首页 正文

Academic medicine : journal of the Association of American Medical Colleges. 2021 Aug 1;96(8):1205-1212. doi: 10.1097/ACM.0000000000003939 Q15.22025

Is Resident-Driven Inpatient Care More Expensive? Challenging a Long-Held Assumption

以住院医师为中心的诊疗费用更高吗?挑战一个长期存在的假设 翻译改进

Debra F Weinstein  1, Jin G Choi  2, Nathaniel D Mercaldo  3, Natalie N Stump  4, Molly L Paras  5, Rhodes A Berube  6, Chin Hur  7

作者单位 +展开

作者单位

  • 1 D.F. Weinstein is vice president, Graduate Medical Education, Mass General Brigham, and associate professor of medicine, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts.
  • 2 J.G. Choi is a second-year medical student, University of Chicago Pritzker School of Medicine, Chicago, Illinois; ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8517-8374 .
  • 3 N.D. Mercaldo is statistician, Department of Radiology and Institute for Technology Assessment, Massachusetts General Hospital, and instructor of radiology, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts.
  • 4 N.N. Stump is a fourth-year medical student, Drexel University College of Medicine, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.
  • 5 M.L. Paras is infectious disease fellowship director, Mass General Brigham, and instructor of medicine, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts.
  • 6 R.A. Berube is senior administrative director for clinical operations, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts.
  • 7 C. Hur is director, Healthcare Innovations Research and Evaluation, and professor of medicine, Columbia University, New York, New York.
  • DOI: 10.1097/ACM.0000000000003939 PMID: 33496432

    摘要 Ai翻译

    Purpose: The financial impact of graduate medical education (GME) on teaching hospitals remains poorly understood, while calls for increased federal support continue alongside legislative threats to reduce funding. Despite studies suggesting that residents are more "economical" than alternative providers, GME is widely believed to be an expensive investment. Assumptions that residents increase the cost of patient care have persisted in the absence of convincing evidence to the contrary. Thus, the authors sought to examine resident influence on patient care costs by comparing costs between a resident-driven service (RS) and a nonresident-covered service (NRS), with attention to clinical outcomes and how potential cost differences relate to the utilization of resources, length of stay (LOS), and other factors.

    Method: This prospective study compared costs and clinical outcomes of internal medicine patients admitted to an RS versus an NRS at Massachusetts General Hospital (July 1, 2016-June 30, 2017). Total variable direct costs of inpatient admission was the primary outcome measure. LOS; 30-day readmission rate; utilization related to diagnostic radiology, pharmaceuticals, and clinical labs; and other outcome measures were also compared. Linear regression models quantified the relationship between log-transformed variable direct costs and service.

    Results: Baseline characteristics of 5,448 patients on the 2 services (3,250 on an RS and 2,198 on an NRS) were similar. On an RS, patient care costs were slightly less and LOS was slightly shorter than on an NRS, with no significant differences in hospital mortality or 30-day readmission rate detected. Resource utilization was comparable between the services.

    Conclusions: These findings undermine long-held assumptions that residents increase the cost of patient care. Though not generalizable to ambulatory settings or other specialties, this study can help inform hospital decision making around sponsorship of GME programs, especially if federal funding for GME remains capped or is subject to additional reductions.

    Keywords:resident-driven care; inpatient care; healthcare expenses

    Copyright © Academic medicine : journal of the Association of American Medical Colleges. 中文内容为AI机器翻译,仅供参考!

    相关内容

    期刊名:Academic medicine

    缩写:ACAD MED

    ISSN:1040-2446

    e-ISSN:1938-808X

    IF/分区:5.2/Q1

    文章目录 更多期刊信息

    全文链接
    引文链接
    复制
    已复制!
    推荐内容
    Is Resident-Driven Inpatient Care More Expensive? Challenging a Long-Held Assumption