U.S. Internists' Perspectives on Discussing Cost of Care With Patients: Structured Interviews and a Survey.

Background: Rising out-of-pocket costs are creating a need for cost conversations between patients and physicians. Objective: To understand the factors that influence physicians to discuss and consider cost during a patient encounter. Design: Mixed-methods study using semistructured interviews and a survey. Setting: United States. Participants: 20 internal medicine physicians were interviewed; 621 internal medicine physician members of the American College of Physicians completed the survey. Measurements: Interviews were analyzed by using thematic analysis, and surveys were analyzed by using descriptive statistics. Results: From the interviews, 4 themes were identified: Physicians are 1) aware that patients are struggling to afford medical care; 2) relying on clues from patients that hint at their cost sensitivity; 3) relying on experience to anticipate potentially high-cost treatments; and 4) aware that patients are making financial trade-offs to afford their care. Three quarters (n = 466) of survey respondents stated that they consider out-of-pocket costs when making most clinical decisions. For 31% (n = 191) of participants, there were times in the past year that they wanted to discuss out-of-pocket prescription drug costs with patients but did not. The most influential factors for ordering a test are the desire to be as thorough as possible (71% [n = 422]) and insurance coverage for the test (68% [n = 422]). Limitation: Findings are self-reported, the sample is limited to a single specialty, the survey response rate was low, information on the patient population was limited, and the survey instrument is not validated. Conclusion: Physicians are attuned to the burden of health care costs and are willing to consider alternative options based on a patient's cost sensitivity. Primary Funding Source: Robert Wood Johnson Foundation.

Actions and processes that patients, family members, and physicians associate with patient- and family-centered care.

BACKGROUND: Patient- and family-centered care (PFCC) is increasingly linked to improved communication, care quality, and patient decision making. However, in order to consistently implement and study PFCC, health care systems and researchers need a solid evidentiary base. Most current definitions and models of PFCC are broad and conceptual, and difficult to translate into measurable behaviors and actions. This paper provides a brief overview of all actions that focus group respondents associated with PFCC in ambulatory (outpatient) care settings and then explores actions associated with the concept of "dignity and respect" in greater detail. METHODS: We conducted nine focus groups with patients, family members, and physicians in three metropolitan regions across the United States. Group discussions were transcribed and analyzed using a thematic analysis approach. RESULTS: We identified 14 domains and 47 specific actions that patients, family members, and physicians associate with PFCC. In addition to providing a detailed matrix of these domains and actions, this paper details the actions associated with the "dignity and respect" concept. Key domains identified under "dignity and respect" include: 1) building relationships, 2) providing individualized care, and 3) respecting patients' time. Within these domains we identified specific actions that break down these abstract ideas into explicit and measurable units such as taking time, listening, including family, and minimizing wait times. We identified 9, 6, and 3 specific actions associated, respectively, with building relationships, providing individualized care, and respecting patients' time. CONCLUSIONS: Our work fills a critical gap in our ability to understand and measure PFCC in ambulatory care settings by breaking down abstract concepts about PFCC into specific measurable actions. Our findings can be used to support research on how PFCC affects clinical outcomes and develop innovative tools and policies to support PFCC.

Principles for Patient and Family Partnership in Care: An American College of Physicians Position Paper.

In this position paper, the American College of Physicians (ACP) examines the rationale for patient and family partnership in care and reviews outcomes associated with this concept, including greater adherence to care plans, improved satisfaction, and lower costs. The paper also explores and acknowledges challenges associated with implementing patient- and family-centered models of care. On the basis of a comprehensive literature review and a multistakeholder vetting process, the ACP's Patient Partnership in Healthcare Committee developed a set of principles that form the foundation for authentic patient and family partnership in care. The principles position patients in their rightful place at the center of care while acknowledging the importance of partnership between the care team and patient in improving health care and reducing harm. The principles state that patients and families should be treated with dignity and respect, be active partners in all aspects of their care, contribute to the development and improvement of health care systems, and be partners in the education of health care professionals. This paper also recommends ways to implement these principles in daily practice.

Glycemic control mentored implementation: creating a national network of shared information.

