Wall-mounted folding chairs to promote resident physician sitting at the hospital bedside

BACKGROUND

Sitting at the bedside may improve patient-clinician communication; however, many clinicians do not regularly sit during inpatient encounters.

OBJECTIVE

To determine the impact of adding wall-mounted folding chairs inside patient rooms, beyond any impact from a resident education campaign, on the patient-reported frequency of sitting at the bedside by internal medicine resident physicians.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

Prospective, controlled pre-post trial between 2019 and 2022 (data collection paused 2020-2021 due to COVID-19) at an academic hospital in Baltimore, Maryland. Folding chairs were installed in two of four internal medicine units and educational activities were delivered equally across all units.

MAIN OUTCOME AND MEASURES

Patient-reported frequency of sitting at bedside, assessed as means on Likert-type items with 1 being "never" and 5 being "every single time." We also examined the frequency of other patient-reported communication behaviors.

RESULTS

Two hundred fifty six and 206 patients enrolled in the pre and post-intervention periods, respectively. The mean frequency of patient-reported sitting by resident physicians increased from 1.8 (SD 1.2) to 2.3 (1.2) on education-only units (absolute difference 0.48 [95% CI: 0.21-0.75]) and from 2.0 (1.3) to 3.2 (1.4) on units receiving chairs (1.16, [0.87-1.45]). Comparing differences between groups using ordered logistic regression adjusting for clustering within residents, units with added chairs had greater increases in sitting (odds ratio 2.05 [1.10-3.82]), spending enough time at the bedside (2.43 [1.32-4.49]), and checking for understanding (3.04 [1.44-6.39]). Improvements in sitting and other behaviors were sustained on both types of units.

CONCLUSIONS

Adding wall-mounted folding chairs may help promote effective patient-clinician communication.

Sitting at the Bedside: Patient and Internal Medicine Trainee Perceptions

BACKGROUND

Sitting at the bedside may strengthen physician-patient communication and improve patient experience. Yet despite the potential benefits of sitting, hospital physicians, including resident physicians, may not regularly sit down while speaking with patients.

OBJECTIVE

To examine the frequency of sitting by internal medicine residents (including first post-graduate year [PGY-1] and supervising [PGY-2/3] residents) during inpatient encounters and to assess the association between patient-reported sitting at the bedside and patients' perceptions of other physician communication behaviors. We also assessed residents' attitudes towards sitting.

DESIGN

In-person survey of patients and email survey of internal medicine residents between August 2019 and January 2020.

PARTICIPANTS

Patients admitted to general medicine teaching services and internal medicine residents at The Johns Hopkins Hospital.

MAIN MEASURES

Patient-reported frequency of sitting at the bedside, patients' perceptions of other communication behaviors (e.g., checking for understanding); residents' attitudes regarding sitting.

KEY RESULTS

Of 334 eligible patients, 256 (76%) completed a survey. Among these 256 respondents, 198 (77%) and 166 (65%) reported recognizing the PGY-1 and PGY-2/3 on their care team, respectively, for a total of 364 completed surveys. On most surveys (203/364, 56%), patients responded that residents "never" sat. Frequent sitting at the bedside ("every single time" or "most of the time," together 48/364, 13%) was correlated with other positive behaviors, including spending enough time at the bedside, checking for understanding, and not seeming to be in a rush (p < 0.01 for all). Of 151 residents, 77 (51%) completed the resident survey; 28 of the 77 (36%) reported sitting frequently. The most commonly cited barrier to sitting was that chairs were not available (38 respondents, 49%).

CONCLUSIONS

Patients perceived that residents sit infrequently. However, sitting was associated with other positive communication behaviors; this is compatible with the hypothesis that promoting sitting could improve overall patient perceptions of provider communication.

Cost-effectiveness of a Digital Health Intervention for Acute Myocardial Infarction Recovery

BACKGROUND

Acute myocardial infarction (AMI) is a common cause of hospital admissions, readmissions, and mortality worldwide. Digital health interventions (DHIs) that promote self-management, adherence to guideline-directed therapy, and cardiovascular risk reduction may improve health outcomes in this population. The "Corrie" DHI consists of a smartphone application, smartwatch, and wireless blood pressure monitor to support medication tracking, education, vital signs monitoring, and care coordination. We aimed to assess the cost-effectiveness of this DHI plus standard of care in reducing 30-day readmissions among AMI patients in comparison to standard of care alone.

METHODS

A Markov model was used to explore cost-effectiveness from the hospital perspective. The time horizon of the analysis was 1 year, with 30-day cycles, using inflation-adjusted cost data with no discount rate. Currencies were quantified in US dollars, and effectiveness was measured in quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs). The results were interpreted as an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio at a threshold of $100,000 per QALY. Univariate sensitivity and multivariate probabilistic sensitivity analyses tested model uncertainty.

RESULTS

The DHI reduced costs and increased QALYs on average, dominating standard of care in 99.7% of simulations in the probabilistic analysis. Based on the assumption that the DHI costs $2750 per patient, use of the DHI leads to a cost-savings of $7274 per patient compared with standard of care alone.

CONCLUSIONS

Our results demonstrate that this DHI is cost-saving through the reduction of risk for all-cause readmission following AMI. DHIs that promote improved adherence with guideline-based health care can reduce hospital readmissions and associated costs.

REPLACING INSULIN WITH ANTI-VIRALS: A CLINICAL VIGNETTE ON DIABETES AND HCV TREATMENT

Objective

There is growing evidence to support a connection between type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) and chronic hepatitis C virus (HCV). Patients with hepatitis C have a substantially higher risk for developing type 2 diabetes and recently there have been several proposed mechanisms. Several retrospective studies have demonstrated a small but significant improvement in glycemic control after treatment of underlying hepatitis C virus. We describe a case that demonstrates the greatest recorded improvement in glycemic control after treatment of HCV in the setting of self-discontinuation of insulin therapy without behavioral modification.

Methods

A 38-year-old obese female with uncontrolled T2DM (hemoglobin A1c [HbA1c] of 11.6% [103 mmol/mol]) was temporarily lost to follow-up and reported nonadherence to insulin therapy, metformin therapy, diet, or exercise. During this time, she was successfully treated for hepatitis C and became euglycemic without other interventions.

Results

The patient's HbA1c decreased from 11.6 to 5.7% (103 to 39 mmol/mol) in the presence of weight gain and in the absence of any intervention other than hepatitis C treatment.

Conclusion

Hepatitis C treatment may offer significant potential for improving insulin sensitivity and decreasing long-term complications of type 2 diabetes in certain patients. Universal treatment of HCV could offer benefits in both hepatic and extrahepatic clinical outcomes.