Search

Importance: Administrative harm (AH), defined as the adverse consequences of administrative decisions within health care that impact work structure, processes, and programs, is pervasive in medicine, yet poorly understood and described., Objective: To explore common AHs experienced by hospitalist clinicians and administrative leaders, understand the challenges that exist in identifying and measuring AH, and identify potential approaches to mitigate AH., Design, Setting, and Participants: A qualitative study using a mixed-methods approach with a 12-question survey and semistructured virtual focus groups was held on June 13 and August 11, 2023. Rapid qualitative methods including templated summaries and matrix analysis were applied. The participants included 2 consortiums comprising hospitalist clinicians, researchers, administrative leaders, and members of a patient and family advisory council., Main Outcomes and Measures: Quantitative data from the survey on specific aspects of experiences related to AH were collected. Focus groups were conducted using a semistructured focus group guide. Themes and subthemes were identified., Results: Forty-one individuals from 32 different organizations participated in the focus groups, with 32 participants (78%) responding to a brief survey. Survey participants included physicians (91%), administrative professionals (6%), an advanced practice clinician (3%), and those in leadership roles (44%), with participants able to select more than one role. Only 6% of participants were familiar with the term administrative harm to a great extent, 100% felt that collaboration between administrators and clinicians is crucial for reducing AH, and 81% had personally participated in a decision that led to AH to some degree. Three main themes were identified: (1) AH is pervasive and comes from all levels of leadership, and the phenomenon was felt to be widespread and arose from multiple sources within health care systems; (2) organizations lack mechanisms for identification, measurement, and feedback, and these challenges stem from a lack of psychological safety, workplace cultures, and ambiguity in who owns a decision; and (3) organizational pressures were recognized as contributors to AHs. Many ideas were proposed as solutions., Conclusions and Relevance: The findings of this study suggest that AH is widespread with wide-reaching impact, yet organizations do not have mechanisms to identify or address it.

Background: Since 2017, women have made up over 50% of medical school matriculants; however, only 16% of department chairs are women-a number that has remained stagnant and demonstrates the underrepresentation of women in leadership positions in medicine., Objective: To better understand the challenges women face in leadership positions and to inform how best to advance women leaders in Hospital Medicine., Design, Setting, and Participants: Using hermeneutical phenomenological methods, we performed semi-structured qualitative interviews of ten female division heads from hospital medicine groups in the USA, transcribed verbatim, and coded for thematic saturation using Atlas.ti software., Measurements: Qualitative themes and subthemes., Key Results: Ten women hospitalist leaders were interviewed from September through November 2019. Participants identified four key challenges in their leadership journeys: lack of support to pursue leadership training, bullying, a sense of sacrifice in order to achieve balance, and the need for internal and external validation. Participants also suggested key interventions in order to support women leaders in the future: recommending a platform to share experiences, combat bullying, advocate for themselves, and bolster each other in sponsorship and mentorship roles. Finally, participants identified how they have unique strengths as women in leadership, and are transforming the culture of medicine with a focus on diversity and flexibility., Conclusion: Women in leadership positions face unique challenges, but also have a unique perspective as to how to support the next generation of leaders., (© 2021. This is a U.S. government work and not under copyright protection in the U.S.; foreign copyright protection may apply.)

Background: Gender disparities still exist for women in academic medicine but may be less evident in younger cohorts. Hospital medicine is a new field, and the majority of hospitalists are <41 years of age., Objective: To determine whether gender disparities exist in leadership and scholarly productivity for academic hospitalists and to compare the findings to academic general internists., Design: Prospective and retrospective observational study., Setting: University programs in the United States., Measurements: Gender distribution of (1) academic hospitalists and general internists, (2) division or section heads for both specialties, (3) speakers at the 2 major national meetings of the 2 specialties, and (4) first and last authors of articles from the specialties' 2 major journals, Results: We found equal gender representation of hospitalists and general internists who worked in university hospitals. Divisions or sections of hospital medicine and general internal medicine were led by women at 11/69 (16%) and 28/80 (35%) of university hospitals, respectively (P = 0.008). Women hospitalists and general internists were listed as speakers on 146/557 (26%) and 291/580 (50%) of the presentations at national meetings, respectively (P < 0.0001), first authors on 153/464 (33%) and 423/895 (47%) publications, respectively (P < 0.0001), and senior authors on 63/305 (21%) and 265/769 (34%) articles, respectively (P < 0.0001)., Conclusions: Despite hospital medicine being a newer field, gender disparities exist in leadership and scholarly productivity., (© 2015 Society of Hospital Medicine.)

