TBD Meeting (4026-18)

Many health care providers are guilty of having implicit or unconscious biases against patients, which can negatively affect the care they give. “Once providers come to this realization, they can make a conscious effort to neutralize these biases from manifesting throughout a practice,” said Aziz Ansari, DO, SFHM, associate chief medical officer, Clinical Optimization and Revenue Integrity, and associate professor of medicine, Loyola University Medical Center, Maywood, Ill., who will present today’s session “Winning Hearts and Minds at the Bedside: Battling Unconscious Bias Through Cultural Humility.”

By practicing cultural humility, hospitalists can gain trust from patients and their families, whom they do not know in their everyday practice. This encourages providers to be humble, ascertain what is important to the patient, and learn from every patient encounter.

The session will begin with a case study involving bias, followed by a self-reflection exercise. To determine whether you may be biased against some patient groups, Dr. Ansari recommends taking the online implicit association test at Implicit.harvard.edu.

As a palliative care specialist, Dr. Ansari has repeatedly faced situations in which a lack of cultural humility caused patients or their family member to foster mistrust toward a provider. Consequently, patients and family members may choose aggressive measures that providers might consider futile.

Dr. Ansari also will define what implicit or unconscious biases entail in greater detail. The discussion will then circle back to the original case and reveal how providers can improve their mindset when facing difficult situations by employing a tool called “The 5 Rs of Cultural Humility,” which include reflection, respect, regard, relevance, and resiliency.

Dr. Ansari spearheaded the development of the 5 Rs tool when he chaired the Cultural Humility Workgroup of SHM’s Practice Management Committee. “The goal is to use the tool to attain cultural humility and transform a potentially negative encounter into a gratifying one,” he said.

At a minimum, attendees should take time during the session to reflect on their own thoughts and biases. “This introspection can bring to light practices that providers may have been unaware of and, ultimately, can change their behaviors so every patient and their family feels that they are being seen and heard,” Dr. Ansari said. “In today’s current climate it is more important than ever for providers to self-reflect on their attitudes and perceptions because an increasing number of groups in our diverse society are feeling more marginalized.”

Winning Hearts and Minds at the Bedside: Battling Unconscious Bias Through Cultural Humility
Wednesday, 9:10-9:50 a.m.
​Crystal Ballroom G2/C-F

Many health care providers are guilty of having implicit or unconscious biases against patients, which can negatively affect the care they give. “Once providers come to this realization, they can make a conscious effort to neutralize these biases from manifesting throughout a practice,” said Aziz Ansari, DO, SFHM, associate chief medical officer, Clinical Optimization and Revenue Integrity, and associate professor of medicine, Loyola University Medical Center, Maywood, Ill., who will present today’s session “Winning Hearts and Minds at the Bedside: Battling Unconscious Bias Through Cultural Humility.”

By practicing cultural humility, hospitalists can gain trust from patients and their families, whom they do not know in their everyday practice. This encourages providers to be humble, ascertain what is important to the patient, and learn from every patient encounter.

The session will begin with a case study involving bias, followed by a self-reflection exercise. To determine whether you may be biased against some patient groups, Dr. Ansari recommends taking the online implicit association test at Implicit.harvard.edu.

As a palliative care specialist, Dr. Ansari has repeatedly faced situations in which a lack of cultural humility caused patients or their family member to foster mistrust toward a provider. Consequently, patients and family members may choose aggressive measures that providers might consider futile.

Dr. Ansari also will define what implicit or unconscious biases entail in greater detail. The discussion will then circle back to the original case and reveal how providers can improve their mindset when facing difficult situations by employing a tool called “The 5 Rs of Cultural Humility,” which include reflection, respect, regard, relevance, and resiliency.

Dr. Ansari spearheaded the development of the 5 Rs tool when he chaired the Cultural Humility Workgroup of SHM’s Practice Management Committee. “The goal is to use the tool to attain cultural humility and transform a potentially negative encounter into a gratifying one,” he said.

At a minimum, attendees should take time during the session to reflect on their own thoughts and biases. “This introspection can bring to light practices that providers may have been unaware of and, ultimately, can change their behaviors so every patient and their family feels that they are being seen and heard,” Dr. Ansari said. “In today’s current climate it is more important than ever for providers to self-reflect on their attitudes and perceptions because an increasing number of groups in our diverse society are feeling more marginalized.”

Winning Hearts and Minds at the Bedside: Battling Unconscious Bias Through Cultural Humility
Wednesday, 9:10-9:50 a.m.
​Crystal Ballroom G2/C-F

Many health care providers are guilty of having implicit or unconscious biases against patients, which can negatively affect the care they give. “Once providers come to this realization, they can make a conscious effort to neutralize these biases from manifesting throughout a practice,” said Aziz Ansari, DO, SFHM, associate chief medical officer, Clinical Optimization and Revenue Integrity, and associate professor of medicine, Loyola University Medical Center, Maywood, Ill., who will present today’s session “Winning Hearts and Minds at the Bedside: Battling Unconscious Bias Through Cultural Humility.”

By practicing cultural humility, hospitalists can gain trust from patients and their families, whom they do not know in their everyday practice. This encourages providers to be humble, ascertain what is important to the patient, and learn from every patient encounter.

The session will begin with a case study involving bias, followed by a self-reflection exercise. To determine whether you may be biased against some patient groups, Dr. Ansari recommends taking the online implicit association test at Implicit.harvard.edu.

As a palliative care specialist, Dr. Ansari has repeatedly faced situations in which a lack of cultural humility caused patients or their family member to foster mistrust toward a provider. Consequently, patients and family members may choose aggressive measures that providers might consider futile.

Dr. Ansari also will define what implicit or unconscious biases entail in greater detail. The discussion will then circle back to the original case and reveal how providers can improve their mindset when facing difficult situations by employing a tool called “The 5 Rs of Cultural Humility,” which include reflection, respect, regard, relevance, and resiliency.

Dr. Ansari spearheaded the development of the 5 Rs tool when he chaired the Cultural Humility Workgroup of SHM’s Practice Management Committee. “The goal is to use the tool to attain cultural humility and transform a potentially negative encounter into a gratifying one,” he said.

At a minimum, attendees should take time during the session to reflect on their own thoughts and biases. “This introspection can bring to light practices that providers may have been unaware of and, ultimately, can change their behaviors so every patient and their family feels that they are being seen and heard,” Dr. Ansari said. “In today’s current climate it is more important than ever for providers to self-reflect on their attitudes and perceptions because an increasing number of groups in our diverse society are feeling more marginalized.”

Winning Hearts and Minds at the Bedside: Battling Unconscious Bias Through Cultural Humility
Wednesday, 9:10-9:50 a.m.
​Crystal Ballroom G2/C-F

As the field of hospital medicine continues to grow, it is experiencing more requests for assistance with pre- and posthospital care. These increasing demands will be the focus of today’s session “Addressing the Expanding Scope of Practice in Hospital Medicine.”

“As hospital medicine continues to advance, we are being asked to help hospitals and health care systems with challenges that extend beyond the hospital,” presenter Nick Fitterman, MD, SFHM, vice chair of hospital medicine of Northwell Health in Long Island, N.Y., explained in an interview. “Sometimes, this is a natural extension of hospital medicine; other times, it may reflect gaps in primary care or the health care system in general. Hospital medicine can be supportive, but our course must be deliberate and not extend beyond our scope of practice.

“The health care system is facing a variety of challenges, which, in turn, make an impact on hospital medicine,” stated Dr. Fitterman. “Factors that result in increased demands on the field include lack of access to posthospitalization care, high-acuity patients in subacute rehabilitation, rising health care costs, and value-based payments that include ‘bundles’ of care stretching beyond hospitalization. Finally, the nation has a population that’s aging,” he continued, “thanks to the ‘silver tsunami’ of baby boomers.”

The session will include presentations by leaders in the fields of post-acute clinics and hospitals at home. Lauren Doctoroff, MD, FHM, of Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center in Boston will discuss post-acute care clinics; David Levine, MD, of Brigham and Women’s Hospital and Harvard Medical School, both in Boston, will cover some hospital-at-home developments; and Efren Manjarrez, MD, SFHM, of the University of Miami Health System will speak about preoperative care. Dr. Fitterman will provide examples of the expanded scope of practice issues that can arise in a large health care system.

