I-CaRe: a case review tool focused on improving inpatient care.

I-CaRe, an inpatient case review tool that walks individual physician reviewers through the details of a patient case, facilitates the collection and assessment of quality and safety data both for internal quality improvement initiatives and external reporting.

A multidisciplinary teamwork training program: the Triad for Optimal Patient Safety (TOPS) experience.

INTRODUCTION: Communication and teamwork failures are a common cause of adverse events. Residency programs, with a mandate to teach systems-based practice, are particularly challenged to address these important skills. AIM: To develop a multidisciplinary teamwork training program focused on teaching teamwork behaviors and communication skills. SETTING: Internal medicine residents, hospitalists, nurses, pharmacists, and all other staff on a designated inpatient medical unit at an academic medical center. PROGRAM DESCRIPTION: We developed a 4-h teamwork training program as part of the Triad for Optimal Patient Safety (TOPS) project. Teaching strategies combined didactic presentation, facilitated discussion using a safety trigger video, and small-group scenario-based exercises to practice effective communication skills and team behaviors. Development, planning, implementation, delivery, and evaluation of TOPS Training was conducted by a multidisciplinary team. PROGRAM EVALUATION: We received 203 evaluations with a mean overall rating for the training of 4.49 +/- 0.79 on a 1-5 scale. Participants rated the multidisciplinary educational setting highly at 4.59 +/- 0.68. DISCUSSION: We developed a multidisciplinary teamwork training program that was highly rated by all participating disciplines. The key was creating a shared forum to learn about and discuss interdisciplinary communication and teamwork.

Early Experiences After Adopting a Quality Improvement Portfolio Into the Academic Advancement Process.

PROBLEM: Academic medical centers (AMCs) and their academic departments are increasingly assuming leadership in the education, science, and implementation of quality improvement (QI) and patient safety efforts. Fostering, recognizing, and promoting faculty leading these efforts is challenging using traditional academic metrics for advancement. APPROACH: The authors adapted a nationally developed QI portfolio, adopted it into their own department's advancement process in 2012, and tracked its utilization and impact over the first two years of implementation. OUTCOMES: Sixty-seven QI portfolios were submitted with 100% of faculty receiving their requested academic advancement. Women represented 60% of the submitted portfolios, while the Divisions of General Internal Medicine and Hospital Medicine accounted for 60% of the submissions. The remaining 40% were from faculty in 10 different specialty divisions. Faculty attitudes about the QI portfolio were overwhelmingly positive, with 83% agreeing that it "was an effective tool for helping to better recognize faculty contributions in QI work" and 85% agreeing that it "was an effective tool for elevating the importance of QI work in our department." NEXT STEPS: The QI portfolio was one part of a broader effort to create opportunities to recognize and support faculty involved in improvement work. Further adapting the tool to ensure that it complements-rather than duplicates-other elements of the advancement process is critical for continued utilization by faculty. This will also drive desired dissemination to other departments locally and other AMCs nationally who are similarly committed to cultivating faculty career paths in systems improvement.

The expanding role of hospitalists in the United States.

Hospitalists are the most rapidly growing group of providers in the United States; in a few years, there will be more hospitalists than cardiologists in the U.S. While early growth in the field was driven by financial demands on hospitals, more recent incentives include a growing focus on improving the quality and safety of care. With current evidence suggesting both financial and educational benefits from the increased presence of hospitalists in both teaching and non-teaching settings, the environment is ripe for further expansion. Hospitalists are likely to embrace a number of additional clinical and non-clinical roles in the coming years. They will serve as change agents, hospital leaders and experts in both quality improvement activities and research initiatives around improving inpatient care delivery. As their skills sets and unique competencies become more clearly outlined, the next step will likely be the development of an independent specialty with its own board certification.

Improving the Ambulatory Patient Experience Within an Academic Department of Medicine.