BACKGROUND: The Society of Hospital Medicine's (SHM's) Glycemic Control Mentored Implementation (GCMI) program, which, like all MI programs, is conducted as an improvement collaborative, is intended to help hospitals improve inpatient glycemic control in diabetic and nondiabetic patients by educating and mentoring quality teams. METHODS: Hospital quality improvement (QI) teams applied for participation in GCMI from 2009 through 2012. Accepted sites were assigned either a hospitalist or endocrinologist mentor to work through the life cycle of a QI project. SHM's Implementation Guide, online resources, measurement strategies, Web-based Glycemic Control Data Center for Performance Tracking, webinars, interactive list-serve, and other tools help mentors guide these teams through the program. Mentors in GCMI bring expertise in both inpatient glycemic control and QI. RESULTS: One hundred fourteen hospital QI teams were enrolled into the GCMI program in the course of 2.5 years. Of these 114 sites, 90 completed the program, with 63 of them uploading data to the Data Center. Feedback from the sites was consistently positive, with the listserve, Data Center, and mentorship reported as the top three most effective components of the program. Ninety-five percent of respondents stated that they would recommend participation in an SHM-mentored implementation program to a colleague. Participants reported improved leadership skills and increased institutional support for glycemic control. CONCLUSIONS: Hospital quality teams participating in the GCMI program gained support to overcome barriers, focus on improving glycemic control, network with peers and expert mentor physicians, collect and analyze data, and build quality leaders. The features and structure of this program can be used in other multisite QI goals and projects.

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.

Function of the Medical Team Quarterback: Patient, Family, and Physician Perspectives on Team Care Coordination in Patient- and Family-Centered Primary Care.

CONTEXT: Patient- and family-centered care (PFCC) literature is growing, but few reports present patient, caregiver, and practitioner perspectives about care coordination in a team-based model. OBJECTIVE: To understand the patient's, caregiver's, and physician's ideal forms of PFCC, we investigated the function of the medical team quarterback, who coordinates and advocates for appropriate care, and probed to understand how the quarterback works with a team to contribute to ideal PFCC. DESIGN AND MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Nine focus groups with 92 participants were held in 3 major cities. Patients (n = 35) and family members (n = 36) were recruited through market research groups. Physicians (n = 21) were recruited by the American College of Physicians. Focus group transcripts were analyzed and coded using inductive analysis. RESULTS: The quarterback emerged as an important function for addressing care gaps and improving the care experience. We identified 6 themes articulated by participants that defined the role of a medical team quarterback: Overseeing care; coordinating diagnoses, tests, and treatments; advocating for patients; identifying and respecting patient values; proactively communicating; and solving problems. Patients and family members in our sample were open to different members of the care team acting as quarterback in coordination with the physician. CONCLUSION: Medical team quarterbacks were perceived as enhancing team-based care by facilitating the coordination/communication that is critical to PFCC. Patients and family members acknowledged that PFCC can be delivered by different members of the medical team if the care felt organized and coordinated with the primary care physician.

Promoting Patient and Family Partnerships in Ambulatory Care Improvement: A Narrative Review and Focus Group Findings.

INTRODUCTION: Ambulatory practices that actively partner with patients and families in quality improvement (QI) report benefits such as better patient/family interactions with physicians and staff, and patient empowerment. However, creating effective patient/family partnerships for ambulatory care improvement is not yet routine. The objective of this paper is to provide practices with concrete evidence about meaningfully involving patients and families in QI activities. METHODS: Review of literature published from 2000-2015 and a focus group conducted in 2014 with practice advisors. RESULTS: Thirty articles discussed 26 studies or examples of patient/family partnerships in ambulatory care QI. Patient and family partnership mechanisms included QI committees and advisory councils. Facilitators included process transparency, mechanisms for acting on patient/family input, and compensation. Challenges for practices included uncertainty about how best to involve patients and families in QI. Several studies found that patient/family partnership was a catalyst for improvement and reported that partnerships resulted in process improvements. Focus group results were concordant. CONCLUSION: This paper describes emergent mechanisms and processes that ambulatory care practices use to partner with patients and families in QI including outcomes, facilitators, and challenges. FUNDING: Gordon and Betty Moore Foundation.

