Charlie M Wray1, Andrea Flores1, William V Padula2, Micah T Prochaska1, David O Meltzer1,3, Vineet M Arora4,5. 1. Section of Hospital Medicine, University of Chicago Medical Center, Chicago, Illinois. 2. Department of Health Policy & Management, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, Maryland. 3. Department of Economics and the Harris School of Public Policy Studies, University of Chicago, Chicago, Illinois. 4. Pritzker School of Medicine, University of Chicago, Chicago, Illinois. 5. Section of General Internal Medicine, University of Chicago Medical Center, Chicago, Illinois.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Data comparing patient experiences between general medicine teaching and nonteaching hospitalist services are lacking. OBJECTIVE: Evaluate hospitalized patients' experience on general medicine teaching and nonteaching hospitalist services by assessing patients' confidence in their ability to identify their physician(s), understand their roles, and their rating of the coordination and overall care. METHODS: Retrospective cohort analysis of general medicine teaching and nonteaching hospitalist services from 2007 to 2013 at an academic medical center. Patients were surveyed 30-days after hospital discharge regarding their confidence in their ability to identify their physician(s), understand the role of their physician(s), and their perceptions of coordination and overall care. A 3-level, mixed effects logistic regression was performed to ascertain the association between service type and patient-reported outcomes. RESULTS: Data from 4591 general medicine teaching and 1811 nonteaching hospitalist service patients demonstrated that those cared for by the hospitalist service were more likely to report being able to identify their physician (50% vs 45%, P < 0.001), understand their role (54% vs 50%, P < 0.001), and rate greater satisfaction with coordination (68 vs 64%, P = 0.006) and overall care (73% vs 67%, P < 0.001). In regression models, the hospitalist service was associated with higher ratings in overall care (odds ratio [OR]: 1.33; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.15-1.47), even when hospitalists were the attendings on general medicine teaching services (OR: 1.17; 95% CI: 1.01-1.31). CONCLUSION: Patients on a nonteaching hospitalist service rated their overall care slightly better than patients on a general medicine teaching service. Team structure and complexity may play a role in this difference.
BACKGROUND: Data comparing patient experiences between general medicine teaching and nonteaching hospitalist services are lacking. OBJECTIVE: Evaluate hospitalized patients' experience on general medicine teaching and nonteaching hospitalist services by assessing patients' confidence in their ability to identify their physician(s), understand their roles, and their rating of the coordination and overall care. METHODS: Retrospective cohort analysis of general medicine teaching and nonteaching hospitalist services from 2007 to 2013 at an academic medical center. Patients were surveyed 30-days after hospital discharge regarding their confidence in their ability to identify their physician(s), understand the role of their physician(s), and their perceptions of coordination and overall care. A 3-level, mixed effects logistic regression was performed to ascertain the association between service type and patient-reported outcomes. RESULTS: Data from 4591 general medicine teaching and 1811 nonteaching hospitalist service patients demonstrated that those cared for by the hospitalist service were more likely to report being able to identify their physician (50% vs 45%, P < 0.001), understand their role (54% vs 50%, P < 0.001), and rate greater satisfaction with coordination (68 vs 64%, P = 0.006) and overall care (73% vs 67%, P < 0.001). In regression models, the hospitalist service was associated with higher ratings in overall care (odds ratio [OR]: 1.33; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.15-1.47), even when hospitalists were the attendings on general medicine teaching services (OR: 1.17; 95% CI: 1.01-1.31). CONCLUSION:Patients on a nonteaching hospitalist service rated their overall care slightly better than patients on a general medicine teaching service. Team structure and complexity may play a role in this difference.
Authors: Christopher S Kim; William Lovejoy; Michael Paulsen; Robert Chang; Scott A Flanders Journal: J Hosp Med Date: 2010 Jul-Aug Impact factor: 2.960
Authors: Matthew D Tipping; Victoria E Forth; Kevin J O'Leary; David M Malkenson; David B Magill; Kate Englert; Mark V Williams Journal: J Hosp Med Date: 2010 Jul-Aug Impact factor: 2.960
Authors: Vincenza Snow; Dennis Beck; Tina Budnitz; Doriane C Miller; Jane Potter; Robert L Wears; Kevin B Weiss; Mark V Williams Journal: J Hosp Med Date: 2009-07 Impact factor: 2.960
Authors: Vineet M Arora; Caitlin Schaninger; Michael D'Arcy; Julie K Johnson; Holly J Humphrey; James N Woodruff; David O Meltzer Journal: Jt Comm J Qual Patient Saf Date: 2009-12
Authors: Kevin J O'Leary; Nita Kulkarni; Matthew P Landler; Jiyeon Jeon; Katherine J Hahn; Katherine M Englert; Mark V Williams Journal: Mayo Clin Proc Date: 2010-01 Impact factor: 7.616
Authors: Jennifer P Stevens; David J Nyweide; Sha Maresh; Laura A Hatfield; Michael D Howell; Bruce E Landon Journal: JAMA Intern Med Date: 2017-12-01 Impact factor: 21.873
Authors: Katie L Lappé; Sonja E Raaum; Claire E Ciarkowski; Santosh P Reddy; Stacy A Johnson Journal: J Gen Intern Med Date: 2020-03-24 Impact factor: 5.128