positive feedback from a mortality review survey provided meaningful insights into a health system's culture of teamwork and values related to civility and collegiality when providing end-of-life care. Systematic collection and sharing of positive feedback is feasible and has the potential to promote positive culture change and improve healthcare worker well-being.

Design and Implementation of a Real-time Monitoring Platform for Optimal Sepsis Care in an Emergency Department: Observational Cohort Study.

BACKGROUND: Sepsis is the leading cause of death in US hospitals. Compliance with bundled care, specifically serial lactates, blood cultures, and antibiotics, improves outcomes but is often delayed or missed altogether in a busy practice environment. OBJECTIVE: This study aims to design, implement, and validate a novel monitoring and alerting platform that provides real-time feedback to frontline emergency department (ED) providers regarding adherence to bundled care. METHODS: This single-center, prospective, observational study was conducted in three phases: the design and technical development phase to build an initial version of the platform; the pilot phase to test and refine the platform in the clinical setting; and the postpilot rollout phase to fully implement the study intervention. RESULTS: During the design and technical development, study team members and stakeholders identified the criteria for patient inclusion, selected bundle measures from the Center for Medicare and Medicaid Sepsis Core Measure for alerting, and defined alert thresholds, message content, delivery mechanisms, and recipients. Additional refinements were made based on 70 provider survey results during the pilot phase, including removing alerts for vasopressor initiation and modifying text in the pages to facilitate patient identification. During the 48 days of the postpilot rollout phase, 15,770 ED encounters were tracked and 711 patient encounters were included in the active monitoring cohort. In total, 634 pages were sent at a rate of 0.98 per attending physician shift. Overall, 38.3% (272/711) patients had at least one page. The missing bundle elements that triggered alerts included: antibiotics 41.6% (136/327), repeat lactate 32.4% (106/327), blood cultures 20.8% (68/327), and initial lactate 5.2% (17/327). Of the missing Sepsis Core Measures elements for which a page was sent, 38.2% (125/327) were successfully completed on time. CONCLUSIONS: A real-time sepsis care monitoring and alerting platform was created for the ED environment. The high proportion of patients with at least one alert suggested the significant potential for such a platform to improve care, whereas the overall number of alerts per clinician suggested a low risk of alarm fatigue. The study intervention warrants a more rigorous evaluation to ensure that the added alerts lead to better outcomes for patients with sepsis.

Colorectal Surgical Site Infection Prevention Kits Prior to Elective Colectomy Improve Outcomes.

INTRODUCTION: Patient compliance with preoperative mechanical and antibiotic bowel preparation, skin washes, carbohydrate loading, and avoidance of fasting are key components of successful colorectal ERAS and surgical site infection (SSI)-reduction programs. In July 2016, we began a quality improvement project distributing a free SSI Prevention Kit (SSIPK) containing patient instructions, mechanical and oral bowel preparation, chlorhexidine washes, and carbohydrate drink to all patients scheduled for elective colectomy, with the goal of improving patient compliance and rates of SSI. METHODS: This was a prospective data audit of our first 221 SSIPK+ patients, who were compared to historical controls (SSIPK-) of 1760 patients undergoing elective colectomy from January 2013 to March 2017. A 1:1 propensity score system accounted for nonrandom treatment assignment. Matched patients' complications, particularly postoperative infection and ileus, were compared. RESULTS: SSIPK+ (n = 219) and SSIPK- (n = 219) matched patients were statistically identical on demographics, comorbidities, BMI, surgical indication, and procedure. SSIPK+ patients had higher compliance with mechanical (95% vs 71%, P < 0.001) and oral antibiotic (94% vs 27%, P < 0.001) bowel preparation. This translated into lower overall SSI rates (5.9% vs 11.4%, P = 0.04). SSIPK+ patients also had lower rates of anastomotic leak (2.7% vs 6.8%, P = 0.04), prolonged postoperative ileus (5.9% vs 14.2%, P < 0.01), and unplanned intubation (0% vs 2.3%, P = 0.02). Furthermore, SSIPK+ patients had shorter mean hospital length of stay (3.1 vs 5.4 d, P < 0.01) and had fewer unplanned readmissions (5.9% vs 14.6%, P < 0.001). There were no differences in rates of postoperative pneumonia, urinary tract infection, Clostridium difficile colitis, sepsis, or death. CONCLUSION: Provision of a free-of-charge SSIPK is associated with higher patient compliance with preoperative instructions and significantly lower rates of surgical site infections, lower rates of prolonged postoperative ileus, and shorter hospital stays with fewer readmissions. Widespread utilization of such a bundle could therefore lead to significantly improved outcomes.

