Although there is no data on what is declared as the ‘gold standard,’ different components of the rounding process can be evaluated as process design concepts. In a review of eight models, one study found that most physicians who already use one of these models are unable to identify the other types of rounding. Rounding models are not well understood by physicians or other medical providers. A quality dynamic can be further examined through the ‘iron triangle’ that demonstrates the relationship between cost, access, and quality. However, at any given time, if improvement is attempted by changing any of the variables in an attempt to achieve a quality dynamic, this manipulation will ultimately come at the expense of the other variables. In addition to changing rounding practices, hospitalists have the power to improve quality and productivity by changing their habits to achieve a quality dynamic. Hospitalists are continually encouraged to improve proficiency in rounding by maximizing resources while eliminating waste and redundancy. In the 1990s, as the market for healthcare became increasingly competitive, hospitals have began using hospitalists more efficiently and economically to maintain quality care while decreasing cost. The role of the hospitalist has traditionally been to increase efficiency in medicine. This analysis can provide insights on designing best practices for hospitalists rounding efficiently. Preference difference due to age was insignificant.ĭiscussion and Conclusion: In this study, 143 hospitalists provided preferences for improving rounding efficiency based on elements from work assignment and communication. Only 29% believe their EMR is too complex to navigate. Majority prefer dictation via Dragon (47%) to the phone application (23%). Majority have not used a WOW yet (74%) believe WOWs could improve efficiency. Respondents preferred calling a consultant (52%) or text messaging (40%). Text messaging for paging was preferred (70.1%) to pagers (23.4%). Geographic rounding was most efficient at 85%. Half (50%) preferred rounding independently, (34%) with an AP, and majority (62%) with a resident. Most (80%) expect higher patient volumes when working with an advanced practitioner (AP). Results: There were 143 respondents, majority male (60%) with (40%) female. Responses were presented using descriptive statistics and SPSS v26. Methods: An anonymous survey containing demographics and questions on preferences for rounding efficiently by hospitalists were widely distributed online. This study investigates hospitalist rounding preferences to improve efficiency based on resources categorized under work assignment and communication. Background: There is no ‘gold standard’ method of rounding for hospitalists.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |