Search PubMed⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search PubMed

Results for “Hospitalists”

Search indexed PubMed citations on genomics, clinical trials, systematic reviews and public health. Explore titles, authors and supplied subject terms, then open the PubMed record.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 37 records · Page 2Linked to original sources
PubMed2003

Improved survival with hospitalists in a pediatric intensive care unit.

OBJECTIVE: To compare the survival of patients in a teaching hospital pediatric intensive care unit in which residents provided after-hours in-house coverage with survival in the same unit with hospitalists providing this coverage. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. SETTING: Pediatric intensive care units in two teaching hospitals that are managed by the same group of academic pediatric intensivists, one of which transitioned from the traditional resident-staffed model to a hospitalist-staffed model for after-hours in-house coverage. PATIENTS: All pediatric patients admitted to the study pediatric intensive care unit and to the control pediatric intensive care unit from April 1997 through March 1998, the resident era, and from October 1998 through September 1999, the hospitalist era. INTERVENTIONS: Multivariate analysis, with survival as the dependent variable and era (hospitalist vs. resident) as an independent variable, was used to compare odds of survival during the hospitalist era with that of the resident era, adjusted for severity of illness. Multivariate linear regression was used to compare length of stay during the hospitalist era with that of the resident era, adjusted for severity of illness. Pediatric Risk of Mortality scores and those diagnostic categories typically associated with higher mortality rates also were included as independent variables in both analyses to adjust for severity of illness. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Multivariate analysis yielded an estimated odds ratio of survival of 2.8 for the hospitalist era compared with the resident era (p = .013), and our analysis supported an independent association between survival and hospitalist era. Multivariate linear regression showed that length of stay, also adjusted for severity of illness, during the hospitalist era was 21.1 hrs shorter than during the resident era (p = .013). Neither survival nor length of stay was significantly associated with era at the control hospital. CONCLUSION: Improved survival with hospitalists, rather than residents, providing after-hours care when an intensivist is not in house suggests that the quality of care of critically ill patients is improved when more experienced physicians are providing bedside care. Shorter length of stay with the hospitalist model also may reflect improved quality of care.

Adolescent↗
PubMed2002

Comparison of processes and outcomes of pneumonia care between hospitalists and community-based primary care physicians.

OBJECTIVE: To compare medical care provided by hospitalists and primary care physicians to patients with community-acquired pneumonia in order to identify specific practices that might explain the improved efficiency of care provided by hospitalists. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed the medical charts of 455 patients hospitalized with pneumonia at a community-based tertiary care center between January 1, 1998, and January 1, 1999. Exclusion criteria included human immunodeficiency virus infection, lung cancer, active tuberculosis, hospitalization within 7 days, length of stay (LOS) more than 14 days, and requirement of mechanical ventilation. All patients were cared for by either a full-time hospitalist or a primary care physician. Data collected included patient insurance status, variables to calculate each patient's Pneumonia Severity Index score, initial antibiotic selection, door-to-needle time, time to patient stability for switch to oral antibiotics, time to actual switch, unstable variables at discharge, and subspecialty consultation rate. Each patient's initial chest x-ray film was reviewed and classified as diagnostic of pneumonia, indeterminate, or clear. Outcomes measured via administrative database were mortality, LOS, costs, and readmission rate. RESULTS: Primary care physicians cared for 270 patients, and hospitalists cared for 185. Primary care physician patients were older, and this group had a higher proportion of the highest-risk patients. The mean time to stability was 3.2 days for hospitalists and 3.3 days for primary care physicians, and the mean time from stability to actual switch from intravenous to oral antibiotics was 1.6 days and 23 days, respectively (P=.003). The mean adjusted LOS was 5.6 days for hospitalists and 6.5 days for primary care physicians. Similarly adjusted costs were $594 less per patient treated by hospitalists. A difference in door-to-needle time of 0.9 hour favoring primary care physicians did not contribute to LOS. No significant differences were noted in adjusted inpatient mortality or the appropriateness of initial antibiotics used. Primary care physicians were more likely to prescribe clindamycin and ceftazidime, and they requested infectious disease consultations more often. At discharge, 14% of hospitalist patients and 7% of primary care physician patients had at least 1 unstable variable. Differences in hospital readmission rates at 15 and 30 days were not statistically significant in combined or risk-stratified analyses. CONCLUSIONS: Inpatients with community-acquired pneumonia cared for by hospitalists had a shorter adjusted LOS than those seen by primary care physicians primarily because of earlier recognition of stability and more rapid conversion from intravenous to oral antibiotics. Adjusted costs were likewise reduced. However, patients seen by hospitalists were discharged with an unstable clinical variable more often. Other than earlier switch to oral antibiotics, less use of clindamycin and ceftazidime, and fewer infectious disease consultations, hospitalists' processes of care were similar to those of primary care physicians.