What Have We Learned From Malpractice Claims Involving the Surgical Management of Benign Biliary Disease?: A 128 Million Dollar Question.

OBJECTIVE: We aimed to study the contributing factors and costs of malpractice claims involving the surgical management of benign biliary disease given the emotional, physical, and financial toll of these claims on patients, providers, and the healthcare system. SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA: Cholecystectomy complications carry significant morbidity and rank among the leading sources of surgical malpractice claims. METHODS: Using the CRICO Strategies' Comparative Benchmarking System database, representing approximately 30% of all paid and unpaid malpractice claims in the United States, 4081 closed claims filed against general surgeons from 1995 to 2015 were reviewed to isolate 745 cholecystectomy-related claims. A multivariable model was used to determine factors associated with claim outcome. RESULTS: The most common associated complications included bile duct injury (n = 397), bowel perforation (n = 96), and hemorrhage (n = 78). Bile duct injuries were recognized intraoperatively only 19% of the time and required biliary reconstruction surgery 77% of the time. The total cost for all claims over the study period was over $128 M and the median time from event to case close was over 3 years. 40% of claims resulted in patient payout; of these, most claims were settled out of court and the median cost per claim was $264,650. For the 60% of claims not resulting in patient payout, most cases were denied, dropped, or dismissed, yet still averaged over $15,000 per claim in legal and administrative fees. On multivariable analysis, bile duct injury, bowel perforation, and high clinical severity were associated with patient payout, while a resident or fellow being named in a claim was negatively associated with patient payout (P < 0.05). CONCLUSION: Cholecystectomy-related claims are costly and time-consuming. Strategies that reduce the risk and aid in recognition of cholecystectomy complications, as well as advance support of patients and families after poor outcomes, may improve clinical care and reduce claim burden.

A Long, Unnerving Road: Malpractice Claims Involving the Surgical Management of Thyroid and Parathyroid Disease.

BACKGROUND: Given their profound emotional, physical, and financial toll on patients and surgeons, we studied the characteristics, costs, and contributing factors of thyroid and parathyroid surgical malpractice claims. METHODS: Using the Controlled Risk Insurance Company Strategies' Comparative Benchmarking System database, representing ~30% of all US paid and unpaid malpractice claims, 5384 claims filed against general surgeons and otolaryngologists from 1995-2015 were reviewed to isolate claims involving the surgical management of thyroid and parathyroid disease. These claims were studied, and multivariable regression analysis was performed to identify factors associated with plaintiff payout. RESULTS: One hundred twenty-eight thyroid and parathyroid surgical malpractice claims were isolated. The median time from alleged harm event to closure of a malpractice case was 39 months. The most common associated complications were bilateral recurrent laryngeal nerve (RLN) injury (n = 23) and hematoma (n = 18). Complications led to death in 18 cases. Patient payout occurred in 33% of claims (n = 42), and the median cost per claim was $277,913 (IQR $87,343-$783,663). On multivariable analysis, bilateral RLN injury was predictive of patient payout (OR 3.58, p = 0.03), while procedure, death, and surgeon specialty were not. CONCLUSION: Though rare, malpractice claims related to thyroid and parathyroid surgery are costly, time-consuming, and reveal opportunities for early surgeon-patient resolution after poor outcomes.

72h returns: A trigger tool for diagnostic error.

