Journal of Healthcare Management最新文献

Goal: Accurate prediction of operating room (OR) time is critical for effective utilization of resources, optimal staffing, and reduced costs. Currently, electronic health record (EHR) systems aid OR scheduling by predicting OR time for a specific surgeon and operation. On many occasions, the predicted OR time is subject to manipulation by surgeons during scheduling. We aimed to address the use of the EHR for OR scheduling and the impact of manipulations on OR time accuracy.

Methods: Between April and August 2022, a pilot study was performed in our tertiary center where surgeons in multiple surgical specialties were encouraged toward nonmanipulation for predicted OR time during scheduling. The OR time accuracy within 5 months before trial (Group 1) and within the trial period (Group 2) were compared. Accurate cases were defined as cases with total length (wheels-in to wheels-out) within ±30 min or ±20% of the scheduled duration if the scheduled time is ≥ or <150 min, respectively. The study included single and multiple Current Procedural Terminology code procedures, while procedures involving multiple surgical specialties (combo cases) were excluded.

Principal findings: The study included a total of 8,821 operations, 4,243 (Group 1) and 4,578 (Group 2), (p < .001). The percentage of manipulation dropped from 19.8% (Group 1) to 7.6% (Group 2), (p < .001), while scheduling accuracy rose from 41.7% (Group 1) to 47.9% (Group 2), (p = .0001) with a significant reduction of underscheduling percentage (38.7% vs. 31.7%, p = .0001) and without a significant difference in the percentage of overscheduled cases (15% vs. 17%, p = .22). Inaccurate OR hours were reduced by 18% during the trial period (2,383 hr vs. 1,954 hr).

Practical applications: The utilization of EHR systems for predicting OR time and reducing manipulation by surgeons helps improve OR scheduling accuracy and utilization of OR resources.

Goal: The objective of this study was to evaluate satisfaction with work-life integration (WLI), social isolation, and the impact of work on personal relationships (IWPR) among senior healthcare operational leaders.

Methods: Between June 7 and June 30, 2021, we performed a national survey of CEOs and other senior healthcare operational leaders in the United States to evaluate their personal work experience. Satisfaction with WLI, social isolation, and IWPR were assessed using standardized instruments. Burnout and professional fulfillment were also assessed using standardized scales.

Principal findings: The mean IWPR score on the 0-10 scale was 4.39 (standard deviation was 2.36; higher scores were unfavorable). On multivariable analysis to identify demographic and professional factors associated with the IWPR score, each additional hour worked per week decreased the likelihood of a favorable IWPR score. The IWPR, feeling isolated, and satisfaction with WLI were independently associated with burnout after adjusting for other personal and professional factors. On multivariable analysis, healthcare administrators were more likely than U.S. workers in other fields to indicate work had adversely impacted personal relationships in response to the item "In the past year, my job has contributed to me feeling more isolated and detached from the people who are most important to me."

Practical applications: Experiencing an adverse IWPR is common among U.S. healthcare administrators, who are more likely than the general U.S. working population to indicate their job contributes to isolation and detachment from the people most important to them. Problems with WLI, isolation, and an adverse IWPR are associated with increased burnout and lower professional fulfillment. Intentional efforts by both organizations and administrative leaders are necessary to address the work characteristics and professional norms that erode WLI and result in work adversely impacting personal relationships.

Goal: Clinician stress and resilience have been the subjects of significant research and interest in the past several decades. We aimed to understand the factors that contribute to clinician stress and resilience in order to appropriately guide potential interventions.

Methods: We conducted a scoping review (n = 42) of published reviews of research on clinician distress and resilience using the methodology of Peters and colleagues (2020). Our team examined these reviews using the National Academy of Medicine's framework for clinician well-being and resilience.

Principal findings: We found that organizational factors, learning/practice environment, and healthcare responsibilities were three of the top four factors identified in the reviews as contributing to clinician distress. Learning/practice environment and organizational factors were two of the top four factors identified in the reviews as contributing to their resilience.