“There are a finite number of beds in any given hospital and extending our reach into pre- or posthospitalization care is an avenue to expand our book of business, cultivate new skills, and engage patients and colleagues in new settings,” Dr. Fitterman explained. “Done with a clear vision and plan and within our scope of practice, this can be quite rewarding. Executed only to meet a demand but without proper resources, this can pose a new challenge and become frustrating.”

“HM18 participants who attend the session will receive some insights into what works and what doesn’t work regarding extrahospital care for hospital medicine,” continued Dr. Fitterman. “And we hope it will help hospital medicine practitioners and groups as they determine where to focus their efforts.”

Addressing the Expanding Scope of Practice in Hospital Medicine
Wednesday, 7:30-8:30 a.m.
​Grand Ballroom 7B

As the field of hospital medicine continues to grow, it is experiencing more requests for assistance with pre- and posthospital care. These increasing demands will be the focus of today’s session “Addressing the Expanding Scope of Practice in Hospital Medicine.”

“As hospital medicine continues to advance, we are being asked to help hospitals and health care systems with challenges that extend beyond the hospital,” presenter Nick Fitterman, MD, SFHM, vice chair of hospital medicine of Northwell Health in Long Island, N.Y., explained in an interview. “Sometimes, this is a natural extension of hospital medicine; other times, it may reflect gaps in primary care or the health care system in general. Hospital medicine can be supportive, but our course must be deliberate and not extend beyond our scope of practice.

“The health care system is facing a variety of challenges, which, in turn, make an impact on hospital medicine,” stated Dr. Fitterman. “Factors that result in increased demands on the field include lack of access to posthospitalization care, high-acuity patients in subacute rehabilitation, rising health care costs, and value-based payments that include ‘bundles’ of care stretching beyond hospitalization. Finally, the nation has a population that’s aging,” he continued, “thanks to the ‘silver tsunami’ of baby boomers.”

The session will include presentations by leaders in the fields of post-acute clinics and hospitals at home. Lauren Doctoroff, MD, FHM, of Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center in Boston will discuss post-acute care clinics; David Levine, MD, of Brigham and Women’s Hospital and Harvard Medical School, both in Boston, will cover some hospital-at-home developments; and Efren Manjarrez, MD, SFHM, of the University of Miami Health System will speak about preoperative care. Dr. Fitterman will provide examples of the expanded scope of practice issues that can arise in a large health care system.

“There are a finite number of beds in any given hospital and extending our reach into pre- or posthospitalization care is an avenue to expand our book of business, cultivate new skills, and engage patients and colleagues in new settings,” Dr. Fitterman explained. “Done with a clear vision and plan and within our scope of practice, this can be quite rewarding. Executed only to meet a demand but without proper resources, this can pose a new challenge and become frustrating.”

“HM18 participants who attend the session will receive some insights into what works and what doesn’t work regarding extrahospital care for hospital medicine,” continued Dr. Fitterman. “And we hope it will help hospital medicine practitioners and groups as they determine where to focus their efforts.”

Addressing the Expanding Scope of Practice in Hospital Medicine
Wednesday, 7:30-8:30 a.m.
​Grand Ballroom 7B

As the field of hospital medicine continues to grow, it is experiencing more requests for assistance with pre- and posthospital care. These increasing demands will be the focus of today’s session “Addressing the Expanding Scope of Practice in Hospital Medicine.”

“As hospital medicine continues to advance, we are being asked to help hospitals and health care systems with challenges that extend beyond the hospital,” presenter Nick Fitterman, MD, SFHM, vice chair of hospital medicine of Northwell Health in Long Island, N.Y., explained in an interview. “Sometimes, this is a natural extension of hospital medicine; other times, it may reflect gaps in primary care or the health care system in general. Hospital medicine can be supportive, but our course must be deliberate and not extend beyond our scope of practice.

“The health care system is facing a variety of challenges, which, in turn, make an impact on hospital medicine,” stated Dr. Fitterman. “Factors that result in increased demands on the field include lack of access to posthospitalization care, high-acuity patients in subacute rehabilitation, rising health care costs, and value-based payments that include ‘bundles’ of care stretching beyond hospitalization. Finally, the nation has a population that’s aging,” he continued, “thanks to the ‘silver tsunami’ of baby boomers.”

The session will include presentations by leaders in the fields of post-acute clinics and hospitals at home. Lauren Doctoroff, MD, FHM, of Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center in Boston will discuss post-acute care clinics; David Levine, MD, of Brigham and Women’s Hospital and Harvard Medical School, both in Boston, will cover some hospital-at-home developments; and Efren Manjarrez, MD, SFHM, of the University of Miami Health System will speak about preoperative care. Dr. Fitterman will provide examples of the expanded scope of practice issues that can arise in a large health care system.

“There are a finite number of beds in any given hospital and extending our reach into pre- or posthospitalization care is an avenue to expand our book of business, cultivate new skills, and engage patients and colleagues in new settings,” Dr. Fitterman explained. “Done with a clear vision and plan and within our scope of practice, this can be quite rewarding. Executed only to meet a demand but without proper resources, this can pose a new challenge and become frustrating.”

“HM18 participants who attend the session will receive some insights into what works and what doesn’t work regarding extrahospital care for hospital medicine,” continued Dr. Fitterman. “And we hope it will help hospital medicine practitioners and groups as they determine where to focus their efforts.”

Addressing the Expanding Scope of Practice in Hospital Medicine
Wednesday, 7:30-8:30 a.m.
​Grand Ballroom 7B

What an amazing 3 days! As we spoke on the first day, delivering higher value of care has been a highlight of this annual conference. With thought-provoking sessions from Kate Goodrich, MD, MHS, on payment reform; Eric Howell, MD, on “Value is NOT a 4-Letter Word”; and Lenny Feldman, MD, SFHM, on “Things We Do for No Reason,” hospital medicine’s focus on value is clear. I hope you also had the chance to attend the sessions on clinical topics of medicine, education, and practice management.

The final day of the conference is no exception when it comes to topics with impact. Starting off at 7:30 a.m., there is a diverse group of sessions on clinical medicine for adults and pediatrics, including “Peter Pan Grows Up: How to Care for Your Patients with Chronic Pediatric Conditions,” topics in health policy, how to advance in academic medicine with a focus on writing a winning abstract, and applying what you have learned at HM18 back home.

This day also offers sessions on advancement with topics for mid-career hospitalists and those aspiring to leadership roles. Promotion in academic medicine also will be addressed.

You can further strengthen your presentation skills in sessions that will teach you how to create valuable teaching points on the fly and deliver memorable lectures and talks. Other sessions will enhance your skills in emotional intelligence.

As always, we are extremely fortunate to wrap up the day with Bob Wachter, MD, MHM, who is sure to deliver a thought-provoking and entertaining presentation entitled “Hospitalists as Drivers of Innovation and System Change: Are We Doing Enough?”

As you wrap up your final day, I wish you a safe journey back home. Please continue your engagement with the Society through chapter meetings in your area, signing up for committees and interest groups, and dropping us a line – we look forward to continuing to work for you in the coming year.
 

Dr. Afsar is the incoming president of the Society of Hospital Medicine and the chief ambulatory officer & CMO for ACOs at UC Irvine Health in Orange, Calif.

What an amazing 3 days! As we spoke on the first day, delivering higher value of care has been a highlight of this annual conference. With thought-provoking sessions from Kate Goodrich, MD, MHS, on payment reform; Eric Howell, MD, on “Value is NOT a 4-Letter Word”; and Lenny Feldman, MD, SFHM, on “Things We Do for No Reason,” hospital medicine’s focus on value is clear. I hope you also had the chance to attend the sessions on clinical topics of medicine, education, and practice management.

The final day of the conference is no exception when it comes to topics with impact. Starting off at 7:30 a.m., there is a diverse group of sessions on clinical medicine for adults and pediatrics, including “Peter Pan Grows Up: How to Care for Your Patients with Chronic Pediatric Conditions,” topics in health policy, how to advance in academic medicine with a focus on writing a winning abstract, and applying what you have learned at HM18 back home.

This day also offers sessions on advancement with topics for mid-career hospitalists and those aspiring to leadership roles. Promotion in academic medicine also will be addressed.

You can further strengthen your presentation skills in sessions that will teach you how to create valuable teaching points on the fly and deliver memorable lectures and talks. Other sessions will enhance your skills in emotional intelligence.