BACKGROUND: Patients who return to the Emergency Department (ED) within 72h of discharge are often used for ED Quality Assurance efforts, however little is known about the yield of this kind of review and the types of errors it identifies. Our objective was to identify the prevalence, types and severity of errors in these cases. METHODS: Retrospective review of patients who presented to an urban, university affiliated ED between 10/1/2012-9/30/2015 who returned within 72 h requiring hospital admission. RESULTS: There were 413,167 ED visits during the study period with 2001 (0.48%) patients who returned within 72h and were admitted to the hospital. An event requiring further investigation was identified in 59 (2.95%) of these patients and 50 (2.49%) of them were deemed to represent a deviation from optimal care. Of these, 48 (96%) represented diagnostic error. When a standard diagnostic process of care framework was applied to these, the majority of cases represented failures in the initial diagnostic pathway (29 cases, 60.4%). When Error Severity Codes were applied, 16 (32%) resulted in minor harm and 34 (68%) resulted in major harm or death. CONCLUSION: Screening of 72h ED returns has low yield in identifying suboptimal care, with less than 3% of cases representing deviations from standard care. Of these, the majority represent cognitive errors in the diagnostic pathway. These reviews may be useful as a tool for Ongoing Professional Practice Evaluation of individual clinicians, however likely serve less value in identifying systems issues contributing to unsafe care.

The Hidden Cost of Regulation: The Administrative Cost of Reporting Serious Reportable Events.

BACKGROUND: More than half of the 50 states (27) and the District of Columbia require reporting of Serous Reportable Events (SREs). The goal is to hold providers accountable and improve patient safety, but there is little information about the administrative cost of this reporting requirement. This study was conducted to identify costs associated with investigating and reporting SREs. METHODS: This qualitative study used case study methods that included interviewing staff and review of data and documents to investigate each SRE occurring at one academic medical center during fiscal year 2013. A framework of tasks and a model to categorize costs was created. Time was summarized and costs were estimated for each SRE. RESULTS: The administrative cost to process 44 SREs was estimated at $353,291, an average cost of $8,029 per SRE, ranging $6,653 for an environmental-related SRE to $21,276 for a device-related SRE. Care management SREs occurred most frequently, costing an average $7,201 per SRE. Surgical SREs, the most expensive on average, cost $9,123 per SRE. Investigation of events accounted for 64.5% of total cost; public reporting, 17.2%; internal reporting, 10.2%; finance and administration, 6.0%; and 2.1%, other. Even with 26 states mandating reporting, the 17.2% incremental cost of public reporting is substantial. CONCLUSION: Policy makers should consider the opportunity costs of these resources, averaging $8,029 per SRE, when mandating reporting. The benefits of public reporting should be collectively reviewed to ensure that the incremental costs in this resource-constrained environment continue to improve patient safety and that trade-offs are acknowledged.

New Mandated Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services Requirements for Sepsis Reporting: Caution from the Field.

BACKGROUND: The release of the Center for Medicare and Medicaid Service's (CMS) latest quality measure, Severe Sepsis/Septic Shock Early Management Bundle (SEP-1), has intensified the long-standing debate over optimal care for severe sepsis and septic shock. Although the last decade of research has demonstrated the importance of comprehensive bundled care in conjunction with compliance mechanisms to reduce patient mortality, it is not clear that SEP-1 achieves this aim. The heterogeneous and often cryptic presentation of severe sepsis and septic shock, along with the multifaceted criteria for the definition of this clinical syndrome, pose a particular challenge for fitting requirements to this disease, and implementation could have unintended consequences. OBJECTIVE: Following a simulated reporting exercise, in which 50 charts underwent expert review, we aimed to detail the challenges of, and offer suggestions on how to rethink, measuring performance in severe sepsis and septic shock care. DISCUSSION: There were several challenges associated with the design and implementation of this measure. The ambiguous definition of severe sepsis and septic shock, prescriptive fluid volume requirements, rigid reassessment, and complex abstraction logic all raise significant concern. CONCLUSIONS: Although SEP-1 represents an important first step in requiring hospitals to improve outcomes for patients with severe sepsis and septic shock, the current approach must be revisited. The volume and complexity of the currently required SEP-1 reporting elements deserve serious consideration and revision before they are used as measures of accountability and tied to reimbursement.