Practical applications: Clinicians continue to face numerous external challenges that complicate their work. Further research, practice, and policy changes are indicated to improve practice environments for healthcare clinicians. Healthcare leaders need to promote resources for organizational and system-level changes to improve clinician well-being.

Goals: Of 513 accountable care organizations (ACOs) participating in the Medicare Shared Savings Program (MSSP) in 2020, 67% generated a positive shared savings of approximately $2.3 billion. This research aimed to examine their financial performance trends and drivers over time.

Methods: The unit of analysis was the ACO in each year of the study period from 2016 to 2020. The dependent variable was the ACOs' total shared savings earned annually per beneficiary. The independent variables included ACO age, risk model, clinician staffing type, and provider type (hybrid, hospital-led, or physician-led). Covariates were the average risk score among beneficiaries, payer type, and calendar year. The Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) public use files (PUFs) and a commercial healthcare data aggregator were the data sources.

Results: ACOs' earned shared savings grew annually by 35%, while the proportions of ACOs with positive shared savings grew by 21%. For 1-year increase in ACO age, an additional $0.57 of shared savings per beneficiary was observed. ACOs with two-sided risk contracting were associated with an average marginal increase of $109 in shared savings per beneficiary compared to ACOs with one-sided risk contracting. Primary care physicians were associated with the greatest increase in earned shared savings per beneficiary. In contrast, nurse practitioners/physician assistants/clinical nurse specialists were associated with a reduction in earned shared savings. Under a one-sided risk model, hospital-led ACOs were associated with $18 higher average shared savings earning per beneficiary compared to hybrid ACOs, while physician-led ACOs were associated with lower average saved shared earnings per beneficiary at -$2 compared to hybrid ACOs. Provider-type results were not statistically significant at the 5% nominal level. No statistically significant differences were observed between provider types under a two-sided risk model.

Practical applications: For all ACO provider types, building broader primary care provider networks was correlated with positive financial results. Future research should examine whether ACOs are conducting specific preventive screenings for cancer or monitoring conditions such as diabetes, hypertension, heart disease, obesity, mental disorders, and joint disorders. Such studies may answer health policy and strategy questions about the effects of incentives for improved ACO performance in serving a healthier population.

Goal: This article explores how broad, contextual factors may be influential in the retention of direct care workers (DCWs; i.e., entry-level caregivers) who provide vital support to patients in healthcare settings. We reflect on lessons learned from an evaluation of a multisite intervention to improve retention among DCWs employed primarily in hospital settings at three health systems.

Methods: We evaluated a multitiered program for entry-level caregivers that included a risk assessment, a 4-day curriculum, and follow-up sessions, as well as workforce coaching at the three health systems. As part of our evaluation, we collected data on roughly 3,000 DCWs from the three health systems; the information included hiring date, any transfer date, and any termination date for each new DCW, as well as demographic information, position characteristics, and termination status and reasons for any termination. In addition, we collected information about organizational characteristics, including staffing and number of employees. We also conducted interviews with 56 DCWs and 21 staff members who implemented a retention program across each of the three health systems and remotely conducted virtual observations of the curriculum sessions at each system.

Principal findings: Although the program we evaluated focused on individual-level factors that may affect retention, our findings revealed other broader, contextual challenges faced by DCWs that they said would have an impact on their willingness to stay in their positions. These challenges included (1) job-related factors including limited compensation, aspects of the job itself, and the inability to advance in one's position; (2) health system challenges including the mission, policies, staffing, and organizational culture; and (3) external factors including federal policies and the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic.

Practical applications: As the direct care workforce continues to grow, interventions to improve retention should consider the interconnectedness of these multilevel factors rather than solely individual-level factors. In addition, further research is needed to rigorously evaluate any potential intervention and consider how such an approach can target DCWs in hospital-based settings who are most affected by the multilevel challenges identified. Finally, any intervention to improve retention must be also aligned to ensure equity, especially in this population of low-wage DCWs, many of whom are marginalized women and individuals of color.