We assessed how hospitalists frame workplace safety, health, and well-being (SHW); their perception of hospital supports for SHW; and whether and how they are sharing leadership responsibility for each other's SHW. Our findings highlight the important role of local support for hospitalist SHW and reveal the systemic, hospital-wide problems that may impede their SHW. We believe that positioning hospitalists as leaders for SHW will result in systems-wide changes in practices to support the SHW of all care team members. (Am J Public Health. 2024;114(S2):S162–S166. https://doi.org/10.2105/AJPH.2024.307573) [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Hospital systems have rapidly adapted to manage the influx of patients with COVID-19 and hospitalists, specialists in inpatient care, have been at the forefront of this response, rapidly adapting to serve the ever-changing needs of the community and hospital system. Institutional leaders, including clinical care team members and administrators, deployed many different strategies (i.e. adaptations) to manage the influx of patients. While many different strategies were utilized in hospitals across the United States, it is unclear how frontline care teams experienced these strategies and multifaceted changes. As these surge adaptations likely directly impact clinical care teams, we aimed to understand the perceptions and impact of these clinical care and staffing adaptations on hospitalists and care team members in order to optimize future surge plans. Methods: Qualitative, semi-structured interviews and focus groups with hospitalist physicians, advanced practice providers (APPs), and hospital nursing and care management staff at a quaternary academic medical center. Interviews focused on the impact of COVID-19 surge practices on the following areas: (1) the experience of clinical care teams with the adaptations used to manage the surge (2) the perception and experience with the communication strategies utilized (3) the personal experience with the adaptations (i.e. how they impacted the individual) and (4) if participants had recommendations on strategies for future surges. We utilized rapid qualitative analysis methods to explore themes and subthemes. Results: We conducted five focus groups and 21 interviews. Three themes emerged from the work including (1) dynamic clinical experience with a lot of uncertainty, (2) the importance of visible leadership with a focus on sense-making, and (3) the significant emotional toll on care team members. Subthemes included sufficient workforce, role delineation and training, information sharing, the unique dichotomy between the need for flexibility and the need for structure, the importance of communication, and the emotional toll not only on the provider but their families. Several recommendations came from this work. Conclusions: COVID-19 surge practices have had direct impact on hospitalists and care team members. Several tactics were identified to help mitigate the many negative effects of COVID-19 on frontline hospitalist providers and care teams. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Since 2017, women have made up over 50% of medical school matriculants; however, only 16% of department chairs are women-a number that has remained stagnant and demonstrates the underrepresentation of women in leadership positions in medicine.Objective: To better understand the challenges women face in leadership positions and to inform how best to advance women leaders in Hospital Medicine.Design, Setting, and Participants: Using hermeneutical phenomenological methods, we performed semi-structured qualitative interviews of ten female division heads from hospital medicine groups in the USA, transcribed verbatim, and coded for thematic saturation using Atlas.ti software.Measurements: Qualitative themes and subthemes.Key Results: Ten women hospitalist leaders were interviewed from September through November 2019. Participants identified four key challenges in their leadership journeys: lack of support to pursue leadership training, bullying, a sense of sacrifice in order to achieve balance, and the need for internal and external validation. Participants also suggested key interventions in order to support women leaders in the future: recommending a platform to share experiences, combat bullying, advocate for themselves, and bolster each other in sponsorship and mentorship roles. Finally, participants identified how they have unique strengths as women in leadership, and are transforming the culture of medicine with a focus on diversity and flexibility.Conclusion: Women in leadership positions face unique challenges, but also have a unique perspective as to how to support the next generation of leaders. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]