BACKGROUND: Implementation of more stringent regulations on duty hours and supervision by the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education in July 2011 makes it challenging to design inpatient Medicine teaching service that complies with the duty hour restrictions while optimizing continuity of patient care. OBJECTIVE: To prospectively compare two inpatient Medicine teaching service structures with respect to residents' impression of continuity of patient care (primary outcome), time available for teaching, resident satisfaction and length-of-stay (secondary endpoints). DESIGN: Observational pre-post study. METHODS: Surveys were conducted both before and after Conventional Medicine teaching service was changed to a novel model (MegaTeam). SETTINGS: Academic General Medicine inpatient teaching service. RESULTS: Surveys before and after MegaTeam implementation were completed by 68.5% and 72.2% of internal medicine residents, respectively. Comparing conventional with MegaTeam, the % of residents who agreed or strongly agreed that the (i) ability to care for majority of patients from admission to discharge increased from 29.7% to 86.6% (p<0.01); (ii) the concern that number of handoffs was too many decreased from 91.9% to 18.2% (p<0.01); (iii) ability to provide appropriate supervision to interns increased from 38.1% to 70.7% (p<0.01); (iv) overall resident satisfaction with inpatient Medicine teaching service increased from 24.7% to 56.4% (p<0.01); and (v) length-of-stay on inpatient Medicine service decreased from 5.3±6.2 to 4.9±6.8 days (p<0.03). CONCLUSIONS: According to our residents, the MegaTeam structure promotes continuity of patient care, decreases number of handoffs, provides adequate supervision and teaching of interns and medical students, increases resident overall satisfaction and decreases length-of-stay.
BACKGROUND: Implementation of more stringent regulations on duty hours and supervision by the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education in July 2011 makes it challenging to design inpatient Medicine teaching service that complies with the duty hour restrictions while optimizing continuity of patient care. OBJECTIVE: To prospectively compare two inpatient Medicine teaching service structures with respect to residents' impression of continuity of patient care (primary outcome), time available for teaching, resident satisfaction and length-of-stay (secondary endpoints). DESIGN: Observational pre-post study. METHODS: Surveys were conducted both before and after Conventional Medicine teaching service was changed to a novel model (MegaTeam). SETTINGS: Academic General Medicine inpatient teaching service. RESULTS: Surveys before and after MegaTeam implementation were completed by 68.5% and 72.2% of internal medicine residents, respectively. Comparing conventional with MegaTeam, the % of residents who agreed or strongly agreed that the (i) ability to care for majority of patients from admission to discharge increased from 29.7% to 86.6% (p<0.01); (ii) the concern that number of handoffs was too many decreased from 91.9% to 18.2% (p<0.01); (iii) ability to provide appropriate supervision to interns increased from 38.1% to 70.7% (p<0.01); (iv) overall resident satisfaction with inpatient Medicine teaching service increased from 24.7% to 56.4% (p<0.01); and (v) length-of-stay on inpatient Medicine service decreased from 5.3±6.2 to 4.9±6.8 days (p<0.03). CONCLUSIONS: According to our residents, the MegaTeam structure promotes continuity of patient care, decreases number of handoffs, provides adequate supervision and teaching of interns and medical students, increases resident overall satisfaction and decreases length-of-stay.
Authors: James S Kahn; Ronald M Witteles; Kenneth W Mahaffey; Sumbul A Desai; Errol Ozdalga; Paul A Heidenreich Journal: Adv Med Educ Pract Date: 2017-08-02