As always, we are extremely fortunate to wrap up the day with Bob Wachter, MD, MHM, who is sure to deliver a thought-provoking and entertaining presentation entitled “Hospitalists as Drivers of Innovation and System Change: Are We Doing Enough?”

As you wrap up your final day, I wish you a safe journey back home. Please continue your engagement with the Society through chapter meetings in your area, signing up for committees and interest groups, and dropping us a line – we look forward to continuing to work for you in the coming year.
 

Dr. Afsar is the incoming president of the Society of Hospital Medicine and the chief ambulatory officer & CMO for ACOs at UC Irvine Health in Orange, Calif.

What an amazing 3 days! As we spoke on the first day, delivering higher value of care has been a highlight of this annual conference. With thought-provoking sessions from Kate Goodrich, MD, MHS, on payment reform; Eric Howell, MD, on “Value is NOT a 4-Letter Word”; and Lenny Feldman, MD, SFHM, on “Things We Do for No Reason,” hospital medicine’s focus on value is clear. I hope you also had the chance to attend the sessions on clinical topics of medicine, education, and practice management.

The final day of the conference is no exception when it comes to topics with impact. Starting off at 7:30 a.m., there is a diverse group of sessions on clinical medicine for adults and pediatrics, including “Peter Pan Grows Up: How to Care for Your Patients with Chronic Pediatric Conditions,” topics in health policy, how to advance in academic medicine with a focus on writing a winning abstract, and applying what you have learned at HM18 back home.

This day also offers sessions on advancement with topics for mid-career hospitalists and those aspiring to leadership roles. Promotion in academic medicine also will be addressed.

You can further strengthen your presentation skills in sessions that will teach you how to create valuable teaching points on the fly and deliver memorable lectures and talks. Other sessions will enhance your skills in emotional intelligence.

As always, we are extremely fortunate to wrap up the day with Bob Wachter, MD, MHM, who is sure to deliver a thought-provoking and entertaining presentation entitled “Hospitalists as Drivers of Innovation and System Change: Are We Doing Enough?”

As you wrap up your final day, I wish you a safe journey back home. Please continue your engagement with the Society through chapter meetings in your area, signing up for committees and interest groups, and dropping us a line – we look forward to continuing to work for you in the coming year.
 

Dr. Afsar is the incoming president of the Society of Hospital Medicine and the chief ambulatory officer & CMO for ACOs at UC Irvine Health in Orange, Calif.

ORLANDO – In a video interview, Ms. Tiffani Panek, SFHM, CLHM, who is the division manager of administration at the Johns Hopkins Bayview Medical Center, Baltimore, discussed the scope of SHM resources available for practice administrators.

She details how there are “an incredible number of resources for practice administrators that are available from SHM,” and she recommends the SHM website’s practice administrator’s page, with helpful links, including to their mentorship program. She describes how, just this year, “we are launching a podcast series called ‘The Leadership Launchpad Essentials.’ ”

In addition: “We [also] have our own HMX [Hospital Medicine Exchange] community, and I would say of any resource the practice administrator should access on a regular basis, that would be the one.” That’s the place that practice managers can go to network with their community, according to Ms. Panek.
 

ORLANDO – In a video interview, Ms. Tiffani Panek, SFHM, CLHM, who is the division manager of administration at the Johns Hopkins Bayview Medical Center, Baltimore, discussed the scope of SHM resources available for practice administrators.

She details how there are “an incredible number of resources for practice administrators that are available from SHM,” and she recommends the SHM website’s practice administrator’s page, with helpful links, including to their mentorship program. She describes how, just this year, “we are launching a podcast series called ‘The Leadership Launchpad Essentials.’ ”

In addition: “We [also] have our own HMX [Hospital Medicine Exchange] community, and I would say of any resource the practice administrator should access on a regular basis, that would be the one.” That’s the place that practice managers can go to network with their community, according to Ms. Panek.
 

ORLANDO – In a video interview, Ms. Tiffani Panek, SFHM, CLHM, who is the division manager of administration at the Johns Hopkins Bayview Medical Center, Baltimore, discussed the scope of SHM resources available for practice administrators.

She details how there are “an incredible number of resources for practice administrators that are available from SHM,” and she recommends the SHM website’s practice administrator’s page, with helpful links, including to their mentorship program. She describes how, just this year, “we are launching a podcast series called ‘The Leadership Launchpad Essentials.’ ”

In addition: “We [also] have our own HMX [Hospital Medicine Exchange] community, and I would say of any resource the practice administrator should access on a regular basis, that would be the one.” That’s the place that practice managers can go to network with their community, according to Ms. Panek.
 

ORLANDO – If you think enough progress is being made to fix gender disparity in medical leadership, consider this observation made in an HM18 session on Tuesday by speaker Elizabeth Harry, MD, SFHM, assistant program director, internal medicine residency: director of wellness,  Brigham and Women’s Hospital, Boston.*

“One might say, ‘Well, that’s okay, we’ll just let it even itself out. I mean, it’s getting better and we’re getting more women positions of leadership,’ ” she said. “But if we continue at the current rate that we are at, of women getting positions of leadership, we will get gender parity in leadership in 67 years – so the year 2085 ... I’m hoping that we as a group can say, ‘That’s a little too slow for our taste. We would like to accelerate this process a little bit.’ ”

The jarring number came near the start of the “Gender Disparities in Hospital Medicine: Where Do We Stand?” session, in which Dr. Harry explored the ways in which gender disparity manifests itself and coaxed ideas for improvement from the audience.

But that was just one of the jarring numbers. Even though women make up 78% of the health care workforce, only 14% of executive officers are women, Dr. Harry said.

And it’s not that large numbers of women joining the physician workforce is a relatively recent phenomenon. There is close to a 50/50 gender split in medical school applicants, students, and residents. But, after that, the parity falls away. Only 38% of medical school faculty members are women, only 21% of full professors are women, and only 16% of deans (Pediatr Res. 2015 Nov;78[5]:589-93).

“There’s definitely a leaky pipeline here,” Dr. Harry said.

She highlighted the ways in which gender disparity seems to be baked into medical education, research, and culture. One study found that women used professional titles 95% of the time when introducing men at internal medicine grand rounds, compared with 49% when men were introducing women (J Womens Health 2017 May;26[5]:413-9).

In hospital medicine, a 2015 study found that women make $14,000 a year less than men, and about $30,000 less in pediatrics. (J Hosp Med. 2015 Aug;10[8]:486-90).

Dr. Harry told the audience to think about the gender disparity problem in a structured way, similar to a design process, by defining the problem, thinking of ideas, developing prototypes to put those ideas into action, and testing them.

During this session, audience members made some suggestions to simplify some of life’s logistics: creating rooms in which physicians could nurse their babies, with a phone and a laptop to make use of the room more practical; building flexible schedules to allow for picking up children and running errands; and – Dr. Harry’s favorite – installing an Amazon locker at hospitals that would allow doctors to pick up packages and make returns.

One audience member asked why the tenor of the conversation seemed to involve an implicit acceptance that it was up to women to handle errands, wondering, “Why are we anchoring on to that?” Dr. Harry agreed that it is up to each household to decide how to divide those responsibilities, and that, personally, she and her husband divide them evenly.

“So what I want to encourage you to do is actually take one of these prototypes home and try it – and it’s not going to work the first time,” Dr. Harry said. “This is culture change, and culture change is really, really hard. That means it takes time and means you’ll have to knock on lots of doors to get to where you want to be eventually.”

Correction, 4/11/18: An earlier version of this article misstated Dr. Harry's position at Brigham and Women's.

ORLANDO – If you think enough progress is being made to fix gender disparity in medical leadership, consider this observation made in an HM18 session on Tuesday by speaker Elizabeth Harry, MD, SFHM, assistant program director, internal medicine residency: director of wellness,  Brigham and Women’s Hospital, Boston.*

“One might say, ‘Well, that’s okay, we’ll just let it even itself out. I mean, it’s getting better and we’re getting more women positions of leadership,’ ” she said. “But if we continue at the current rate that we are at, of women getting positions of leadership, we will get gender parity in leadership in 67 years – so the year 2085 ... I’m hoping that we as a group can say, ‘That’s a little too slow for our taste. We would like to accelerate this process a little bit.’ ”

The jarring number came near the start of the “Gender Disparities in Hospital Medicine: Where Do We Stand?” session, in which Dr. Harry explored the ways in which gender disparity manifests itself and coaxed ideas for improvement from the audience.