Administration, Oral↗
PubMed2003

How physicians perceive hospitalist services after implementation: anticipation vs reality.

OBJECTIVE: To determine whether internists' attitudes toward the hospitalist model change after implementation of a new inpatient service. DESIGN: Cross-sectional surveys performed in 1998 and 2000. SETTING: Tertiary care hospital in Boston, Mass. SUBJECTS: A total of 236 internal medicine board-certified physicians affiliated with Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Responses to survey items regarding attitude toward inpatient care and the hospitalist model. We used multivariable models to determine factors associated with physician responses. RESULTS: Of physicians surveyed in 2000, 236 (69%) responded; 145 (61%) had also responded in 1998. The mean (SD) age of respondents was 46.4 (10.8) years; 157 (66.5%) were male; and 146 (61.9%) were primary care providers. In 2000, more physicians agreed that "caring for inpatients is an inefficient use of my time" (P<.001), and that "use of a hospitalist service improves quality of care" (P =.002). In 2000, more physicians disagreed that "use of a hospitalist service diminishes physician career satisfaction" (P<.001), and that "use of the hospitalist service adversely affects the physician-patient relationship" (P<.001). No differences were detected in responses to questions regarding patient satisfaction or overall career satisfaction. In multivariable models, older physicians were more likely to favor the hospitalist model; those with busier inpatient practices were more negative (P<.05 for each). Physician specialty or being a primary care provider was not associated with attitudes toward the hospitalist model. CONCLUSIONS: Following experience with a hospitalist system, physician attitude, including concerns regarding career satisfaction and relationships with patients, toward a voluntary hospitalist model improved. Future research should investigate whether the hospitalist model affects patient satisfaction and quality of care.

Adult↗
PubMedDate not supplied

The hospitalist movement 5 years later.

CONTEXT: We originally described the hospitalist model of inpatient care in 1996; since then, the model has experienced tremendous growth. This growth has important clinical, financial, educational, and policy implications. OBJECTIVES: To review data regarding the effect of hospitalists on resource use, quality of care, satisfaction, and teaching; and to analyze the impact of hospitalists on the health care system and frame key issues facing the movement. DATA SOURCES AND STUDY SELECTION: We searched MEDLINE, BIOSIS, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library from 1996 to September 2001 for studies comparing hospitalist care with an appropriate control group in terms of resource use, quality, or satisfaction outcomes. DATA EXTRACTION: We extracted information regarding study design, nature of hospitalist and control groups, analytical strategies, and key outcomes. DATA SYNTHESIS: Most studies found that implementation of hospitalist programs was associated with significant reductions in resource use, usually measured as hospital costs (average decrease, 13.4%) or average length of stay (average decrease, 16.6%). The few studies that failed to demonstrate reductions usually used atypical control groups. Although several studies found improved outcomes, such as inpatient mortality and readmission rates, these results were inconsistent. Patient satisfaction was generally preserved, while limited data supported positive effects on teaching. Although concerns about inpatient-outpatient information transfer remain, recent physician surveys indicate general acceptance of the model. CONCLUSIONS: Empirical research supports the premise that hospitalists improve inpatient efficiency without harmful effects on quality or patient satisfaction. Education may be improved. In part catalyzed by these data, the clinical use of hospitalists is growing rapidly, and hospitalists are also assuming prominent roles as teachers, researchers, and quality leaders. The hospitalist field has now achieved many of the attributes of traditional medical specialties and seems destined to continue to grow.