Academic departments of medicine (ADOM) can provide an important vehicle to drive the sharing and dissemination of best practices in clinical care delivery. With the increased focus on improving the patient experience, particularly in the ambulatory setting, ADOM also should lead efforts to cultivate improvements in this arena. To address this need, the study ADOM established a Patient Experience Working Group (PEWG) that brought together physician and nonphysician leaders, set improvement goals, and created a structure for sharing and learning. Since initiation, the PEWG has implemented more than 20 performance improvement initiatives, which have resulted in measured positive changes at both the local practice settings and department-wide. Striking the right balance between top-down governance, bottom-up innovation and ownership, and shared goal setting was a key to success. This model is one that could easily be adopted by other ADOM in their own efforts to improve the patient experience.

National trends in statin use by coronary heart disease risk category.

BACKGROUND: Only limited research tracks United States trends in the use of statins recorded during outpatient visits, particularly use by patients at moderate to high cardiovascular risk. METHODS AND FINDINGS: Data collected between 1992 and 2002 in two federally administered surveys provided national estimates of statin use among ambulatory patients, stratified by coronary heart disease risk based on risk factor counting and clinical diagnoses. Statin use grew from 47% of all lipid-lowering medications in 1992 to 87% in 2002, with atorvastatin being the leading medication in 2002. Statin use by patients with hyperlipidemia, as recorded by the number of patient visits, increased significantly from 9% of patient visits in 1992 to 49% in 2000 but then declined to 36% in 2002. Absolute increases in the rate of statin use were greatest for high-risk patients, from 4% of patient visits in 1992 to 19% in 2002. Use among moderate-risk patients increased from 2% of patient visits in 1992 to 14% in 1999 but showed no continued growth subsequently. In 2002, 1 y after the release of the Adult Treatment Panel III recommendations, treatment gaps in statin use were detected for more than 50% of outpatient visits by moderate- and high-risk patients with reported hyperlipidemia. Lower statin use was independently associated with younger patient age, female gender, African American race (versus non-Hispanic white), and non-cardiologist care. CONCLUSION: Despite notable improvements in the past decade, clinical practice fails to institute recommended statin therapy during many ambulatory visits of patients at moderate-to-high cardiovascular risk. Innovative approaches are needed to promote appropriate, more aggressive statin use for eligible patients.

"Choosing wisely" in an academic department of medicine.

The "Choosing Wisely" campaign seeks to reduce unnecessary care in the United States through self-published recommendations by professional societies. The research team sought to identify factors related to low-value care in the Department of Medicine at the University of California San Francisco, using a subset of clinical scenarios published by the American College of Physicians. The team further explored respondents' values on cost consciousness. A notable minority disagreed with the identified low-value tests. In 6 of 8 scenarios, faculty were more likely to rate the scenarios as representing low-value testing (P < .05). Level of training was the only predictor of attitudes toward unnecessary care after linear regression analysis (coefficient 3.14, P < .001). Increased postgraduate education about cost of care is recommended.

Bringing continuing medical education to the bedside: the University of California, San Francisco Hospitalist Mini-College.

INTRODUCTION: As a relatively new generalist specialty, hospitalists must acquire new competencies that may not have been taught during their training years. Continuing medical education (CME) has traditionally been a mechanism to meet training needs but often fails to apply adult learning principles and fulfill current demands. METHODS: We developed an innovative 3-day course called the University of California, San Francisco Hospitalist Mini-College (UHMC) that brings adult learners to the bedside for small-group learning focused on content areas relevant to today's hospitalists. The program was built on a structure of 4 clinical domains and 2 clinical skills labs. Sessions about patient safety and immersion into traditional academic learning vehicles, such as morning report and a morbidity and mortality conference, were also included. Participants completed a precourse survey and a postcourse evaluation. RESULTS: Over 5 years, 152 participants enrolled and completed the program; 91% completed the pre-UHMC survey and 89% completed the postcourse evaluation. Overall, participants rated the quality of the UHMC course highly (4.65; 1-5 scale). Ninety-eight percent of UHMC participants (n = 57) in 2011 to 2012 reported a "high" or "definite" likelihood to change practice, higher than the 78% reported by the 11,447 participants in other UCSF CME courses during the same time period. DISCUSSION: The UHMC successfully brought participants to an academic health center for a participatory, hands-on, and small-group learning experience that was highly rated. A shift of CME from a hotel conference room to the bedside is feasible, valued by participants, and offers a new paradigm for how to maintain and improve hospitalist competencies.