Association of magnetic resonance imaging for back pain on seven-day return visit to the Emergency Department.

BACKGROUND: The prevalence of back pain is rising, as is the use of high-cost imaging in the ED. The objective of our study was to determine if an MRI in the ED for patients with back pain resulted in a lower incidence of ED return visit and to determine if these patients had longer ED length of stay (LOS) and use of ED observation. METHODS: A retrospective cohort study of consecutive patients seen with back pain was conducted at an urban, university-affiliated ED between 1 January 2012 and 11 July 2014. The association of MRI on return within 7 days was assessed using a χ2 test and a multivariable logistic regression model and the difference in median ED LOS was compared using a Wilcoxon rank-sum test. RESULTS: During the study period, 6094 patients were evaluated in the ED with back pain as the primary diagnosis. Of these, 797 (13%) received an MRI. Among all patients with back pain, 277 (4.5%) returned within 7 days. Univariate analysis found that patients who received an MRI were no less likely to return within 7 days than patients who did not (4.3% vs 4.6%; p=0.68). Patients who had an MRI were more likely to be admitted to observation (74.2% vs 10.8%; p<0.0001) and had a longer ED LOS (median 4.8 hours vs 2.7; p<0.0001). Multivariable regression confirmed that MRI did not decrease the rate of a 7-day return visit (OR=0.98; 95% CI 0.68 to 1.42). CONCLUSIONS: In patients with uncomplicated back pain, performing an MRI will not mitigate their likelihood of return; however, it leads to a longer ED LOS and more ED observation admissions.

Reporting trends and outcomes in ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction national hospital quality assessment programs.

BACKGROUND: For patients who undergo primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) for ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction, the door-to-balloon time is an important performance measure reported to the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) and tied to hospital quality assessment and reimbursement. We sought to assess the use and impact of exclusion criteria associated with the CMS measure of door-to-balloon time in primary PCI. METHODS AND RESULTS: All primary PCI-eligible patients at 3 Massachusetts hospitals (Brigham and Women's, Massachusetts General, and North Shore Medical Center) were evaluated for CMS reporting status. Rates of CMS reporting exclusion were the primary end points of interest. Key secondary end points were between-group differences in patient characteristics, door-to-balloon times, and 1-year mortality rates. From 2005 to 2011, 26% (408) of the 1548 primary PCI cases were excluded from CMS reporting. This percentage increased over the study period from 13.9% in 2005 to 36.7% in the first 3 quarters of 2011 (P<0.001). The most frequent cause of exclusion was for a diagnostic dilemma such as a nondiagnostic initial ECG, accounting for 31.2% of excluded patients. Although 95% of CMS-reported cases met door-to-balloon time goals in 2011, this was true of only 61% of CMS-excluded cases and consequently 82.6% of all primary PCI cases performed that year. The 1-year mortality for CMS-excluded patients was double that of CMS-included patients (13.5% versus 6.6%; P<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: More than a quarter of patients who underwent primary PCI were excluded from hospital quality reports collected by CMS, and this percentage has grown substantially over time. These findings may have significant implications for our understanding of process improvement in primary PCI and mechanisms for reimbursement through Medicare.

Long-Term Sustainability and Adaptation of I-PASS Handovers.