Health Services Research↗
PubMed2001

Primary care physician attitudes regarding communication with hospitalists.

Hospitalist systems create discontinuity of care. Enhanced communication between the hospitalist and primary care physician (PCP) could mitigate the harms of discontinuity. We conducted a mailed survey of 4,155 physician members of the California Academy of Family Physicians to determine their preferences for and satisfaction with communication with hospitalists. We received 1,030 completed surveys (26%). PCPs overwhelmingly stated that they "very much prefer" to communicate with hospitalists by telephone (77%), at admission (73%), and discharge (78%). Only discharge medications (94%) and discharge diagnosis (90%) were deemed "very important" by >90% of PCPs. Of the 556 respondents (54%) who had ever used a hospitalist, 56% were very or somewhat satisfied with communication with hospitalists, and 68% agreed that hospitalists are a good idea. Regarding communication at discharge, only 33% of PCPs reported that discharge summaries always or usually arrive before the patient is seen for follow-up. Only 56% of PCPs in our survey were satisfied with communication with hospitalists. Hospitalists should communicate with PCPs in a timely manner by telephone, at least at admission and discharge, and provide the specific pieces of information deemed important by the vast majority of PCPs. Hospitalists should also ensure that discharge information arrives in time to assist the PCP in reassuming care of their patients. It may be possible to tailor communication to individual PCPs. Further research could assess the impact of such communication on patient satisfaction and outcomes.

Adult↗
PubMed2001

The effect of a hospitalist service with nurse discharge planner on patient care in an academic teaching hospital.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the impact of implementing a hospitalist service with a nurse discharge planner in an academic teaching hospital. SUBJECTS AND METHODS: Inpatient medicine service was provided by hospitalists, general internists, and specialists. Service personnel were identical except that the hospitalist service also had a nurse discharge planner. Hospitalists attended 4 months per year (compared with the 1 month by most other attending physicians) and had no outpatient responsibilities during the ward months. Patients were admitted alternately based on resident call schedule. Major outcomes included average costs of hospitalization, length of stay, and resource utilization. Quality measures included inpatient mortality, 30-day readmission rates, and satisfaction of patients, residents and students. RESULTS: Hospitalist-attended services had lower mean (+/- SD) inpatient costs per patient ($4289 +/- $6512) compared with specialist-staffed services ($6066 +/- $7550, P < 0.0001), with a trend toward lower costs when compared with generalist-attended services ($4850 +/- $7027, P = 0.11). Hospitalist services had shorter mean lengths of stay (4.4 +/- 4.0 days), compared with generalists (5.2 +/- 5.2 days) and specialists (6.0 +/- 5.5 days, P < 0.0001 for hospitalists vs. both groups). Readmission rates were similar in all groups. Mortality rates were higher in the specialist group [5.0% (44 of 874)] compared with hospitalists [2.2% (18 of 829)] and generalists [2.6% (20 of 761), P = 0.002 for specialists vs. both groups, P = 0.09 for generalists vs hospitalists]. Satisfaction results were uniformly high in all groups, with no significant differences. CONCLUSION: Hospitalist services with a nurse discharge planner were associated with lower average cost and shorter average length of hospital stay, without any apparent compromise in clinical outcomes or patient satisfaction.

Adult↗
PubMed2002

Primary care physician attitudes regarding communication with hospitalists.

