SIMPLE procedures: Survey of Internal Medicine Providers' Limitations and Experiences with procedures and medical procedure services

Author:

Cool Joséphine A.1ORCID,Lai Andrew R.2,Kramer Henry3,Baduashvili Amiran3ORCID

Affiliation:

1. Division of General Medicine Harvard Medical School, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center Boston Massachusetts USA

2. Division of Hospital Medicine University of California, San Francisco San Francisco California USA

3. Division of Hospital Medicine University of Colorado School of Medicine Aurora Colorado USA

Abstract

AbstractBackgroundIn response to a decline in bedside procedures performed by hospitalists, some hospital medicine groups have created medical procedure services (MPSs) concentrating procedures under the expertise of trained hospitalist‐proceduralists.ObjectivesTo characterize the structure, breadth, and heterogeneity of academic medical center MPSs, as well as compare the procedural landscape for groups with and without an MPS.MethodsThe Survey of Internal Medicine Providers' Limitations and Experiences with Procedures and MPSs, is a cross‐sectional study, conducted in the United States and Canada through a web‐based survey administered from October 2022 to March 2023. We used convenience and snowball sampling to identify eligible study participants. The survey explored presence of MPS, procedure volumes, patient safety, and educational practices. For MPSs, we explored onboarding, staffing, skill maintenancy, funding, and barriers to growth.ResultsForty institutions (response rate 97.5%), represented by members of the Procedural Research and Innovation for Medical Educators (PRIME) consortium participated in the survey. MPSs were found in 75% of the surveyed institutions. Most MPSs (97%) involved trainees and were staffed by internists (100%) who often had additional clinical duties (70%). The majority (83%) of MPSs used checklists and procedural safety guidelines, but only 53% had a standardized process for tracking complications. There was significant variability in determining procedural competency and supervising trainees. Groups with an MPS reported higher procedure volume compared to those without.ConclusionsMPSs were highly prevalent among the participating institutions, offered a broad array of bedside procedures, and often included trainees. There was a high variability in funding models, procedure volumes, patient safety practices, and skill maintenance requirements.

Publisher

Wiley

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3