Role-modeling and medical error disclosure: a national survey of trainees.

PURPOSE: To measure trainees' exposure to negative and positive role-modeling for responding to medical errors and to examine the association between that exposure and trainees' attitudes and behaviors regarding error disclosure. METHOD: Between May 2011 and June 2012, 435 residents at two large academic medical centers and 1,187 medical students from seven U.S. medical schools received anonymous, electronic questionnaires. The questionnaire asked respondents about (1) experiences with errors, (2) training for responding to errors, (3) behaviors related to error disclosure, (4) exposure to role-modeling for responding to errors, and (5) attitudes regarding disclosure. Using multivariate regression, the authors analyzed whether frequency of exposure to negative and positive role-modeling independently predicted two primary outcomes: (1) attitudes regarding disclosure and (2) nontransparent behavior in response to a harmful error. RESULTS: The response rate was 55% (884/1,622). Training on how to respond to errors had the largest independent, positive effect on attitudes (standardized effect estimate, 0.32, P < .001); negative role-modeling had the largest independent, negative effect (standardized effect estimate, -0.26, P < .001). Positive role-modeling had a positive effect on attitudes (standardized effect estimate, 0.26, P < .001). Exposure to negative role-modeling was independently associated with an increased likelihood of trainees' nontransparent behavior in response to an error (OR 1.37, 95% CI 1.15-1.64; P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: Exposure to role-modeling predicts trainees' attitudes and behavior regarding the disclosure of harmful errors. Negative role models may be a significant impediment to disclosure among trainees.

Enculturation of unsafe attitudes and behaviors: student perceptions of safety culture.

PURPOSE: Safety culture may exert an important influence on the adoption and learning of patient safety practices by learners at clinical training sites. This study assessed students' perceptions of safety culture and identified curricular gaps in patient safety training. METHOD: A total of 170 fourth-year medical students at the University of California, San Francisco, were asked to complete a modified version of the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality Hospital Survey on Patient Safety Culture in 2011. Students responded on the basis of either their third-year internal medicine or surgery clerkship experience. Responses were recorded on a five-point Likert scale. Percent positive responses were compared between the groups using a chi-square test. RESULTS: One hundred twenty-one students (71% response rate) rated "teamwork within units" and "organizational learning" highest among the survey domains; "communication openness" and "nonpunitive response to error" were rated lowest. A majority of students reported that they would not speak up when witnessing a possible adverse event (56%) and were afraid to ask questions if things did not seem right (55%). In addition, 48% of students reported feeling that mistakes were held against them. Overall, students reported a desire for additional patient safety training to enhance their educational experience. CONCLUSIONS: Assessing student perceptions of safety culture highlighted important observations from their clinical experiences and helped identify areas for curricular development to enhance patient safety. This assessment may also be a useful tool for both clerkship directors and clinical service chiefs in their respective efforts to promote safe care.

Perspective: a road map for academic departments to promote scholarship in quality improvement and patient safety.