But that was just one of the jarring numbers. Even though women make up 78% of the health care workforce, only 14% of executive officers are women, Dr. Harry said.

And it’s not that large numbers of women joining the physician workforce is a relatively recent phenomenon. There is close to a 50/50 gender split in medical school applicants, students, and residents. But, after that, the parity falls away. Only 38% of medical school faculty members are women, only 21% of full professors are women, and only 16% of deans (Pediatr Res. 2015 Nov;78[5]:589-93).

“There’s definitely a leaky pipeline here,” Dr. Harry said.

She highlighted the ways in which gender disparity seems to be baked into medical education, research, and culture. One study found that women used professional titles 95% of the time when introducing men at internal medicine grand rounds, compared with 49% when men were introducing women (J Womens Health 2017 May;26[5]:413-9).

In hospital medicine, a 2015 study found that women make $14,000 a year less than men, and about $30,000 less in pediatrics. (J Hosp Med. 2015 Aug;10[8]:486-90).

Dr. Harry told the audience to think about the gender disparity problem in a structured way, similar to a design process, by defining the problem, thinking of ideas, developing prototypes to put those ideas into action, and testing them.

During this session, audience members made some suggestions to simplify some of life’s logistics: creating rooms in which physicians could nurse their babies, with a phone and a laptop to make use of the room more practical; building flexible schedules to allow for picking up children and running errands; and – Dr. Harry’s favorite – installing an Amazon locker at hospitals that would allow doctors to pick up packages and make returns.

One audience member asked why the tenor of the conversation seemed to involve an implicit acceptance that it was up to women to handle errands, wondering, “Why are we anchoring on to that?” Dr. Harry agreed that it is up to each household to decide how to divide those responsibilities, and that, personally, she and her husband divide them evenly.

“So what I want to encourage you to do is actually take one of these prototypes home and try it – and it’s not going to work the first time,” Dr. Harry said. “This is culture change, and culture change is really, really hard. That means it takes time and means you’ll have to knock on lots of doors to get to where you want to be eventually.”

Correction, 4/11/18: An earlier version of this article misstated Dr. Harry's position at Brigham and Women's.

ORLANDO – If you think enough progress is being made to fix gender disparity in medical leadership, consider this observation made in an HM18 session on Tuesday by speaker Elizabeth Harry, MD, SFHM, assistant program director, internal medicine residency: director of wellness,  Brigham and Women’s Hospital, Boston.*

“One might say, ‘Well, that’s okay, we’ll just let it even itself out. I mean, it’s getting better and we’re getting more women positions of leadership,’ ” she said. “But if we continue at the current rate that we are at, of women getting positions of leadership, we will get gender parity in leadership in 67 years – so the year 2085 ... I’m hoping that we as a group can say, ‘That’s a little too slow for our taste. We would like to accelerate this process a little bit.’ ”

The jarring number came near the start of the “Gender Disparities in Hospital Medicine: Where Do We Stand?” session, in which Dr. Harry explored the ways in which gender disparity manifests itself and coaxed ideas for improvement from the audience.

But that was just one of the jarring numbers. Even though women make up 78% of the health care workforce, only 14% of executive officers are women, Dr. Harry said.

And it’s not that large numbers of women joining the physician workforce is a relatively recent phenomenon. There is close to a 50/50 gender split in medical school applicants, students, and residents. But, after that, the parity falls away. Only 38% of medical school faculty members are women, only 21% of full professors are women, and only 16% of deans (Pediatr Res. 2015 Nov;78[5]:589-93).

“There’s definitely a leaky pipeline here,” Dr. Harry said.

She highlighted the ways in which gender disparity seems to be baked into medical education, research, and culture. One study found that women used professional titles 95% of the time when introducing men at internal medicine grand rounds, compared with 49% when men were introducing women (J Womens Health 2017 May;26[5]:413-9).

In hospital medicine, a 2015 study found that women make $14,000 a year less than men, and about $30,000 less in pediatrics. (J Hosp Med. 2015 Aug;10[8]:486-90).

Dr. Harry told the audience to think about the gender disparity problem in a structured way, similar to a design process, by defining the problem, thinking of ideas, developing prototypes to put those ideas into action, and testing them.

During this session, audience members made some suggestions to simplify some of life’s logistics: creating rooms in which physicians could nurse their babies, with a phone and a laptop to make use of the room more practical; building flexible schedules to allow for picking up children and running errands; and – Dr. Harry’s favorite – installing an Amazon locker at hospitals that would allow doctors to pick up packages and make returns.

One audience member asked why the tenor of the conversation seemed to involve an implicit acceptance that it was up to women to handle errands, wondering, “Why are we anchoring on to that?” Dr. Harry agreed that it is up to each household to decide how to divide those responsibilities, and that, personally, she and her husband divide them evenly.

“So what I want to encourage you to do is actually take one of these prototypes home and try it – and it’s not going to work the first time,” Dr. Harry said. “This is culture change, and culture change is really, really hard. That means it takes time and means you’ll have to knock on lots of doors to get to where you want to be eventually.”

Correction, 4/11/18: An earlier version of this article misstated Dr. Harry's position at Brigham and Women's.

ORLANDO – Hospitalists in attendance at a Rapid Fire session at the Society of Hospital Medicine’s annual conference came away with updated information about stroke and intracranial hemorrhage, among the neurologic emergencies commonly seen in hospitalized patients.

Aaron Lord, MD, chief of neurocritical care at New York University Langone Health, provided hopeful news about thrombectomy for ischemic stroke and confirmed the importance of blood pressure management in intracranial hemorrhage in his review of several common neurologic emergencies.

Dr. Lord said that, for ischemic stroke, the evidence is now very good for mechanical thrombectomy, with newer data pointing to a prolonged treatment window for some patients.

Though IV tissue plasminogen activator (TPA) is the only Food and Drug Administration–approved pharmacologic treatment for acute stroke, said Dr. Lord, “It’s good, but it’s not perfect. It doesn’t necessarily target the clot or concentrate in it. ... The big kicker is that not all patients are candidates for IV TPA. They either present too late or have comorbidities.”

“Frustratingly, even for those who do present on time, TPA doesn’t work for everyone. This is especially true for large or long clots,” said Dr. Lord. In 2015, he said, a half-dozen trials examining mechanical thrombectomy for acute stroke were all positive, giving assurance to physicians and patients of this therapy’s efficacy within the 6-8 hour acute stroke window. Pooled analysis of the 2015 trials showed a number needed to treat (NNT) of 5 for regaining functional independence, and a NNT of 2.6 for decreased disability.

Further, he said, two additional trials have examined thrombectomy’s utility when patients have a large stroke penumbra, with a relatively small core infarct, using “tissue-based parameters rather than time” to select patients for thrombectomy. “These trials were just as positive as the initial trials,” said Dr. Lord; the trials showed NNTs of 2.9 and 3.6 for reduced disability in a population of patients who were 6-24 hours poststroke.

The takeaway for hospitalists? Even when it’s unknown how much time has passed since the onset of stroke symptoms, step No. 1 is still to activate the stroke team’s resources, giving patients the best hope for recovery. “We now have the luxury of treating patients up to 24 hours. This has revolutionized the way that we treat acute stroke,” said Dr. Lord.

For intracranial hemorrhage, the story is a little different. Here, “initial management focuses on preventing hematoma expansion,” said Dr. Lord.

After tending to airway, breathing, and circulation and activation of the stroke team, the managing clinician should turn to blood pressure management and reversal of any anticoagulation or antiplatelet therapy.

The medical literature gives some guidance about goal blood pressures, he said. Although all of the trials did not use the same parameters for “highest” or “lower” systolic blood pressures, the best data available point toward a systolic goal of about 140.

“Blood pressure treatment is still important,” said Dr. Lord. In larger hemorrhages or with hydrocephalus, he advised always at least considering placement of an intracranial pressure monitor.

If a patient is anticoagulated with a vitamin K antagonist, he said, the INCH trial showed that intracranial bleeds are best reversed by use of prothrombin complex concentration (PCC), rather than fresh frozen plasma (FFP). The trial, stopped early for safety, showed that the primary outcome of internationalized normal ratio of less than 1.2 by the 3-hour mark was reached by just 9% of the FFP group, compared with 67% of those who received PCC. Mortality was 35% for the FFP cohort, compared with 19% who received PCC.