Hospitalist systems create discontinuity of care. Enhanced communication between the hospitalist and primary care physician (PCP) could mitigate the harms of discontinuity. We conducted a mailed survey of 4,155 physician members of the California Academy of Family Physicians to determine their preferences for and satisfaction with communication with hospitalists. We received 1,030 completed surveys (26%). PCPs overwhelmingly stated that they "very much prefer" to communicate with hospitalists by telephone (77%), at admission (73%), and discharge (78%). Only discharge medications (94%) and discharge diagnosis (90%) were deemed "very important" by >90% of PCPs. Of the 556 respondents (54%) who had ever used a hospitalist, 56% were very or somewhat satisfied with communication with hospitalists, and 68% agreed that hospitalists are a good idea. Regarding communication at discharge, only 33% of PCPs reported that discharge summaries always or usually arrive before the patient is seen for follow-up. Only 56% of PCPs in our survey were satisfied with communication with hospitalists. Hospitalists should communicate with PCPs in a timely manner by telephone, at least at admission and discharge, and provide the specific pieces of information deemed important by the vast majority of PCPs. Hospitalists should also ensure that discharge information arrives in time to assist the PCP in reassuming care of their patients. It may be possible to tailor communication to individual PCPs. Further research could assess the impact of such communication on patient satisfaction and outcomes.

Attitude of Health Personnel↗
PubMed2003

Hospital economics of the hospitalist.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the economic impact on the hospital of a hospitalist program and to develop insights into the relative economic importance of variables such as reductions in mean length of stay and cost, improvements in throughput (patients discharged per unit time), payer methods of reimbursement, and the cost of the hospitalist program. DATA SOURCES: The primary data source was Tufts-New England Medical Center in Boston. Patient demographics, utilization, cost, and revenue data were obtained from the hospital's cost accounting system and medical records. STUDY DESIGN: The hospitalist admitted and managed all patients during a six-week period on the general medical unit of Tufts-New England Medical Center. Reimbursement, cost, length of stay, and throughput outcomes during this period were contrasted with patients admitted to the unit in the same period in the prior year, in the preceding period, and in the following period. PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: The hospitalist group compared with the control group demonstrated: length of stay reduced to 2.19 days from 3.45 days (p<.001); total hospital costs per admission reduced to 1,775 dollars from 2,332 dollars (p<.001); costs per day increased to 811 dollars from 679 dollars (p<.001); no differences for readmission within 30 days of discharge to extended care facilities. The hospital's expected incremental profitability with the hospitalist was -1.44 dollars per admission excluding incremental throughput effects, and it was most sensitive to changes in the ratio of per diem to case rate reimbursement. Incremental throughput with the hospitalist was estimated at 266 patients annually with an associated incremental profitability of 1.3 million dollars. CONCLUSION: Hospital interventions designed to reduce length of stay, such as the hospitalist, should be evaluated in terms of cost, throughput, and reimbursement effects. Excluding throughput effects, the hospitalist program was not economically viable due to the influence of per diem reimbursement. Throughput improvements occasioned by the hospitalist program with high baseline occupancy levels are substantial and tend to favor a hospitalist program.

Bed Occupancy↗
PubMed2006

Comparison of outcome measures for a traditional pediatric faculty service and nonfaculty hospitalist services in a community teaching hospital.

