Hannah Bassett, MD

View details for DOI 10.1542/hpeds.2023-007121

View details for PubMedID 37035878

Abstract

PhenomenonMoral distress, which occurs when someone's moral integrity is seriously compromised because they feel unable to act in accordance with their core values and obligations, is an increasingly important concern for physicians. Due in part to limited understanding of the root causes of moral distress, little is known about which approaches are most beneficial for mitigating physicians' distress. Our objective was to describe system-level factors in United States (U.S.) healthcare that contribute to moral distress among pediatric hospitalist attendings and pediatric residents.ApproachIn this qualitative study, we conducted one-on-one semi-structured interviews with pediatric hospitalist attendings and pediatric residents from 4 university-affiliated, freestanding children's hospitals in the U.S. between August 2019 and February 2020. Data were coded with an iteratively developed codebook, categorized into themes, and then synthesized.FindingsWe interviewed 22 hospitalists and 18 residents. Participants described in detail how the culture of medicine created a context that cultivated moral distress. Norms of medical education and the practice of medicine created conflicts between residents' strong sense of professional responsibility to serve the best interests of their patients and the expectations of a hierarchical system of decision-making. The corporatization of the U.S. healthcare system created administrative and financial pressures that conflicted with the moral responsibility felt by both residents and hospitalists to provide the care that their patients and families needed.InsightsThese findings highlight the critical role of systemic sources of moral distress. These findings suggest that system-level interventions must supplement existing interventions that target individual health care providers. Preventing and managing moral distress will require a broad approach that addresses systemic drivers, such as the corporatization of medicine, which are entrenched in the culture of medicine.

View details for DOI 10.1080/10401334.2022.2056740

View details for PubMedID 35466844

View details for Web of Science ID 000715749300023

Abstract

Importance: Health care in the US is often expensive for families; however, there is little transparency in the cost of medical services. The extent to which parents want cost transparency in their children's care is not well characterized.Objective: To explore the preferences and experiences of parents of hospitalized children regarding the discussion and consideration of health care costs in the inpatient care of their children.Design, Setting, and Participants: This cross-sectional multicenter survey study included 6 geographically diverse university-affiliated US children's hospitals from November 3, 2017, to November 8, 2018. Participants included a convenience sample of English- and Spanish-speaking parents of hospitalized children nearing hospital discharge. Data were analyzed from January 1, 2020, to June 25, 2021.Main Outcomes and Measures: Parents' preferences and experiences regarding transparency of their child's health care costs. Multivariable linear regression examined associations between clinical and sociodemographic variables with parents' preferences for knowing, discussing, and considering costs in the clinical setting. Factors included family financial difficulties, child's level of chronic disease, insurance payer, deductible, family poverty level, race, ethnicity, parental educational level, and study site.Results: Of 644 invited participants, 526 (82%) were enrolled (290 [55%] male), of whom 362 (69%) were White individuals, 400 (76%) were non-Hispanic/Latino individuals, and 274 (52%) had children with private insurance. Overall, 397 families (75%) wanted to discuss their child's medical costs, but only 36 (7%) reported having a cost conversation. If cost discussions were to occur, 294 families (56%) would prefer to speak to a financial counselor. Ninety-eight families (19%) worried discussing costs would hurt the quality of their child's care. Families with a medical financial burden unrelated to their hospitalized child had higher mean agreement that their child's physician should consider the family's costs in medical decision-making than families without a medical financial burden (effect size, 0.55 [95% CI, 0.18-0.92]). No variables were consistently associated with cost transparency preferences.Conclusions and Relevance: Most parents want to discuss their child's costs during an acute hospitalization. Discussions of health care costs may be an important, relatively unexplored component of family-centered care. However, these discussions rarely occur, indicating a tremendous opportunity to engage and support families in this issue.

View details for DOI 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2021.26083