Dr. Lord finds these data compelling. “When I ask my residents what the appropriate agent is for vitamin K reversal in acute ICH, and they answer FFP, I tell them, ‘That’s a great answer ... for 2012.’ ”

ORLANDO – Hospitalists in attendance at a Rapid Fire session at the Society of Hospital Medicine’s annual conference came away with updated information about stroke and intracranial hemorrhage, among the neurologic emergencies commonly seen in hospitalized patients.

Aaron Lord, MD, chief of neurocritical care at New York University Langone Health, provided hopeful news about thrombectomy for ischemic stroke and confirmed the importance of blood pressure management in intracranial hemorrhage in his review of several common neurologic emergencies.

Dr. Lord said that, for ischemic stroke, the evidence is now very good for mechanical thrombectomy, with newer data pointing to a prolonged treatment window for some patients.

Though IV tissue plasminogen activator (TPA) is the only Food and Drug Administration–approved pharmacologic treatment for acute stroke, said Dr. Lord, “It’s good, but it’s not perfect. It doesn’t necessarily target the clot or concentrate in it. ... The big kicker is that not all patients are candidates for IV TPA. They either present too late or have comorbidities.”

“Frustratingly, even for those who do present on time, TPA doesn’t work for everyone. This is especially true for large or long clots,” said Dr. Lord. In 2015, he said, a half-dozen trials examining mechanical thrombectomy for acute stroke were all positive, giving assurance to physicians and patients of this therapy’s efficacy within the 6-8 hour acute stroke window. Pooled analysis of the 2015 trials showed a number needed to treat (NNT) of 5 for regaining functional independence, and a NNT of 2.6 for decreased disability.

Further, he said, two additional trials have examined thrombectomy’s utility when patients have a large stroke penumbra, with a relatively small core infarct, using “tissue-based parameters rather than time” to select patients for thrombectomy. “These trials were just as positive as the initial trials,” said Dr. Lord; the trials showed NNTs of 2.9 and 3.6 for reduced disability in a population of patients who were 6-24 hours poststroke.

The takeaway for hospitalists? Even when it’s unknown how much time has passed since the onset of stroke symptoms, step No. 1 is still to activate the stroke team’s resources, giving patients the best hope for recovery. “We now have the luxury of treating patients up to 24 hours. This has revolutionized the way that we treat acute stroke,” said Dr. Lord.

For intracranial hemorrhage, the story is a little different. Here, “initial management focuses on preventing hematoma expansion,” said Dr. Lord.

After tending to airway, breathing, and circulation and activation of the stroke team, the managing clinician should turn to blood pressure management and reversal of any anticoagulation or antiplatelet therapy.

The medical literature gives some guidance about goal blood pressures, he said. Although all of the trials did not use the same parameters for “highest” or “lower” systolic blood pressures, the best data available point toward a systolic goal of about 140.

“Blood pressure treatment is still important,” said Dr. Lord. In larger hemorrhages or with hydrocephalus, he advised always at least considering placement of an intracranial pressure monitor.

If a patient is anticoagulated with a vitamin K antagonist, he said, the INCH trial showed that intracranial bleeds are best reversed by use of prothrombin complex concentration (PCC), rather than fresh frozen plasma (FFP). The trial, stopped early for safety, showed that the primary outcome of internationalized normal ratio of less than 1.2 by the 3-hour mark was reached by just 9% of the FFP group, compared with 67% of those who received PCC. Mortality was 35% for the FFP cohort, compared with 19% who received PCC.

Dr. Lord finds these data compelling. “When I ask my residents what the appropriate agent is for vitamin K reversal in acute ICH, and they answer FFP, I tell them, ‘That’s a great answer ... for 2012.’ ”

ORLANDO – Hospitalists in attendance at a Rapid Fire session at the Society of Hospital Medicine’s annual conference came away with updated information about stroke and intracranial hemorrhage, among the neurologic emergencies commonly seen in hospitalized patients.

Aaron Lord, MD, chief of neurocritical care at New York University Langone Health, provided hopeful news about thrombectomy for ischemic stroke and confirmed the importance of blood pressure management in intracranial hemorrhage in his review of several common neurologic emergencies.

Dr. Lord said that, for ischemic stroke, the evidence is now very good for mechanical thrombectomy, with newer data pointing to a prolonged treatment window for some patients.

Though IV tissue plasminogen activator (TPA) is the only Food and Drug Administration–approved pharmacologic treatment for acute stroke, said Dr. Lord, “It’s good, but it’s not perfect. It doesn’t necessarily target the clot or concentrate in it. ... The big kicker is that not all patients are candidates for IV TPA. They either present too late or have comorbidities.”

“Frustratingly, even for those who do present on time, TPA doesn’t work for everyone. This is especially true for large or long clots,” said Dr. Lord. In 2015, he said, a half-dozen trials examining mechanical thrombectomy for acute stroke were all positive, giving assurance to physicians and patients of this therapy’s efficacy within the 6-8 hour acute stroke window. Pooled analysis of the 2015 trials showed a number needed to treat (NNT) of 5 for regaining functional independence, and a NNT of 2.6 for decreased disability.

Further, he said, two additional trials have examined thrombectomy’s utility when patients have a large stroke penumbra, with a relatively small core infarct, using “tissue-based parameters rather than time” to select patients for thrombectomy. “These trials were just as positive as the initial trials,” said Dr. Lord; the trials showed NNTs of 2.9 and 3.6 for reduced disability in a population of patients who were 6-24 hours poststroke.

The takeaway for hospitalists? Even when it’s unknown how much time has passed since the onset of stroke symptoms, step No. 1 is still to activate the stroke team’s resources, giving patients the best hope for recovery. “We now have the luxury of treating patients up to 24 hours. This has revolutionized the way that we treat acute stroke,” said Dr. Lord.

For intracranial hemorrhage, the story is a little different. Here, “initial management focuses on preventing hematoma expansion,” said Dr. Lord.

After tending to airway, breathing, and circulation and activation of the stroke team, the managing clinician should turn to blood pressure management and reversal of any anticoagulation or antiplatelet therapy.

The medical literature gives some guidance about goal blood pressures, he said. Although all of the trials did not use the same parameters for “highest” or “lower” systolic blood pressures, the best data available point toward a systolic goal of about 140.

“Blood pressure treatment is still important,” said Dr. Lord. In larger hemorrhages or with hydrocephalus, he advised always at least considering placement of an intracranial pressure monitor.

If a patient is anticoagulated with a vitamin K antagonist, he said, the INCH trial showed that intracranial bleeds are best reversed by use of prothrombin complex concentration (PCC), rather than fresh frozen plasma (FFP). The trial, stopped early for safety, showed that the primary outcome of internationalized normal ratio of less than 1.2 by the 3-hour mark was reached by just 9% of the FFP group, compared with 67% of those who received PCC. Mortality was 35% for the FFP cohort, compared with 19% who received PCC.

Dr. Lord finds these data compelling. “When I ask my residents what the appropriate agent is for vitamin K reversal in acute ICH, and they answer FFP, I tell them, ‘That’s a great answer ... for 2012.’ ”

ORLANDO – The top award in the research arm of the Research, Innovations and Clinical Vignettes (RIV) competition, bestowed Monday night at HM18, went to investigators at Brigham and Women’s Hospital in Boston, who looked for trouble spots in interhospital transfers across more than 24,000 cases.

In the innovations category, also awarded Tuesday night, the top award went to clinicians and researchers at the University of Iowa in Iowa City, who attempted to use “virtual hospitalists” to improve local care at rural, critical-access hospitals.

The winning study in the research arm set out to pinpoint problems that could be attributed to process in cases of patients being transferred from one acute care facility to another, and was presented by Stephanie Mueller, MD, MPH, SFHM, associate physician in the hospital medicine unit at Brigham and Women’s.

Dr. Mueller and her colleagues looked at transfers to the hospital from 2005 to 2013. They analyzed the effects that three factors – day of the week, time of day, and admission team “busyness” on the day of the transfer – had on transfers to intensive care within 48 hours and on 30-day mortality. They looked at data for Monday through Thursday, compared with Friday through Sunday, at day, evening, and night transfers as well as the number of patient admissions and discharges to the admitting team on that day.