OBJECTIVE: Several studies have found decreased cost and length of stay for patients who are cared for by pediatric hospitalists compared with traditional faculty models. The objective of this study was to compare cost and length of stay between a faculty group and 2 separate hospitalist groups in a community teaching hospital. This study differs from previous ones in that both the traditional faculty and hospitalist models were in place simultaneously, and the traditional faculty group was employed by the hospital, whereas the hospitalist groups were in private practice. METHODS: A total of 1009 pediatric patients with any of the 11 most frequent diagnosis-related groups were analyzed according to the admitting physician group. Total direct costs and length of stay were computed for 3 separate groups (faculty group, hospitalist group 1, and hospitalist group 2). Linear regression models were used to compare total direct costs and length of stay among the groups. Each model accounted for age, severity index, and payer source. RESULTS: Age, severity index, and physician group were predictive in determining total direct costs and length of stay. There was no significant difference in patient age among the groups, but the faculty group had significantly increased severity indices compared with hospitalist groups 1 and 2 (1.6 +/- 0.7 vs 1.3 +/- 0.6 vs 1.4 +/- 0.6, mean +/- SD). The faculty group had statistically significantly lower total direct costs compared with hospitalist groups 1 and 2 (1781 dollars +/- 1449 dollars vs 1954 dollars +/- 1212 dollars vs 1964 dollars +/- 1495 dollars, mean +/- SD). The faculty group had shorter average length of stay compared with hospitalist groups 1 and 2 (2.6 +/- 2.0 vs 3.1 +/- 2.6 vs 2.9 +/- 2.3, mean +/- SD). The readmission rates among the groups were similar. CONCLUSIONS: Traditional faculty models can be as efficient in terms of total direct costs and length of stay as evolving hospitalist models. This study's results may be unique because the traditional faculty model was composed of general pediatricians instead of a blend of generalists and subspecialists. In addition, the traditional faculty physicians concentrated almost entirely on the care of inpatients while engaged in hospital care.

Child↗
PubMed2001

Characteristics and work experiences of hospitalists in the United States.

BACKGROUND: Little is known about the personal characteristics, work-related attitudes, or professional experiences of hospitalists. In considering the future of hospital medicine as a viable career choice for physicians (primarily, internists), these issues should be examined in a systematic fashion. Learning more about hospitalists and their work can enhance dialogue about the advantages and shortcomings of such a career from the perspective of the individual physician. METHODS: A self-administered mail survey was sent to 820 hospitalists who are dues-paying members of the National Association of Inpatient Physicians and who spend 50% or more of their time doing clinical work, teaching, or research related to hospital medicine. Attitudes about topics such as job-related burnout and job satisfaction were tapped, as well as information about different professional and social experiences. The analyses were performed using descriptive statistics and analysis of variance techniques. RESULTS: Analysis was based on 393 responses (48% response rate). Results show hospitalists to be a group of younger, mostly male, early-career individuals with high levels of job satisfaction and autonomy, low levels of burnout, and a long-term commitment to remaining in the role. Hospital medicine is a source of positive social and professional work experiences related to interactions with physician peers, patients and their families, and nonphysician hospital coworkers. Key components of hospitalists' jobs, practices, and workload are coalescing. However, certain developments, such as changing patterns of compensation and the enlisting of more general internists and women as hospitalists, merit further examination. CONCLUSIONS: The results offer insight into the physicians who are becoming hospitalists, the jobs and settings in which they work, and how hospitalists experience their everyday work lives. Valuable baseline data are provided for assessment of attitudes, such as burnout, that should be examined regularly in this fledgling group. This study complements research looking at the performance-related outcomes of hospitalists, and it can be used by various stakeholders to better understand and assess the long-term potential of what is being proposed as a new career path.

Adult↗
PubMed2004

Effects of hospitalist attending physicians on trainee satisfaction with teaching and with internal medicine rotations.

BACKGROUND: Hospitalists are increasingly serving as inpatient attendings at teaching hospitals. The educational impact of this new model is unclear. We evaluated the relationship between type of attending (hospitalist vs traditional) and trainees' ratings of attending teaching and the overall ward rotation. METHODS: We analyzed data from a Web-based evaluation system containing all house staff and student evaluations of their attendings and internal medicine ward rotations at 2 university-affiliated teaching hospitals over a 2-year period (1999-2001). RESULTS: The overall evaluation completion rate was 91% (1587 of 1742 evaluations) by trainees working with 17 hospitalists and 52 traditional attendings. Trainees reported significantly more overall satisfaction with hospitalists than traditional attendings (8.3 vs 8.0 on a 9-point scale; P<.001) and rated hospitalists' overall teaching effectiveness as superior (4.8 vs 4.5 on a 5-point scale; P<.001). Perceived overall educational value of rotations was higher with hospitalist attendings (3.9 vs 3.7 on a 5-point scale; P =.04). Trainees evaluated hospitalists' knowledge, teaching, and feedback as superior to that of traditional attendings. There were no significant differences in reports of attendings' interest in teaching or patients, availability, or emphasis on cost-effectiveness. CONCLUSIONS: Trainees reported more effective teaching and more satisfying inpatient rotations when supervised by hospitalists. This analysis suggests that hospitalists may possess or accrue a specific inpatient knowledge base and teaching skill that distinguishes them from nonhospitalists.

