The redesign of an advanced practice registered nurse professional evaluation process and tool at a midwest academic medical center

2021 ◽  
Vol Publish Ahead of Print ◽  
Author(s):  
Alaine M. Kamm ◽  
Josie A. Howard-Ruben ◽  
Elizabeth A. Carlson
2019 ◽  
Vol 26 (1) ◽  
pp. 116-123
Author(s):  
Michelle A Carrasquillo ◽  
Tyler A Vest ◽  
Jill S Bates ◽  
Aimee Faso ◽  
Jessica Auten ◽  
...  

Purpose Nurse practitioners, physician assistants, and pharmacists are advanced practice providers who are highly trained and qualified healthcare professionals that can help support traditional demands on oncologists' increased time in direct patient care. The purpose of this study was to detail and assess the creation of a privileging process for this group of medical professionals within an academic medical center. Obtaining the designation of limited oncology practice provider (LOPP) gives the right to modify chemotherapy orders and to order supportive care medications. Methods An interdisciplinary team developed a comprehensive training process inclusive of required educational domains, knowledge goals, and educational activities to become an LOPP. In 2018, five years after the implementation of the privileging process, a survey was distributed to assess perceptions of the training process and integration of LOPPs within oncology practice. Results Most oncologists noted that working with LOPPs is beneficial to oncology practice (94%) and that they make modifying chemotherapy orders more efficient (87%). Greater than 82% of LOPPs also reported that their privileges streamline the chemotherapy process and make them feel valuable. Conclusion The creation of the LOPP designation is an effective way to integrate nurse practitioners, physician assistants, and pharmacists within oncology practice. The inclusion of a focused privileging process ensures the safety of cancer care provided and has created a streamlined process for chemotherapy modifications and supportive care.


2019 ◽  
Vol 201 (Supplement 4) ◽  
Author(s):  
Brooke Moore* ◽  
Carlos Mejia Arbelaez ◽  
Dianne Sacco ◽  
Lauren Swisher ◽  
Brian Eisner

2020 ◽  
Vol 15 (12) ◽  
pp. 709-715
Author(s):  
Stacy A JOhnson ◽  
Claire E Ciarkowski ◽  
Katie L Lappe ◽  
David R Kendrick ◽  
Adrienne Smith ◽  
...  

BACKGROUND: Academic medical centers have expanded their inpatient medicine services with advanced practice clinicians (APCs) or nonteaching hospitalists in response to patient volumes, residency work hour restrictions, and recently, COVID-19. Reports of clinical outcomes, cost, and resource utilization differ among inpatient team structures. OBJECTIVE: Directly compare outcomes among resident, APC, and solo hospitalist inpatient general medicine teams. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study using multivariable analysis adjusted for time of admission, interhospital transfer, and comorbidities that compares clinical outcomes, cost, and resource utilization. SUBJECTS: Patients 18 years or older discharged from an inpatient medicine service between July 2015 and July 2018 (N = 12,716). MAIN MEASURES: Length of stay (LOS), 30-day readmission, inpatient mortality, normalized total direct cost, discharge time, and consultation utilization. KEY RESULTS: Resident teams admitted fewer patients at night (32.0%; P < .001) than did APC (49.5%) and hospitalist (48.6%) teams. APCs received nearly 4% more outside transfer patients (P = .015). Hospitalists discharged patients 26 minutes earlier than did residents (mean hours after midnight [95% CI], 14.58 [14.44-14.72] vs 15.02 [14.97-15.08]). Adjusted consult utilization was 15% higher for APCs (adjusted mean consults per admission [95% CI], 1.00 [0.96-1.03]) and 8% higher for residents (0.93 [0.90-0.95]) than it was for hospitalists (0.85 [0.80-0.90]). No differences in LOS, readmission, mortality, or cost were observed between the teams. CONCLUSION: We observed similar costs, LOS, 30-day readmission, and mortality among hospitalist, APC, and resident teams. Our results suggest clinical outcomes are not significantly affected by team structure. The addition of APC or hospitalist teams represent safe and effective alternatives to traditional inpatient resident teams.


2020 ◽  
Vol Publish Ahead of Print ◽  
Author(s):  
April N. Kapu ◽  
Elizabeth Card ◽  
Heather Jackson ◽  
Jill Kinch ◽  
Buffy Krauser Lupear ◽  
...  

2019 ◽  
Vol 12 (3) ◽  
pp. 168-178
Author(s):  
Zack Altizer ◽  
William J. Canar ◽  
Dave Redemske ◽  
Francis Fullam ◽  
Mike Lamont

Facility planning for healthcare organizations has become increasingly important in recent years, due primarily to the complicated needs of patient rooms and the escalating pressure to provide high-quality care to satisfy patients. Concurrently, there has been a considerable development in the field of evidence-based design (EBD) on the impact the healthcare environment has on patients and the operations of clinical staff. Although tools are being developed to assist in measuring EBD principles, they have not been universally adopted by organizations regarding how they either develop or assess healthcare facilities. This case study focuses on our attempt to implement an internal facilities evaluation process and a Post-Occupancy Evaluation (POE) on a major Academic Medical Center’s (AMC) new bed tower. An assembled auditing team comprised of diverse professional healthcare backgrounds performed an audit on three patient rooms using a Center for Health Design POE Questionnaire. The results of this evaluation were then compared to the guiding principles developed for the hospital during its design. Results indicated that the project narrowly missed the threshold score agreed upon by the AMC’s facilities leadership. This project demonstrated the difficulty in implementing a POE without prior experience, while highlighting the value of a standardized evaluation tool to assess past and future facilities projects.


2002 ◽  
Vol 2 (3) ◽  
pp. 95-104 ◽  
Author(s):  
JoAnn Manson ◽  
Beverly Rockhill ◽  
Margery Resnick ◽  
Eleanor Shore ◽  
Carol Nadelson ◽  
...  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document