The Interdisciplinary Academy for Coaching and Teamwork (I-ACT): A novel approach for training faculty experts in preventing healthcare-associated infection.

BACKGROUND: The Interdisciplinary Academy for Coaching and Teamwork (I-ACT) was an advanced course aimed at educating leaders of a quality improvement project on addressing clinical challenges associated with catheter-associated urinary tract infection (CAUTI), overcoming socioadaptive issues among a multidisciplinary team, and effective coaching. METHODS: The I-ACT course provided substantial opportunities for interaction among participants and faculty experts through role playing. Participants were grouped so that each discipline of a potential CAUTI improvement team was represented during interactive components of the training. Precourse and postcourse surveys were used to assess participants' comfort in addressing various challenges associated with implementation of interventions. RESULTS: After the course, participants expressed improved comfort with using the tools provided to address challenging socioadaptive issues. Written comments indicated that the participants valued being able to learn from experts and meet in a face-to-face setting. CONCLUSIONS: The I-ACT course was successful in training faculty to serve as improvement experts for US hospitals working on CAUTI prevention. After completing the course, participants felt that their comfort and ability to address complex improvement problems had improved. This model may be effective for use in preparing improvement project leaders and participants to tackle other healthcare-associated infections and complex quality problems.

Choosing wisely in adult hospital medicine: five opportunities for improved healthcare value.

BACKGROUND: In an effort to lead physicians in addressing the problem of overuse of medical tests and treatments, the American Board of Internal Medicine Foundation developed the Choosing Wisely campaign. The Society of Hospital Medicine (SHM) joined the initiative to highlight the need to critically appraise resource utilization in hospitals. METHODS: The SHM employed a staged methodology to develop the adult Choosing Wisely list. This included surveys of the organization's leaders and general membership, a review of the literature, and Delphi panel voting. RESULTS: The 5 recommendations that were subsequently approved by the SHM Board are: (1) Do not place, or leave in place, urinary catheters for incontinence or convenience or monitoring of output for non-critically ill patients (acceptable indications: critical illness, obstruction, hospice, perioperatively for <2 days for urologic procedures; use weights instead to monitor diuresis). (2) Do not prescribe medications for stress ulcer prophylaxis to medical inpatients unless at high risk for gastrointestinal complications. (3) Avoid transfusions of red blood cells for arbitrary hemoglobin or hematocrit thresholds and in the absence of symptoms or active coronary disease, heart failure, or stroke. (4) Do not order continuous telemetry monitoring outside of the intensive care unit without using a protocol that governs continuation. (5) Do not perform repetitive complete blood count and chemistry testing in the face of clinical and lab stability. CONCLUSIONS: Hospitalists have many opportunities to impact overutilization of care. The adult hospital medicine Choosing Wisely recommendations offer an explicit starting point for eliminating waste in the hospital.

Choosing wisely in pediatric hospital medicine: five opportunities for improved healthcare value.

BACKGROUND: Despite estimates that waste constitutes up to 20% of healthcare expenditures in the United States, overuse of tests and therapies is significantly under-recognized in medicine, particularly in pediatrics. The American Board of Internal Medicine Foundation developed the Choosing Wisely campaign, which challenged medical societies to develop a list of 5 things physicians and patients should question. The Society of Hospital Medicine (SHM) joined this effort in the spring of 2012. This report provides the pediatric work group's results. METHODS: A work group of experienced and geographically dispersed pediatric hospitalists was convened by the Quality and Safety Committee of the SHM. This group developed an initial list of 20 recommendations, which was pared down through a modified Delphi process to the final 5 listed below. RESULTS: The top 5 recommendations proposed for pediatric hospital medicine are: (1) Do not order chest radiographs in children with asthma or bronchiolitis. (2) Do not use systemic corticosteroids in children under 2 years of age with a lower respiratory tract infection. (3) Do not use bronchodilators in children with bronchiolitis. (4) Do not treat gastroesophageal reflux in infants routinely with acid suppression therapy. (5) Do not use continuous pulse oximetry routinely in children with acute respiratory illness unless they are on supplemental oxygen. CONCLUSION: We recommend that pediatric hospitalists use this list to prioritize quality improvement efforts and include issues of waste and overuse in their efforts to improve patient care.