Attitude of Health Personnel↗
PubMed2001

Implications of the hospitalist model for medical students' education.

At many academic health centers, medical students in internal medicine, family medicine, and pediatrics are working with a new form of attending physician, the hospitalist. Although a growing literature demonstrates the benefits of hospitalists for patients and housestaff, the influence of hospitalists on students has been underemphasized. Advantages of the hospitalist model for students can include hospitalists' expertise in general inpatient medicine, their availability to teach throughout the day, and their role-modeling of the provision of high-quality and efficient care. However, the change in the ward attending workforce from non-hospitalist generalists, subspecialists, and biomedical researchers to generalist-hospitalists potentially limits students' exposure to the broad range of career opportunities the former group represents. The authors propose a research agenda to investigate the educational impact of the hospitalist model, suggest strategies to mitigate the limitations in students' exposures to subspecialty faculty, and recommend professional development in teaching for hospitalists to ensure that student education thrives in this new environment of inpatient medicine.

Academic Medical Centers↗
PubMedDate not supplied

Hospitalists: Evolution, evidence, and eventualities.

Hospitalists are physicians who spend at least 25% of their professional time serving as the physicians-of-record for inpatients, during which time they accept "hand-offs" of hospitalized patients from primary care providers, returning the patients to their primary care providers at the time of hospital discharge. The hospitalist movement is only about 5 years old, yet at least 7000 hospitalists practice today and an estimated 19,000 will ultimately practice, approximately the current number of emergency medicine physicians. The emerging positivist literature on hospitalists' impact is the subject of this review. It traces the nature and evolution of the hospitalist movement; summarizes empirical evidence about costs, clinical outcomes, patient satisfaction, and education; and appraises whether the hospitalist model is indeed novel. The review concludes by outlining research questions about the hospitalist model's viability over time, the mechanisms by which it produces benefits, and especially hospitalists' longitudinal effect on continuity of patient care. A literature "scorecard" might rank evidence to date on costs as positive, evidence on clinical outcomes and education as nonnegative, and evidence on patient satisfaction and continuity of care as inconclusive. Above all, longitudinal research must illuminate whether hospitalists' advantages comeat the cost of the doctor-patient relationship.

Continuity of Patient Care↗
PubMed2004

Comparison of hospitalists and nonhospitalists in inpatient length of stay adjusting for patient and physician characteristics.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the independent effect of hospitalist status upon inpatient length of stay after controlling for case mix, as well as patient-level and provider-level variables such as age, years since physician medical school graduation, and volume status of provider. DESIGN: Observational retrospective cohort study employing a hierarchical random intercept logistic regression model. SETTING: Tertiary-care teaching hospital. PATIENTS: All admissions during 2001 to the department of medicine not sent initially to the medical intensive care unit or coronary care unit. MEASUREMENTS: Observed length of stay (LOS) compared to principle diagnosis related group (DRG)-specific mean LOS for hospitalist and nonhospitalist patients adjusting for patient age, gender, years since physician graduation from medical school, and physician volume status. MAIN RESULTS: The 9 hospitalists discharged 2,027 patients while the nonhospitalists discharged 9,361 patients. On average, hospitalist patients were younger, 63.3 versus 73.3 years (P < .0001). Hospitalists were more recently graduated from medical school, 13.8 versus 22.5 years (P= .02). Each year of patient age was found to increase the likelihood of an above average LOS (odds ratio [OR], 1.01; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.01 to 1.02; P < .001). In unadjusted analysis, hospitalists were less likely to have an above average LOS (OR, 0.51; 95% CI, 0.28 to 0.93; P= .03). Adjustment for effects of patient age and gender, physician gender, years since medical school graduation, and quintile of physician admission volume did not appreciably change the point estimate that hospitalist patients remained less likely to have above average LOS (OR, 0.60; 95% CI, 0.32 to 1.11; P= .11). CONCLUSIONS: For a given principle DRG, hospitalist patients were less likely to exceed the average LOS than were nonhospitalist patients. This effect was rather large, in that hospitalist status reduced the likelihood of above average LOS by about 49%. Adjustment for patient age, years since physician graduation, and admission volume did not significantly alter this finding. Further research should focus on identifying specific practices that account for hospitalism's effects.

