Search

Background: Failed referrals for specialty care are common and often represent medical errors. Technological structures and processes account for many failures. Scheduling appointments for subspecialty evaluation is a first step in outpatient referral and consultation.Objective: We determined whether moving from paper-based referrals to a Web-based system with automated tracking features was associated with greater scheduling of appointments among referred patients.Design: Staggered implementation of a quality-improvement project, with comparison of intervention and control groups.Participants: Patients 21 or more years of age referred from any of 11 primary-care clinics to any of 25 specialty clinics.Interventions: Faxed referrals were replaced by a Web-based application shared by generalists and specialists, with enhanced communications and automated notification to the specialty office.Measurements: We compared scheduling before and after implementation and time from referral to appointment. A logistic regression analysis adjusted for demographics.Main Results: Among 40,487 referrals, 54% led to scheduled specialty visits before intervention, compared to 83% with intervention. The median time to appointment was 168 days without intervention and 78 days with intervention. Scheduling increased more when duplicate referrals were not generated (54% for single orders, 24% for multiple orders). After adjustment, referrals with the intervention were more than twice as likely to have scheduled visits.Conclusions: With a new Web-based referrals system, referrals were more than twice as likely to lead to a scheduled visit. This system improves access to specialty medical services. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Hyperglycemia is common among diabetic inpatients, and has been linked to adverse outcomes. However, antihyperglycemic treatment is seldom intensified in noncritical care patients, and the relationship between intensification frequency and glucose control is poorly understood. We evaluated the relationship between treatment intensification and changes in blood glucose in hospitalized diabetic patients.Design: We retrospectively analyzed 3,613 hospitalized diabetic patients who were admitted to the hospital between January 2003 and August 2004, were not hospitalized in an ICU, were not prescribed IV insulin or total parenteral nutrition (TPN), had a length of stay of at least 3 days, and had at least one point-of-care blood glucose measurement. A linear model was used to assess the relationship between intensification of antihyperglycemic medications and the average daily change in point-of-care glucose measurements.Results: Hyperglycemia (>180 mg/dL) was documented at least once for 82.5% of patient admissions. Antihyperglycemic treatment was intensified for 22.0% of days with hyperglycemia. Intensifications of scheduled and sliding scale insulin, but not oral medications, were associated with a 11.1 mg/dL (p < 0.0001) and 12.2 mg/dL (p < 0.0001) reduction in the average daily glucose, respectively. Hypoglycemia (<50 mg/dL) was documented on 2.2% of days after antihyperglycemic treatment intensification.Conclusion: In this cohort, lack of treatment intensification in response to inpatient hyperglycemia was common. Antihyperglycemic treatment intensification was strongly associated with decrease in average daily glucose, while hypoglycemia was uncommon. This suggests that increasing the frequency of treatment intensifications could lead to improved glycemic control in inpatients with diabetes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Few curricula train medical students to engage in health system reform.Aim: To develop physician activists by teaching medical students the skills necessary to advocate for socially equitable health policies in the U.S. health system.Setting: Montefiore Medical Center, the University Hospital of the Albert Einstein College of Medicine, Bronx, NY.Program Description: We designed a 1-month curriculum in research-based health activism to develop physician activists. The annual curriculum includes a student project and 4 course sections;health policy, research methods, advocacy, and physician activists as role models; taught by core faculty and volunteers from academic institutions, government, and nongovernmental organizations.Program Evaluation: From 2002 to 2005, 47 students from across the country have participated. Students reported improved capabilities to generate a research question, design a research proposal,and create an advocacy plan.Discussion: Our curriculum demonstrates a model for training physician activists to engage in health systems reform. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]