The fields of quality improvement and patient safety (QI/PS) continue to grow with greater attention and awareness, increased mandates and incentives, and more research. Academic medical centers and their academic departments have a long-standing tradition for innovation and scholarship within a multifaceted mission to provide patient care, educate the next generation, and conduct research. Academic departments are well positioned to lead the science, education, and application of QI/PS efforts nationally. However, meaningful engagement of faculty and trainees to lead this work is a major barrier. Understanding and developing programs that foster QI/PS work while also promoting a scholarly focus can generate the incentives and acknowledgment to help elevate QI/PS into the academic mission. Academic departments should define and articulate a QI/PS strategy, develop individual and departmental capacity to lead scholarly QI/PS programs, streamline and support access to data, share information and improve collaboration, and recognize and elevate academic success in QI/PS. A commitment to these goals can also serve to cultivate important collaborations between academic departments and their respective medical centers, divisions, and training programs. Ultimately, the elevation of QI/PS into the academic mission can improve the quality and safety of our health care delivery systems.

Interdisciplinary teamwork in hospitals: a review and practical recommendations for improvement.

Recognizing the importance of teamwork in hospitals, senior leadership from the American College of Physician Executives (ACPE), the American Hospital Association (AHA), the American Organization of Nurse Executives (AONE), and the Society of Hospital Medicine (SHM) established the High Performance Teams and the Hospital of the Future project. This collaborative learning effort aims to redesign care delivery to provide optimal value to hospitalized patients. With input from members of this initiative, we prepared this report which reviews the literature related to teamwork in hospitals. Teamwork is critically important to provide safe and effective hospital care. Hospitals with high teamwork ratings experience higher patient satisfaction, higher nurse retention, and lower hospital costs. Elements of effective teamwork have been defined and provide a framework for assessment and improvement efforts in hospitals. Measurement of teamwork is essential to understand baseline performance, and to demonstrate the utility of resources invested to enhance it and the subsequent impact on patient care. Interventions designed to improve teamwork in hospitals include localization of physicians, daily goals of care forms and checklists, teamwork training, and interdisciplinary rounds. Though additional research is needed to evaluate the impact on patient outcomes, these interventions consistently result in improved teamwork knowledge, ratings of teamwork climate, and better understanding of patients' plans of care. The optimal approach is implementation of a combination of interventions, with adaptations to fit unique clinical settings and local culture.

Effects of a multicentre teamwork and communication programme on patient outcomes: results from the Triad for Optimal Patient Safety (TOPS) project.

BACKGROUND: Improving communication between caregivers is an important approach to improving safety. OBJECTIVE: To implement teamwork and communication interventions and evaluate their impact on patient outcomes. DESIGN: A prospective, interrupted time series of a three-phase INTERVENTION: a run-in period (phase 1), during which a training programme was given to providers and staff on each unit; phase 2, which focused on unit-based safety teams to identify and address care problems using skills from phase 1; and phase 3, which focused on engaging patients in communication efforts. SETTING: General medical inpatient units at three northern California hospitals. PATIENTS: Administrative data were collected from all adults admitted to the target units, and a convenience sample of patients interviewed during and after hospitalisation. MEASUREMENTS: Readmission, length of stay and patient reports of teamwork, problems with care, and overall satisfaction. RESULTS: 10 977 patients were admitted; 581 patients (5.3% of total sample) were interviewed in hospital, and 313 (2.9% overall, 53.8% of interviewed patients) completed 1-month surveys. No phase of the study was associated with adjusted differences in readmission or length of stay. The phase 2 intervention appeared to be associated with improvement in reports of whether physicians treated them with respect, whether nurses treated them with respect or understood their needs (p<0.05 for all). Interestingly, patients were more likely to perceive that an error took place with their care and agreed less that their caregivers worked well together as a team. No phase had a consistent impact on patient reports of care processes or overall satisfaction. Limitations The study lacks direct measures of patient safety. CONCLUSIONS: Efforts to simultaneously improve caregivers' ability to troubleshoot care and enhance communication may improve patients' perception of team functions, but may also increase patients' perception of safety gaps.

Investing in the future: building an academic hospitalist faculty development program.