Aged↗
PubMed2004

Evaluation of a staff-only hospitalist system in a tertiary care, academic children's hospital.

OBJECTIVE: The staff/housestaff hospitalist system has been evaluated in 2 pediatric centers in the United States. In Canada, fewer residents and duty hour restrictions led to the development of a staff-only hospitalist system. The objective of this study was to compare the staff-only pediatric hospitalist system and the staff/housestaff hospitalist system with respect to traditional outcome measures. DESIGN: This cohort study (staff-only hospitalist system versus staff/housestaff system) used electronic health records data (July 1, 1996, to June 30, 1997) for all admissions (n = 3807) to the general pediatric inpatient unit of an urban, tertiary care, pediatric, teaching hospital in Toronto, Canada. Outcome measures included length of hospital stay, subspecialty consultations, readmission to the hospital, and death during the hospital stay. RESULTS: The median length of hospital stay was reduced by 14% for patients admitted to the staff-only hospitalist system, compared with the staff/housestaff hospitalist system (2.5 and 2.9 days, respectively). This difference remained statistically significant after adjustment for age, gender, and comorbidity. There were no significant differences between the 2 models of care with respect to subspecialty consultation, hospital readmission, or mortality rates. A stratified analysis showed similar findings for the 10 most frequent diagnostic groups. CONCLUSIONS: The staff-only hospitalist system was associated with a significant reduction in the hospital length of stay, without evidence of adverse effects on mortality or readmission rates, compared with the staff/hospitalist system. In the context of recent restrictions on resident duty hours in the United States, these findings may be of interest to pediatric teaching hospitals considering the development of a similar staff-only hospitalist model.

Analysis of Variance↗
PubMed2002

Implementation of a voluntary hospitalist service at a community teaching hospital: improved clinical efficiency and patient outcomes.

BACKGROUND: Previous investigations of the effect of the hospitalist model on resource use and patient outcomes have focused on academic medical centers or have used short follow-up periods. OBJECTIVE: To determine the effects of hospitalist care on resource use and patient outcomes and whether these effects change over time. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. SETTING: Community-based, urban teaching hospital. PATIENTS: 5308 patients cared for by community or hospitalist physicians in the 2 years after implementation of a voluntary hospitalist service. MEASUREMENTS: Length of stay, costs, 10-day readmission rates, use of consultative services, in-hospital mortality rate, and mortality rate at 30 and 60 days. RESULTS: Patients of hospitalists were younger than those of community physicians (65 years vs. 74 years; P < 0.001) and were more likely to be of black than of white ethnicity (33.3% vs. 17.9%; P < 0.001), have Medicaid insurance (25.1% vs. 10.2%; P < 0.001), and receive intensive care (19.9% vs. 15.8%; P < 0.001). After adjustment in multivariable models, length of stay and costs were not different in the first year of the study. In year 2, patients of hospitalists had shorter stays (0.61 day shorter; P = 0.002) and lower costs ($822 lower; P = 0.002). Over the 2 years of this study, patients of hospitalists had lower risk for death in the hospital (adjusted relative hazard, 0.71 [95% CI, 0.54 to 0.93]) and at 30 and 60 days of follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: A voluntary hospitalist service at a community-based teaching hospital produced reductions in length of stay and costs that became statistically significant in the second year of use. A mortality benefit extending beyond hospitalization was noted in both years. Future investigations are needed to understand the ways in which hospitalists increase clinical efficiency and appear to improve the quality of care.