They found that nighttime arrival was linked with an increased chance of being transferred to the ICU and with 30-day mortality. They also found that weekday arrival was associated with lower odds of mortality among patients getting cardiothoracic and gastrointestinal surgery.

“I think that these are potential targets in which we can actually do something to mitigate the outcomes for these patients,” Dr. Mueller said. “I’m working on a number of studies related to this topic and so it’s sort of validating that this is an important topic and that I should continue doing what I’m doing.”

Raj Sehgal, MD, FHM, a judge in the research arm and associate professor at University of Texas, San Antonio, praised the relevance of the project.

“Interhospital transfer is a topic that a lot of hospitals are dealing with right now,” he said. “It’s always a group of patients that we worry about.”

“One of the strongest things about this poster was the strong methodology,” said another judge, Vineet Gupta, MD, FHM, assistant clinical professor at the University of California, San Diego. “The statistical analysis was really good, very strong, very robust.”

The innovations award–winning study, presented by Ethan Kuperman, MD, MSc, FHM, clinical assistant professor at the University of Iowa, involved an attempt to reduce transfers from the emergency departments of critical-access hospitals in rural Iowa to urban medical centers by providing care with “virtual hospitalists” using tablets.

“Our goal was to treat more patients locally, to keep those patients happy in their communities. That’s what patients get out of it,” Dr. Kuperman told judges. “The hospitals get to keep their family practice doctors doing primary care, stay open, and get more patients. Win, win, win.”

At the critical-access hospital pilot site, virtual hospitalists at the University of Iowa handled all inpatient and observation admissions, with the assistance of local advance practice professionals. The percentage of outside transfers from the emergency department over 64 weeks after implementation was 12.9%, a statistically significant drop from the 16.6% seen in a 24-week baseline period. This did not lead to another goal – a higher daily census at the hospital – though, because there was also a drop in ED visits that ended in a hospital admission.

At two other sites, where virtual hospitalists provided fewer services – at one site, they also helped with preoperative work – there was less of an impact, Dr. Kuperman said. He said he was encouraged that the mean time reported by virtual hospitalists for patient care and documentation was just 2.8 hours a day, but there were days when that hit 12 hours, so there could be a need for “surge” coverage.

He said he’s gratified that the award draws more attention to attempts to improve the care at rural hospitals and that he plans to continue to develop the program.

“Hopefully, this helps get the word out,” Dr. Kuperman said. “I think a lot of work still needs to be done.”

The awards capped a 2-hour competition in which judges went from poster to poster, hearing short presentations from researchers and asking rapid-fire questions. The decisions were difficult in both categories, the judges said. The judges in the innovations category, for instance, deliberated at a table outside the exhibit hall for about 20 minutes before coming to a decision.

The pool of 20 finalists – 10 in each category – were chosen from hundreds of submissions considered during the final two rounds of judging on Tuesday night. In the research category, 261 abstracts were accepted from the 319 submitted; in the innovations category, 140 were accepted from the 207 submitted.

ORLANDO – The top award in the research arm of the Research, Innovations and Clinical Vignettes (RIV) competition, bestowed Monday night at HM18, went to investigators at Brigham and Women’s Hospital in Boston, who looked for trouble spots in interhospital transfers across more than 24,000 cases.

In the innovations category, also awarded Tuesday night, the top award went to clinicians and researchers at the University of Iowa in Iowa City, who attempted to use “virtual hospitalists” to improve local care at rural, critical-access hospitals.

The winning study in the research arm set out to pinpoint problems that could be attributed to process in cases of patients being transferred from one acute care facility to another, and was presented by Stephanie Mueller, MD, MPH, SFHM, associate physician in the hospital medicine unit at Brigham and Women’s.

Dr. Mueller and her colleagues looked at transfers to the hospital from 2005 to 2013. They analyzed the effects that three factors – day of the week, time of day, and admission team “busyness” on the day of the transfer – had on transfers to intensive care within 48 hours and on 30-day mortality. They looked at data for Monday through Thursday, compared with Friday through Sunday, at day, evening, and night transfers as well as the number of patient admissions and discharges to the admitting team on that day.

They found that nighttime arrival was linked with an increased chance of being transferred to the ICU and with 30-day mortality. They also found that weekday arrival was associated with lower odds of mortality among patients getting cardiothoracic and gastrointestinal surgery.

“I think that these are potential targets in which we can actually do something to mitigate the outcomes for these patients,” Dr. Mueller said. “I’m working on a number of studies related to this topic and so it’s sort of validating that this is an important topic and that I should continue doing what I’m doing.”

Raj Sehgal, MD, FHM, a judge in the research arm and associate professor at University of Texas, San Antonio, praised the relevance of the project.

“Interhospital transfer is a topic that a lot of hospitals are dealing with right now,” he said. “It’s always a group of patients that we worry about.”

“One of the strongest things about this poster was the strong methodology,” said another judge, Vineet Gupta, MD, FHM, assistant clinical professor at the University of California, San Diego. “The statistical analysis was really good, very strong, very robust.”

The innovations award–winning study, presented by Ethan Kuperman, MD, MSc, FHM, clinical assistant professor at the University of Iowa, involved an attempt to reduce transfers from the emergency departments of critical-access hospitals in rural Iowa to urban medical centers by providing care with “virtual hospitalists” using tablets.

“Our goal was to treat more patients locally, to keep those patients happy in their communities. That’s what patients get out of it,” Dr. Kuperman told judges. “The hospitals get to keep their family practice doctors doing primary care, stay open, and get more patients. Win, win, win.”

At the critical-access hospital pilot site, virtual hospitalists at the University of Iowa handled all inpatient and observation admissions, with the assistance of local advance practice professionals. The percentage of outside transfers from the emergency department over 64 weeks after implementation was 12.9%, a statistically significant drop from the 16.6% seen in a 24-week baseline period. This did not lead to another goal – a higher daily census at the hospital – though, because there was also a drop in ED visits that ended in a hospital admission.

At two other sites, where virtual hospitalists provided fewer services – at one site, they also helped with preoperative work – there was less of an impact, Dr. Kuperman said. He said he was encouraged that the mean time reported by virtual hospitalists for patient care and documentation was just 2.8 hours a day, but there were days when that hit 12 hours, so there could be a need for “surge” coverage.

He said he’s gratified that the award draws more attention to attempts to improve the care at rural hospitals and that he plans to continue to develop the program.

“Hopefully, this helps get the word out,” Dr. Kuperman said. “I think a lot of work still needs to be done.”

The awards capped a 2-hour competition in which judges went from poster to poster, hearing short presentations from researchers and asking rapid-fire questions. The decisions were difficult in both categories, the judges said. The judges in the innovations category, for instance, deliberated at a table outside the exhibit hall for about 20 minutes before coming to a decision.

The pool of 20 finalists – 10 in each category – were chosen from hundreds of submissions considered during the final two rounds of judging on Tuesday night. In the research category, 261 abstracts were accepted from the 319 submitted; in the innovations category, 140 were accepted from the 207 submitted.

ORLANDO – The top award in the research arm of the Research, Innovations and Clinical Vignettes (RIV) competition, bestowed Monday night at HM18, went to investigators at Brigham and Women’s Hospital in Boston, who looked for trouble spots in interhospital transfers across more than 24,000 cases.

In the innovations category, also awarded Tuesday night, the top award went to clinicians and researchers at the University of Iowa in Iowa City, who attempted to use “virtual hospitalists” to improve local care at rural, critical-access hospitals.

The winning study in the research arm set out to pinpoint problems that could be attributed to process in cases of patients being transferred from one acute care facility to another, and was presented by Stephanie Mueller, MD, MPH, SFHM, associate physician in the hospital medicine unit at Brigham and Women’s.

Dr. Mueller and her colleagues looked at transfers to the hospital from 2005 to 2013. They analyzed the effects that three factors – day of the week, time of day, and admission team “busyness” on the day of the transfer – had on transfers to intensive care within 48 hours and on 30-day mortality. They looked at data for Monday through Thursday, compared with Friday through Sunday, at day, evening, and night transfers as well as the number of patient admissions and discharges to the admitting team on that day.