BACKGROUND: Inadequate communication during transitions of care is a major health care quality and safety vulnerability. In 2013 Massachusetts General Hospital (MGH) embarked on a comprehensive training program using a standardized handover system (I-PASS) that had been shown to reduce adverse events by 30% even when not completely executed on each patient. In this cross-sectional study, the authors sought to characterize handover practices six years later. METHODS: Using a standardized interview tool, the researchers evaluated handovers between responding clinicians in 10 departments and then validated these findings through direct observations, allowing for flexibility and customization in the I-PASS elements. The study qualitatively compared I-PASS element use in verbal handovers to MGH early postintervention data, as well as verbal and written handovers with the I-PASS Study Group's postintervention results. RESULTS: The authors observed 156 verbal and reviewed 182 written patient handovers. Ninety percent of departments adhered at least partially to the I-PASS system. Average handover duration ranged from 0.6 to 2.1 minutes per established patient. The service with best I-PASS adherence also consistently included the most information per unit of time. Acknowledging substantial differences in study technique, MGH adherence was, on average, comparable or better on all I-PASS elements in verbal handovers and on three of four elements of written handovers compared with the I-PASS Study Group's postintervention results. CONCLUSION: Although uptake has varied across services, six years after hospitalwide implementation of I-PASS, the majority of services are performing structured and sequenced handovers, most of which include some elements of the I-PASS system. Those services with the best I-PASS adherence conducted the most efficient handovers.

Development and Implementation of a Practical Onboarding Curriculum for Physician Quality and Safety Leaders.

Physicians are increasingly asked to assume quality and safety (Q&S) leadership roles; prior experience varies, and onboarding training is limited. Semistructured interviews were completed with physician Q&S leaders; interview responses were analyzed using 2-step rapid analysis. Interview learnings informed development of a 2-day onboarding training and complementary digital resource repository. Attendees were surveyed to evaluate the training. Thirteen semistructured interviews with physician leaders from 6 academic medical centers demonstrated 61.5% had no formal Q&S training before assuming their role. Respondents identified a range of knowledge gaps. A 2-day virtual onboarding training and complementary digital repository were created. Attendee surveys demonstrated 96% (73/76) believed the training would be "extremely" or "moderately" helpful to others. Subject-matter familiarity across all content areas improved after the training. Using front-line stakeholder input, a pilot onboarding curriculum for Q&S leaders was created. Future work includes ongoing implementation and iterative improvement.

The association of hospital research publications and clinical quality.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the quantity and impact of research publications among US acute care hospitals; to identify hospital characteristics associated with publication volumes; and to estimate the independent association of bibliometric indicators with Hospital Compare quality measures. DATA SOURCES: Hospital Compare; American Hospital Association Survey; Magnet Recognition Program; Science Citation Index Expanded. STUDY DESIGN: In cross-sectional studies using a 40% random sample of US Medicare-participating hospitals, we estimated associations of hospital characteristics with publication volumes and associations of hospital-linked bibliometric indicators with 19 Hospital Compare quality metrics. DATA COLLECTION/EXTRACTION METHODS: Using standardized search strategies, we identified all publications attributed to authors from these institutions from January 1, 2015 to December 31, 2016 and their subsequent citations through July 2020. PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: Only 647 of 1604 study hospitals (40.3%) had ≥1 publication. Council of Teaching Hospitals and Health Systems (COTH) hospitals had significantly more publications (average 599 vs. 11 for non-COTH teaching and 0.6 for nonteaching hospitals), and their publications were cited more frequently (average 22.6/publication) than those from non-COTH teaching (18.2 citations) or nonteaching hospitals (12.8 citations). In multivariable regression, teaching intensity, hospital beds, New England or Pacific region, and not-for-profit or government ownership were significant predictors of higher publication volumes; the percentage of Medicaid admissions was inversely associated. In multivariable linear regression, hospital publications were associated with significantly lower risk-adjusted mortality rates for acute myocardial infarction (coefficient -0.52, p = 0.01), heart failure (coefficient -0.74, p = 0.004), pneumonia (coefficient -1.02, p = 0.001), chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (coefficient -0.48, p = 0.005), and coronary artery bypass surgery (coefficient -0.73, p < 0.0001); higher overall Hospital Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems (HCAHPS) ratings (coefficient 2.37, p = 0.04); and greater patient willingness to recommend (coefficient 3.38, p = 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: A minority of US hospitals published in the biomedical literature. Publication quantity and impact indicators are independently associated with lower risk-adjusted mortality and higher HCAHPS scores.