Aged↗
PubMed2005

Effects of a hospitalist model on elderly patients with hip fracture.

BACKGROUND: Hospitalists' increased role in perioperative medicine allows for examination of their effects on surgical patients. This study examined the effects of a hospitalist service created to medically manage elderly patients with hip fracture. METHODS: During a 2-year historical cohort study of 466 patients 65 years or older admitted for surgical repair of hip fracture, we examined outcomes 1 year prior to and subsequent to the change from the standard to the hospitalist model. RESULTS: The mean (SD) time to surgery (38 [47] vs 25 [53] hours; P<.001), time from surgery to dismissal (9 [8] vs 7 [5] days; P = .04), and length of stay (10.6 [9] vs 8.4 [6] days; P<.001) were shorter in the hospitalist group. Predictors of shorter time to surgery were care by the hospitalist group (P = .002), older age (P = .01), and fall as the mechanism of fracture (P<.001), while American Society of Anesthesia scores of 3 and 4 were associated with increased time to surgery (P<.001). Receiving care by the hospitalist group (P<.001) and diagnosis of delirium (P<.001) were associated with increased chance of earlier dismissal, while admission to the intensive care unit decreased this chance (P<.001). Diagnosis of delirium was more frequent in the hospitalist group (74 [32.2%] of 230 vs 42 [17.8%] of 236; P<.001). There were no differences in inpatient deaths or 30-day readmission rates. CONCLUSION: In elderly patients with hip fracture, a hospitalist model decreased time to surgery, time from surgery to dismissal, and length of stay without adversely affecting inpatient deaths or 30-day readmission rates.

Aged↗
PubMed2002

Effect of a pediatric hospitalist system on housestaff education and experience.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the effect of a pediatric hospitalist system on housestaff education and experience. SETTING: Free-standing academic children's hospital. Hospitalists were introduced in June 24, 1998, to supervise teaching and care on the general pediatric wards. METHODS: On 2 surveys, housestaff rated their skills, knowledge, and experiences on the wards (experiences survey), and the quality of teaching and supervision by attending physicians (attending survey). Responses before and after the introduction of the hospitalist system were compared using Wilcoxon nonparametric tests. RESULTS: Seventy-six (70%) of the 109 interns and 54 (62%) of the 87 senior residents responded to the experiences survey. Following introduction of the hospitalist system, the interns' mean overall rating of the general pediatrics wards rose from 4.1 to 4.7 on a 5-point Likert scale (P =.01). Their ratings of comparison rotations did not change significantly. Interns' satisfaction with the educational experience (3.2 to 3.5 of a 4-point Likert scale, P<.05), supervision, and quality of life on the pediatrics wards also improved significantly, as did their self-assessments of skills and knowledge related to general pediatrics training. Senior residents' ratings were generally unchanged. Three hundred seventy-one (63%) of the 593 attending physicians' surveys were completed. Compared with nonhospitalist attendings, hospitalists were rated more effective role models (4.7 vs 4.5 points, P<.05) and teachers (4.7 vs 4.4 points, P<.01). They were rated more knowledgeable (4.8 vs 4.5 of 5, P<.001) and accessible (4.7 vs 4.5 points, P<.05), involved housestaff more in the learning process (4.7 vs 4.4 points, P<.05), and gave better feedback (4.5 vs 4.2 points, P<.01). Hospitalists' bedside teaching, however, was rated lower (3.7 vs 4.2 points, P<.001). CONCLUSIONS: Overall, hospitalists were rated significantly higher as educators than were traditional attending physicians. Introduction of a hospitalist system was associated with improved intern experience and quality of life on general pediatrics wards, and with improved self-reported skills and knowledge in general pediatrics.

Educational Measurement↗