They found that nighttime arrival was linked with an increased chance of being transferred to the ICU and with 30-day mortality. They also found that weekday arrival was associated with lower odds of mortality among patients getting cardiothoracic and gastrointestinal surgery.

“I think that these are potential targets in which we can actually do something to mitigate the outcomes for these patients,” Dr. Mueller said. “I’m working on a number of studies related to this topic and so it’s sort of validating that this is an important topic and that I should continue doing what I’m doing.”

Raj Sehgal, MD, FHM, a judge in the research arm and associate professor at University of Texas, San Antonio, praised the relevance of the project.

“Interhospital transfer is a topic that a lot of hospitals are dealing with right now,” he said. “It’s always a group of patients that we worry about.”

“One of the strongest things about this poster was the strong methodology,” said another judge, Vineet Gupta, MD, FHM, assistant clinical professor at the University of California, San Diego. “The statistical analysis was really good, very strong, very robust.”

The innovations award–winning study, presented by Ethan Kuperman, MD, MSc, FHM, clinical assistant professor at the University of Iowa, involved an attempt to reduce transfers from the emergency departments of critical-access hospitals in rural Iowa to urban medical centers by providing care with “virtual hospitalists” using tablets.

“Our goal was to treat more patients locally, to keep those patients happy in their communities. That’s what patients get out of it,” Dr. Kuperman told judges. “The hospitals get to keep their family practice doctors doing primary care, stay open, and get more patients. Win, win, win.”

At the critical-access hospital pilot site, virtual hospitalists at the University of Iowa handled all inpatient and observation admissions, with the assistance of local advance practice professionals. The percentage of outside transfers from the emergency department over 64 weeks after implementation was 12.9%, a statistically significant drop from the 16.6% seen in a 24-week baseline period. This did not lead to another goal – a higher daily census at the hospital – though, because there was also a drop in ED visits that ended in a hospital admission.

At two other sites, where virtual hospitalists provided fewer services – at one site, they also helped with preoperative work – there was less of an impact, Dr. Kuperman said. He said he was encouraged that the mean time reported by virtual hospitalists for patient care and documentation was just 2.8 hours a day, but there were days when that hit 12 hours, so there could be a need for “surge” coverage.

He said he’s gratified that the award draws more attention to attempts to improve the care at rural hospitals and that he plans to continue to develop the program.

“Hopefully, this helps get the word out,” Dr. Kuperman said. “I think a lot of work still needs to be done.”

The awards capped a 2-hour competition in which judges went from poster to poster, hearing short presentations from researchers and asking rapid-fire questions. The decisions were difficult in both categories, the judges said. The judges in the innovations category, for instance, deliberated at a table outside the exhibit hall for about 20 minutes before coming to a decision.

The pool of 20 finalists – 10 in each category – were chosen from hundreds of submissions considered during the final two rounds of judging on Tuesday night. In the research category, 261 abstracts were accepted from the 319 submitted; in the innovations category, 140 were accepted from the 207 submitted.

ORLANDO – In a video interview, Brian Kwan, MD, SFHM, of the University of California, San Diego, discusses the role of the SHM Physicians in Training Committee in “increasing the hospitalist pipeline.”

In discussing the work of the committee, Dr. Kwan describes how “a lot of our initiatives really focus on the training and development and basically nurturing them from becoming students to residents to early-career hospitalists.”

Two of the key programs he discusses are the Student Scholarship Program and the “new-this-year” Resident Travel Grant, among other initiatives that the committee is exploring.

ORLANDO – In a video interview, Brian Kwan, MD, SFHM, of the University of California, San Diego, discusses the role of the SHM Physicians in Training Committee in “increasing the hospitalist pipeline.”

In discussing the work of the committee, Dr. Kwan describes how “a lot of our initiatives really focus on the training and development and basically nurturing them from becoming students to residents to early-career hospitalists.”

Two of the key programs he discusses are the Student Scholarship Program and the “new-this-year” Resident Travel Grant, among other initiatives that the committee is exploring.

ORLANDO – In a video interview, Brian Kwan, MD, SFHM, of the University of California, San Diego, discusses the role of the SHM Physicians in Training Committee in “increasing the hospitalist pipeline.”

In discussing the work of the committee, Dr. Kwan describes how “a lot of our initiatives really focus on the training and development and basically nurturing them from becoming students to residents to early-career hospitalists.”

Two of the key programs he discusses are the Student Scholarship Program and the “new-this-year” Resident Travel Grant, among other initiatives that the committee is exploring.

Sepsis and critical care issues are in the spotlight at HM18, and these hot topics were the focus of the Monday education session, “He-Who-Shall-Not-Be-Named: Updates in Sepsis and Critical Care.”

Patricia Kritek, MD, EdM, of the University of Washington, Seattle, led an interactive and engaging session, educating attendees about the current research in sepsis and critical care areas so they would feel comfortable implementing the latest evidence into practice in the ICU.

The session focused on “what’s new” in critical care and sepsis from the literature published in the past year.

According to the National Center for Health Statistics at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, sepsis or septicemia patients averaged a 75% longer length of stay and were more than eight times likely to die, compared with patients hospitalized for other conditions.

“There has been a lot of discussion about steroids in sepsis that is potentially practice changing,” Dr. Kritek said in an interview. To tackle the always-tricky topic of steroids and sepsis, Dr. Kritek selected a trio of studies for review and discussion. In the first, vitamin C was potentially as effective as hydrocortisone and thiamine for the treatment of severe sepsis and septic shock (CHEST. 2017;151[6]:1229‐38). Another study addressed adjunctive glucocorticoid therapy for septic shock patients, and a third examined the use of hydrocortisone plus fludrocortisone for adults with septic shock.

The trials not involving vitamin C were published in the New England Journal of Medicine this year, conducted in Australia (2018;378:797‐808) and France (2018;378:809‐18), and included 3,658 and 1,241 adult sepsis patients, respectively. The studies were similar in size and design. Based on these two studies, hydrocortisone appears to shorten septic shock duration, and treatment with hydrocortisone and possibly fludrocortisone could be helpful for the more seriously ill patients, said Dr. Kritek. As for the value of vitamin C and thiamine, “the jury is still out,” she noted.

 

Sepsis and critical care issues are in the spotlight at HM18, and these hot topics were the focus of the Monday education session, “He-Who-Shall-Not-Be-Named: Updates in Sepsis and Critical Care.”

Patricia Kritek, MD, EdM, of the University of Washington, Seattle, led an interactive and engaging session, educating attendees about the current research in sepsis and critical care areas so they would feel comfortable implementing the latest evidence into practice in the ICU.

The session focused on “what’s new” in critical care and sepsis from the literature published in the past year.

According to the National Center for Health Statistics at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, sepsis or septicemia patients averaged a 75% longer length of stay and were more than eight times likely to die, compared with patients hospitalized for other conditions.

“There has been a lot of discussion about steroids in sepsis that is potentially practice changing,” Dr. Kritek said in an interview. To tackle the always-tricky topic of steroids and sepsis, Dr. Kritek selected a trio of studies for review and discussion. In the first, vitamin C was potentially as effective as hydrocortisone and thiamine for the treatment of severe sepsis and septic shock (CHEST. 2017;151[6]:1229‐38). Another study addressed adjunctive glucocorticoid therapy for septic shock patients, and a third examined the use of hydrocortisone plus fludrocortisone for adults with septic shock.

The trials not involving vitamin C were published in the New England Journal of Medicine this year, conducted in Australia (2018;378:797‐808) and France (2018;378:809‐18), and included 3,658 and 1,241 adult sepsis patients, respectively. The studies were similar in size and design. Based on these two studies, hydrocortisone appears to shorten septic shock duration, and treatment with hydrocortisone and possibly fludrocortisone could be helpful for the more seriously ill patients, said Dr. Kritek. As for the value of vitamin C and thiamine, “the jury is still out,” she noted.

 

Sepsis and critical care issues are in the spotlight at HM18, and these hot topics were the focus of the Monday education session, “He-Who-Shall-Not-Be-Named: Updates in Sepsis and Critical Care.”

Patricia Kritek, MD, EdM, of the University of Washington, Seattle, led an interactive and engaging session, educating attendees about the current research in sepsis and critical care areas so they would feel comfortable implementing the latest evidence into practice in the ICU.

The session focused on “what’s new” in critical care and sepsis from the literature published in the past year.

