Search

Objectives: Individuals who prefer to communicate about health care in a language other than English (LOE) experience poorer quality medical care and challenges when communicating with health care providers. The objective of this study was to elucidate how caregivers who prefer an LOE perceive communication with their physicians on an inpatient general pediatrics service., Methods: Caregivers of patients admitted to the general pediatrics service at our urban freestanding children's hospital whose preferred language for medical care was Spanish, Arabic, Brazilian Portuguese, or Mandarin were eligible for this qualitative study. Semistructured interviews using video interpreter services were conducted to explore the participants' experiences communicating with their physicians. Interview transcripts were analyzed using conventional content analysis., Results: We interviewed 15 participants representing 7 countries of origin and 4 non-English languages: Spanish, Arabic, Brazilian Portuguese, and Mandarin. Three main domains emerged, including: (1) use of interpreter services, (2) overall communication experience with physician providers, and (3) suggestions for improvement in physician communication. Salient themes included early identification of the need for an interpreter is essential and physicians' use of body language in combination with an interpreter enhances successful communication., Conclusions: This project fills a gap in existing literature by describing the perspectives of caregivers who prefer an LOE, including those speaking languages other than Spanish, as they communicate with inpatient pediatricians. In addition to ensuring appropriate use of interpreter services, physicians can focus on using plain language and gestures during encounters, helping to facilitate communication and provide culturally competent care for this population., (Copyright © 2023 by the American Academy of Pediatrics.)

Low-value health care is pervasive in the United States, and clinicians need to be trained to be stewards of health care resources. Despite a mandate by the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education to educate trainee physicians on cost awareness, only 10% of pediatric residency programs have a high-value care (HVC) curriculum. To meet this need, we set out to develop and evaluate the impact of High-Value Pediatrics, an open-access HVC curriculum. High-Value Pediatrics is a 3-part curriculum that includes 4 standardized didactics, monthly interactive morning reports, and an embedded HVC improvement project. Curriculum evaluation through an anonymous, voluntary survey revealed an improvement in the self-reported knowledge of health care costs, charges, reimbursement, and value ( P < .05). Qualitative results revealed self-reported behavior changes, and HVC improvement projects resulted in higher-value patient care. The implementation of High-Value Pediatrics is feasible and reveals improved knowledge and attitudes about HVC. HVC improvement projects augmented curricular knowledge gains and revealed behavior changes. It is imperative that formal high-value education be taught to every pediatric trainee to lead the culture change that is necessary to turn the tide against low-value health care. In addition, simultaneous work on faculty education and attention to the hidden curriculum of low-value care is needed for sustained and long-term improvements., Competing Interests: POTENTIAL CONFLICT OF INTEREST: The authors have indicated they have no potential conflicts of interest to disclose., (Copyright © 2018 by the American Academy of Pediatrics.)

Background: Providing and learning from feedback are essential components of medical education, and typically described as resistant to change. But given a decade of change in the clinical context in which feedback occurs, the authors asked if, and how, perceptions of feedback and feedback behaviors might have changed in response to contextual affordances., Methods: In 2017, the authors conducted a follow-up, ethnographic study on 2 general pediatric floors at the same children's hospital where another ethnographic study on a general pediatric floor was conducted in 2007. Data sources included (1) 21 and 34 hours of observation in 2007 and 2017, respectively, (2) 35 and 25 interviews with general pediatric attending physicians and residents in 2007 and 2017, respectively, and (3) a review of 120 program documents spanning 2007 to 2017. Data were coded and organized around 3 recommendations for feedback that were derived from 2007 data and served as standards for assessing change in 2017., Results: Data revealed progress in achieving each recommendation. Compared with 2007, participants in 2017 more clearly distinguished between feedback and evaluation; residents were more aware of in-the-moment feedback, and they had shifted their orientation from evaluation and grades to feedback and learning. Explanations for progress in achieving recommendations, which were derived from the data, pointed to institutional and national influences, namely, the pediatric milestones., Conclusions: On the basis of follow-up, ethnographic data, changes in the clinical context of pediatric education may afford positive change in perceptions of feedback and feedback behavior and point to influences within and beyond the institution., Competing Interests: POTENTIAL CONFLICT OF INTEREST: The authors have indicated they have no potential conflicts of interest to disclose., (Copyright © 2018 by the American Academy of Pediatrics.)

Background: To develop the capacity for rapid-cycle improvement at the unit level, a large freestanding children's hospital designated 2 inpatient units with normal patient loads and workforce as pilot "Innovation Units" where frontline staff was trained to lead rigorous improvement portfolios., Methods: Frontline staff received improvement training, and interdisciplinary teams brainstormed ideas for tests of change. Ideas were prioritized using an impact-effort evaluation and an assessment of how they aligned with high-level goals. A template for each test summarized the following: the opportunity for improvement, the test being conducted, dates for the tests, driver diagrams, metrics to measure effects, baseline data, results, findings, and next steps. Successful interventions were implemented and disseminated to other units., Results: Multidisciplinary staff generated 150 improvement ideas and Innovation Units collectively ran >40 plan-do-study-act cycles. Of the 10 distinct improvement projects, elements of all 10 were deemed "successful" and fully implemented on the unit, and elements from 8 were spread to other units. More than 3 years later, elements of all of the successful improvements are still in practice in some form on the units, and each unit has tested >20 additional improvement ideas, using multiple plan-do-study-act cycles to refine them., Conclusions: The Innovation Unit model successfully engaged frontline staff in improvement work and established a sustainable system and framework for managing rigorous improvement portfolios at the unit level. Other hospitals and health care delivery settings may find our quality improvement approach helpful, especially because it is rooted in the microsystem of care delivery., (Copyright © 2016 by the American Academy of Pediatrics.)