View details for PubMedID 34546372

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: To increase the number of essential consult elements (ECEs) included in initial inpatient consultation requests between pediatric residents and fellows through implementation of a novel consult communication tool.METHODS: Literature review and previous needs assessment of pediatric residents and fellows were used to identify 4 specific ECEs. From February to June 2018, fellows audited verbal consult requests at a medium-sized, quaternary care children's hospital to determine the baseline percentage of ECE components within consults. A novel consult communication tool containing all ECEs was then developed by using a modified situation-background-assessment-recommendation (SBAR) format. The SBAR tool was implemented over 3 plan-do-study-act cycles. Adherence to SBAR, inclusion of ECEs, and consult question clarity were tracked via audits of consult requests. A pre- and postintervention survey of residents and fellows was used to examine perceived miscommunication and patient care errors and overall satisfaction.RESULTS: The median percentage of consults containing 3 ECEs increased from 50% preintervention to 100% postintervention with consult question clarity increasing from 52% to 92% (P < .001). Overall perception of consult miscommunication frequency decreased (52% vs 18%; P < .01), although there was no significant change in resident- or fellow-reported patient errors. SBAR maintained residents' already high consult satisfaction (96% vs 92%; P = .39) and increased fellows' consult satisfaction (51% vs 91%; P < .001).CONCLUSIONS: Implementation of a standardized consult communication tool resulted in increased inclusion of ECEs. Use of the tool led to greater consult question clarity, decreased perceived miscommunication, and improved overall consult satisfaction.

View details for DOI 10.1542/peds.2020-0681

View details for PubMedID 33858984

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: To derive care targets and evaluate the impact of displaying them at the point of care on postoperative length of stay (LOS).STUDY DESIGN: A prospective cohort study using 2 years of historical controls within a freestanding, academic children's hospital. Patients undergoing benchmark cardiac surgery between May 4, 2014 and August 15, 2016 (preintervention) and September 6, 2016 to September 30, 2018 (postintervention) were included. The intervention consisted of displaying at the point of care targets for the timing of extubation, transfer from the intensive care unit (ICU), and hospital discharge. Family satisfaction, reintubation, and readmission rates were tracked.RESULTS: The postintervention cohort consisted of 219 consecutive patients. There was a reduction in variation for ICU (difference in SD -2.56, p < 0.01), and total LOS (difference in SD -2.84, P < .001). Patients stayed on average 0.97 fewer days (p<0.001) in the ICU (median -1.01 [IQR -2.15,-0.39], 0.7 fewer days (p<0.001) on mechanical ventilation (median -0.54 [IQR -0.77,-0.50], and 1.18 fewer days (p<0.001) for the total LOS (median -2.25 [IQR -3.69,-0.15]. Log transformed multivariable linear regression demonstrated the intervention to be associated with shorter ICU LOS (beta coefficient -0.19, SE 0.059, p<0.001), total postoperative LOS (beta coefficient -0.12, SE 0.052, p=0.02), and ventilator duration (beta coefficient -0.21, SE 0.048, p<0.001). Balancing metrics did not differ after the intervention.CONCLUSIONS: Target based care is a simple, novel intervention associated with reduced variation in LOS and absolute LOS across a diverse spectrum of complex cardiac surgeries.

View details for DOI 10.1016/j.jpeds.2020.09.017

View details for PubMedID 32920104

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: Moral distress is increasingly identified as a major problem affecting healthcare professionals, but it is poorly characterized among pediatricians. Our objective was to assess the sources of moral distress in residents and pediatric hospitalist attendings and to examine the association of moral distress with reported burnout.METHODS: Cross-sectional survey from January through March 2019 of pediatric residents and hospital medicine attending physicians affiliated with four free-standing children's hospitals. Moral distress was measured using the Measure of Moral Distress for Healthcare Professionals (MMD-HP). Burnout was measured using 2 items adapted from the Maslach Burnout Inventory.RESULTS: Respondents included 288/541 eligible pediatric residents (response rate: 53%) and 118/168 pediatric hospitalists (response rate: 70%; total response rate: 57%). The mean MMD-HP composite score was 93.4 (SD=42.5). Residents reported significantly higher frequency scores (residents: M=38.5 vs. hospitalists: M=33.3; difference: 5.2, 95% CI:2.9-7.5) and composite scores (residents: M=97.6 vs. hospitalists: M=83.0; difference: 14.6, 95% CI:5.7-23.5) than hospitalists. The most frequent source of moral distress was "having excessive documentation requirements that compromise patient care," and the most intense source of moral distress was "be[ing] required to work with abusive patients/family members who are compromising quality of care." Significantly higher mean MMD-HP composite scores were observed among participants reporting that they felt burned out at least once per week (M=114.6 vs. M=82.3; difference: 32.3, 95% CI:23.5-41.2).CONCLUSIONS: Pediatric residents and hospitalists report experiencing moral distress from a variety of patient-, team-, and system-level sources, and this distress is associated with burnout.