According to the National Center for Health Statistics at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, sepsis or septicemia patients averaged a 75% longer length of stay and were more than eight times likely to die, compared with patients hospitalized for other conditions.

“There has been a lot of discussion about steroids in sepsis that is potentially practice changing,” Dr. Kritek said in an interview. To tackle the always-tricky topic of steroids and sepsis, Dr. Kritek selected a trio of studies for review and discussion. In the first, vitamin C was potentially as effective as hydrocortisone and thiamine for the treatment of severe sepsis and septic shock (CHEST. 2017;151[6]:1229‐38). Another study addressed adjunctive glucocorticoid therapy for septic shock patients, and a third examined the use of hydrocortisone plus fludrocortisone for adults with septic shock.

The trials not involving vitamin C were published in the New England Journal of Medicine this year, conducted in Australia (2018;378:797‐808) and France (2018;378:809‐18), and included 3,658 and 1,241 adult sepsis patients, respectively. The studies were similar in size and design. Based on these two studies, hydrocortisone appears to shorten septic shock duration, and treatment with hydrocortisone and possibly fludrocortisone could be helpful for the more seriously ill patients, said Dr. Kritek. As for the value of vitamin C and thiamine, “the jury is still out,” she noted.

 

Antibiotic resistance is “one of the greatest problems we face,” according to Jennifer A. Hanrahan, DO, MSc, of MetroHealth Medical Center in Cleveland. Dr. Hanrahan led the education session, “A Bug’s Life: Infectious Disease Pearls,” and she called the topic “timely and timeless.”

Antibiotic resistance stems from several problems, Dr. Hanrahan said in her Monday presentation. “One of these is overuse of antibiotics, specifically overuse of broad-spectrum antibiotics, and the other problem is overuse of testing.”

Data from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention show that at least 2 million people in the United States develop antibiotic-resistant bacterial infections each year. At least 23,000 of these patients die each year because of these infections.

In 2013, the CDC published a report on drug-resistant threats in the United States. The three offenders deemed most serious – Clostridium difficile, Carbapenem-resistant Enterobacteriaceae, and Neisseria gonorrhoeae, continue to challenge clinicians.

Clinicians can help curb antibiotic resistance by practicing good stewardship, said Dr. Hanrahan. “Antimicrobial stewardship and laboratory stewardship are two things that can greatly improve patient care and outcomes for patients,” she said.

“Testing stewardship means ordering tests that are necessary based on signs and symptoms,” said Dr. Hanrahan. “For example, people often order urine cultures when there are no symptoms of urinary tract infection, and then end up treating positive cultures with antibiotics even when there are no symptoms of infection. This leads to unnecessary antibiotic exposure,” she noted.

The CDC’s core plans to fight antimicrobial resistance include:

• Preventing infections in the first place: The CDC emphasizes the importance of prevention through hand washing, safe food handling practices, and immunizations.
• Tracking data: The CDC collects and uses data on resistant infections to identify risk factors for resistance and develop strategies to prevent the spread of resistant bacteria.
• Practicing antibiotic stewardship: As Dr. Hanrahan noted, judicious use of antibiotics can help cut down on resistant bacteria.
• Developing alternatives: The CDC supports the development of new antibiotics and new tests to track antibacterial resistance.

Dr. Hanrahan discussed the Top 10 things hospitalists can do to improve lab testing and antimicrobial use.

“Hospitalists must recognize the need to decrease antibiotic use, utilize laboratory testing appropriately, and improve patient safety,” she said.

“There are a wide range of resources available on the Internet that can help you delve further into this topic and to find the appropriate balance for testing and treatment,” Dr. Hanrahan concluded.

Antibiotic resistance is “one of the greatest problems we face,” according to Jennifer A. Hanrahan, DO, MSc, of MetroHealth Medical Center in Cleveland. Dr. Hanrahan led the education session, “A Bug’s Life: Infectious Disease Pearls,” and she called the topic “timely and timeless.”

Antibiotic resistance stems from several problems, Dr. Hanrahan said in her Monday presentation. “One of these is overuse of antibiotics, specifically overuse of broad-spectrum antibiotics, and the other problem is overuse of testing.”

Data from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention show that at least 2 million people in the United States develop antibiotic-resistant bacterial infections each year. At least 23,000 of these patients die each year because of these infections.

In 2013, the CDC published a report on drug-resistant threats in the United States. The three offenders deemed most serious – Clostridium difficile, Carbapenem-resistant Enterobacteriaceae, and Neisseria gonorrhoeae, continue to challenge clinicians.

Clinicians can help curb antibiotic resistance by practicing good stewardship, said Dr. Hanrahan. “Antimicrobial stewardship and laboratory stewardship are two things that can greatly improve patient care and outcomes for patients,” she said.

“Testing stewardship means ordering tests that are necessary based on signs and symptoms,” said Dr. Hanrahan. “For example, people often order urine cultures when there are no symptoms of urinary tract infection, and then end up treating positive cultures with antibiotics even when there are no symptoms of infection. This leads to unnecessary antibiotic exposure,” she noted.

The CDC’s core plans to fight antimicrobial resistance include:

• Preventing infections in the first place: The CDC emphasizes the importance of prevention through hand washing, safe food handling practices, and immunizations.
• Tracking data: The CDC collects and uses data on resistant infections to identify risk factors for resistance and develop strategies to prevent the spread of resistant bacteria.
• Practicing antibiotic stewardship: As Dr. Hanrahan noted, judicious use of antibiotics can help cut down on resistant bacteria.
• Developing alternatives: The CDC supports the development of new antibiotics and new tests to track antibacterial resistance.

Dr. Hanrahan discussed the Top 10 things hospitalists can do to improve lab testing and antimicrobial use.

“Hospitalists must recognize the need to decrease antibiotic use, utilize laboratory testing appropriately, and improve patient safety,” she said.

“There are a wide range of resources available on the Internet that can help you delve further into this topic and to find the appropriate balance for testing and treatment,” Dr. Hanrahan concluded.

Antibiotic resistance is “one of the greatest problems we face,” according to Jennifer A. Hanrahan, DO, MSc, of MetroHealth Medical Center in Cleveland. Dr. Hanrahan led the education session, “A Bug’s Life: Infectious Disease Pearls,” and she called the topic “timely and timeless.”

Antibiotic resistance stems from several problems, Dr. Hanrahan said in her Monday presentation. “One of these is overuse of antibiotics, specifically overuse of broad-spectrum antibiotics, and the other problem is overuse of testing.”

Data from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention show that at least 2 million people in the United States develop antibiotic-resistant bacterial infections each year. At least 23,000 of these patients die each year because of these infections.

In 2013, the CDC published a report on drug-resistant threats in the United States. The three offenders deemed most serious – Clostridium difficile, Carbapenem-resistant Enterobacteriaceae, and Neisseria gonorrhoeae, continue to challenge clinicians.

Clinicians can help curb antibiotic resistance by practicing good stewardship, said Dr. Hanrahan. “Antimicrobial stewardship and laboratory stewardship are two things that can greatly improve patient care and outcomes for patients,” she said.

“Testing stewardship means ordering tests that are necessary based on signs and symptoms,” said Dr. Hanrahan. “For example, people often order urine cultures when there are no symptoms of urinary tract infection, and then end up treating positive cultures with antibiotics even when there are no symptoms of infection. This leads to unnecessary antibiotic exposure,” she noted.

The CDC’s core plans to fight antimicrobial resistance include:

• Preventing infections in the first place: The CDC emphasizes the importance of prevention through hand washing, safe food handling practices, and immunizations.
• Tracking data: The CDC collects and uses data on resistant infections to identify risk factors for resistance and develop strategies to prevent the spread of resistant bacteria.
• Practicing antibiotic stewardship: As Dr. Hanrahan noted, judicious use of antibiotics can help cut down on resistant bacteria.
• Developing alternatives: The CDC supports the development of new antibiotics and new tests to track antibacterial resistance.

Dr. Hanrahan discussed the Top 10 things hospitalists can do to improve lab testing and antimicrobial use.

“Hospitalists must recognize the need to decrease antibiotic use, utilize laboratory testing appropriately, and improve patient safety,” she said.

“There are a wide range of resources available on the Internet that can help you delve further into this topic and to find the appropriate balance for testing and treatment,” Dr. Hanrahan concluded.