BACKGROUND: Academic hospital medicine (AHM) groups continue to grow rapidly, driven largely by clinical demands. While new hospitalist faculty usually have strong backgrounds in clinical medicine, they often lack the tools needed to achieve excellence in the other aspects of a faculty career, including teaching, research, quality improvement, and leadership skills. OBJECTIVE: To develop and implement a Faculty Development (FD) Program that improves the knowledge, skills, attitudes, and scholarly output of first-year faculty. INTERVENTION: We created a vision and framework for FD that targeted our new faculty but also engaged our entire Division of Hospital Medicine. New faculty participated in a dedicated coaching relationship with a more senior faculty member, a core curriculum, a teaching course, and activities to meet a set of stated scholarly expectations. All faculty participated in newly established divisional Grand Rounds, a lunch seminar series, and venues to share scholarship and works in progress. RESULTS: Our FD programmatic offerings were rated highly overall on a scale of 1 to 5 (5 highest): Core Seminars 4.83 ± 0.41, Coaching Program 4.5 ± 0.84, Teaching Course 4.5 ± 0.55, Grand Rounds 4.83 ± 0.41, and Lunch Seminars 4.5 ± 0.84. Compared to faculty hired in the 2 years prior to our FD program implementation, new faculty reported greater degrees of work satisfaction, increased comfort with their skills in a variety of areas, and improved academic output. CONCLUSION: Building FD programs can be effective to foster the development and satisfaction of new faculty while also creating a shared commitment towards an academic mission.

Critical conversations: a call for a nonprocedural "time out".

BACKGROUND: Communication failures are an ongoing threat to patient safety. Procedural "time outs" were developed as a method to enhance communication and mitigate patient harm. Nonprocedural settings generate equal risks for communication failure, yet lack a similar communication tool or practice that can be applied, particularly with a patient-driven focus. INNOVATION: Rapidly changing clinical states and care plans are common in the hospital setting, placing patients at risk for adverse events. Certain junctures allow for the highest potential of patient harm-at the time of admission, at a change in clinical condition, and at the time of discharge. Direct communication among healthcare providers at these junctures, which we have dubbed Critical Conversations, can provide an opportunity to clarify plans of care, address or anticipate concerns, and foster greater teamwork. Information exchanged during Critical Conversations includes a combination of checklist-type items and more open-ended questions but they ultimately create a structure and expectation for communication. LESSONS LEARNED: Integration of Critical Conversations into practice requires provider education and buy-in, as well as expectations for them to occur. Monitoring adherence, capturing stories of success, and demonstrating effectiveness may enhance implementation and continuous improvement in the process. CONCLUSIONS: Communication tools designed to reduce the likelihood of patient harm remain a focus of patient safety efforts. Critical Conversations are an innovative communication tool, intervention, and policy that potentially limits communication failures at critical junctures to ensure high quality and safe patient care.

Patient whiteboards as a communication tool in the hospital setting: a survey of practices and recommendations.

BACKGROUND: Patient whiteboards can serve as a communication tool between hospital providers and as a mechanism to engage patients in their care, but little is known about their current use or best practices. METHODS: We surveyed bedside nurses, internal medicine housestaff, and hospitalists from the medical service at the University of California, San Francisco. A brief survey about self-reported whiteboard practices and their impact on patient care was administered via paper and a commercial online survey tool. RESULTS: Surveys were collected from 104 nurse respondents (81% response rate), 118 internal medicine housestaff (74% response rate), and 31 hospitalists (86% response rate). Nurses were far more likely to use and read whiteboards than physicians. While all respondents highly valued the utility of family contact information on whiteboards, nurses valued the importance of a "goal for the day" and an "anticipated discharge date" more than physicians. Most respondents believed that nurses should be responsible for accurate and updated information on whiteboards, that goals for the day should be created by a nurse and physician together, and that unavailability of pens was the greatest barrier to use. DISCUSSION: Despite differences in practice patterns of nurses and physicians in using whiteboards, our findings suggest that all providers value their potential as a tool to improve teamwork, communication, and patient care. Successful adoption of whiteboard use may be enhanced through strategies that emphasize a patient-centered focus while also addressing important barriers to use.