Skip to main content

Hospital Medicine Threatens Quality of Care with Communication Lapses


To those brave souls who have returned after digesting last week’s cheerleading on hospitalists, here is the Achilles’s heel of the system.  While the advantages are clear and substantial, there are serious vulnerabilities which have not yet been adequately remedied. 

Achilles Held by the Heel Being Dipped into the River Styx
  • Hospitalists cannot appreciate the medical nuances, personality, family dynamics, life events and prior experiences that may be well known by the out-patient physician.   
  • There are serious communication lapses, all of which cannot be bridged.  The out-patient doc may know that the patient’s chest pain is his typical anxiety and that it is not necessary to repeat the cardiac evaluation that was done 2 years ago.  The hospitalist may take a different tack here. 
  • Despite their best efforts, hospitalists know that they will not be seeing the patients after discharge.  As they are not permanently vested,  they may not address certain patient concerns, punting these  to the outpatient arena.  While this may be medically acceptable, it may be frustrating for some patients.
  • The hand off back to the out-patient doc after hospital discharge can be a minefield.   Patients may be on new medications.   They may have had a variety of laboratory and radiology tests.  Some of these results might be ‘pending’ at the time of discharge.   How does the out-patient physician reliably receive these results and understand their context?   Did medical specialists on the case leave recommendations that the primary physician now has to track and implement?   When the primary care doctor resumes care of a patient who had a complex hospitalization, is he now responsible to search out and address every loose end contained within the voluminous hospital record?   Could a single laboratory abnormality buried in the record that was totally unrelated to the medical illness become a medico-legal issue years later?  Do we really think that the hospitalists discharge summary to the primary care physician is airtight? 
A primary care physician recently complained to me that the local hospitalists never call him when his patient is admitted when he might provide useful information about his patient that only he know.   This is a legitimate gripe.

No system is perfect
.  
So, over the past 2 weeks you have been offered a fair and balanced presentation on hospital medicine.   Which side of the issue has the better argument?

Comments

  1. For many years now I have felt that every hospitalized patient should have a constantly-attending advocate who is medically knowledgeable. At least one family member should be able to interpret, intercede, advise, and have full power of attorney for the patient. That person must sleep in, go with, and hang out with the patient 24/7. They must be logical thinkers who don't become emotional. They must be prepared to argue like a lawyer, have the memory of computer, the strength of Atlas, the stamina of a long distance swimmer, and the countenance of a pit bull. Hospitalists, especially those who don't speak English well, are often a miserable lot and patients are often bullied, over-treated, under-counseled, not understood, and even sometimes neglected. Docs in private practice sometimes depend on the hospitalist too much and tend the patient too little, but I think that's rare. Patients are usually frightened, cowering creatures who tend to regress in age when confronted with the giant internal MEDICAL MONSTER whose name is, "NoKnowledgeAboutThisSubject" and/or "ThisScaresTheBejeebersOutofMe,and their normally intelligent brains have left the building when it comes to making the right decision for themselves. Have pity! Hospitalists have shoved good nurses off onto the sidelines because there aren't enough nurses who are well-enough trained to be able to advocate for their patients, and their patient loads are way too large. As a patient, I've spent more time with housekeeping than a nurse, and I tend to want a weapon or a teddy bear when the hospitalist comes in, and I always need an interpreter because I don't understand foreigners well. I personally tend to fire them and tell them to get out of my room. Unless I need something that only they can provide, of course. The nice thing is, I have my real doc on speed dial. And I have the internet. :-]

    ReplyDelete
  2. Barbara, your comment is scarily close to what I experienced advocating for my wife during multiple hospitalizations last year. The major difference was that nursing was good. The contract hospitalists were a danger. At least one seemed borderline mentally ill to me. The other hospital chain in town has nurses more like you describe, which is why we don't go there.

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Why Most Doctors Choose Employment

Increasingly, physicians today are employed and most of them willingly so.  The advantages of this employment model, which I will highlight below, appeal to the current and emerging generations of physicians and medical professionals.  In addition, the alternatives to direct employment are scarce, although they do exist.  Private practice gastroenterology practices in Cleveland, for example, are increasingly rare sightings.  Another practice model is gaining ground rapidly on the medical landscape.   Private equity (PE) firms have   been purchasing medical practices who are in need of capital and management oversight.   PE can provide services efficiently as they may be serving multiple practices and have economies of scale.   While these physicians technically have authority over all medical decisions, the PE partners can exert behavioral influences on physicians which can be ethically problematic. For example, if the PE folks reduce non-medical overhead, this may very directly affe

Should Doctors Wear White Coats?

Many professions can be easily identified by their uniforms or state of dress. Consider how easy it is for us to identify a policeman, a judge, a baseball player, a housekeeper, a chef, or a soldier.  There must be a reason why so many professions require a uniform.  Presumably, it is to create team spirit among colleagues and to communicate a message to the clientele.  It certainly doesn’t enhance professional performance.  For instance, do we think if a judge ditches the robe and is wearing jeans and a T-shirt, that he or she cannot issue sage rulings?  If members of a baseball team showed up dressed in comfortable street clothes, would they commit more errors or achieve fewer hits?  The medical profession for most of its existence has had its own uniform.   Male doctors donned a shirt and tie and all doctors wore the iconic white coat.   The stated reason was that this created an aura of professionalism that inspired confidence in patients and their families.   Indeed, even today

Electronic Medical Records vs Physicians: Not a Fair Fight!

Each work day, I enter the chamber of horrors also known as the electronic medical record (EMR).  I’ve endured several versions of this torture over the years, monstrosities that were designed more to appeal to the needs of billers and coders than physicians. Make sense? I will admit that my current EMR, called Epic, is more physician-friendly than prior competitors, but it remains a formidable adversary.  And it’s not a fair fight.  You might be a great chess player, but odds are that you will not vanquish a computer adversary armed with artificial intelligence. I have a competitive advantage over many other physician contestants in the battle of Man vs Machine.   I can type well and can do so while maintaining eye contact with the patient.   You must think I am a magician or a savant.   While this may be true, the birth of my advanced digital skills started decades ago.   (As an aside, digital competence is essential for gastroenterologists.) During college, I worked as a secretary