View details for DOI 10.1016/j.acap.2020.05.017

View details for PubMedID 32492578

Abstract

High costs of hospitalization may contribute to financial difficulties for some families.To examine the prevalence of financial distress and medical financial burden in families of hospitalized children and identify factors that can predict financial difficulties.Cross-sectional survey of parents of hospitalized children at six children's hospitals between October 2017 and November 2018.The outcomes were high financial distress and medical financial burden. Multivariable logistic regression identified predictors of each outcome. The primary predictor variable was level of chronic disease (complex chronic disease, C-CD; noncomplex chronic disease, NC-CD; no chronic disease, no-CD).Of 644 invited participants, 526 (82%) were enrolled, with 125 (24%) experiencing high financial distress, and 160 (30%) reporting medical financial burden. Of those, 86 (54%) indicated their medical financial burden was caused by costs associated with their hospitalized child. Neither C-CD nor NC-CD were associated with high financial distress. Child-related medical financial burden was associated with both C-CD and NC-CD (adjusted odds ratio [AOR], 4.98; 95% CI, 2.41-10.29; and AOR, 2.57; 95% CI, 1.11-5.93), compared to no-CD. Although household poverty level was associated with both measures, financial difficulties occurred in all family income brackets.Financial difficulties are common in families of hospitalized children. Low-income families and those who have children with chronic conditions are at particular risk; however, financial difficulties affect all subsets of the pediatric population. Hospitalization may be a prime opportunity to identify and engage families at risk for financial distress and medical financial burden.

View details for DOI 10.12788/jhm.3500

View details for PubMedID 33147127

Abstract

Although perforated appendicitis is associated with infectious complications, the choice of antibiotic therapy is controversial. We assess the effectiveness and safety of an intervention to reduce piperacillin and tazobactam (PT) use for pediatric acute perforated appendicitis.This is a single-center, retrospective cohort study of children18y of age who underwent primary appendectomy for perforated appendicitis between January 01, 2016 and June 30, 2019. An intervention to decrease PT use was implemented: the first phase was provider education (April 19, 2017) and the second phase was modification of electronic antibiotic orders to default to ceftriaxone and metronidazole (July 06, 2017). Preintervention and postintervention PT exposure, use of PThalf of intravenous antibiotic days, and clinical outcomes were compared.Forty children before and 109 after intervention were included and had similar baseline characteristics. PT exposure was 31 of 40 (78%) and 20 of 109 (18%) (P<0.001), and usehalf of intravenous antibiotic days was 31 of 40 (78%) and 14 of 109 (13%) (P<0.001), in the preintervention and postintervention groups, respectively. There was no significant difference in mean duration of antibiotic therapy (10.8 versus 9.8d), mean length of stay (6.2 versus 6.5d), rate of surgical site infection (10% versus 11%), or rate of 30-d readmission and emergency department visit (20% versus 20%) between the preintervention and postintervention periods, respectively.Provider education and modification of electronic antibiotic orders safely reduced the use of PT for pediatric perforated appendicitis.

View details for DOI 10.1016/j.jss.2020.11.067

View details for PubMedID 33340867

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: The purpose of hospital discharge instructions (HDIs) is to facilitate safe patient transitions home, but electronic health records can generate lengthy documents filled with irrelevant information. When our institution changed electronic health records, a cumbersome electronic discharge workflow produced low-value HDI and contributed to a spike in discharge delays. Our aim was to decrease these delays while improving family and provider satisfaction with HDI.METHODS: We used quality improvement methodology to redesign the electronic discharge navigator and HDI to address the following issues: (1) difficulty preparing discharge instructions before time of discharge, (2) suboptimal formatting of HDI, (3) lack of standard templates and language within HDI, and (4) difficulties translating HDI into non-English languages. Discharge delays due to HDI were tracked before and after the launch of our new discharge workflow. Parents and providers evaluated HDI and the electronic discharge workflow, respectively, before and after our intervention. Providers audited HDI for content.RESULTS: Discharge delays due to HDI errors decreased from a mean of 3.4 to 0.5 per month after our intervention. Parents' ratings of how understandable our HDIs were improved from 2.35 to 2.74 postintervention (P = .05). Pediatric resident agreement that the electronic discharge process was easy to use increased from 9% to 67% after the intervention (P < .001).CONCLUSIONS: Through multidisciplinary collaboration we facilitated advance preparation of more standardized HDI and decreased related discharge delays from the acute care units at a large tertiary care hospital.

View details for DOI 10.1542/hpeds.2018-0251

View details for PubMedID 31243058

View details for PubMedID 30498164