Podcasts about quality ahrq

April 10, 2025: Sarah Richardson and Kate Gamble examine the proposed merger of the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ) with the Assistant Secretary for Planning and Evaluation to create the new Office of Strategy. They explore expert concerns about potential reductions in safety research and disruptions to quality initiatives, including AHRQ's goal to reduce patient and workforce harm by 50% by 2026. X: This Week Health LinkedIn: This Week Health Donate: Alex's Lemonade Stand: Foundation for Childhood Cancer

My guest for Episode #523 of the Lean Blog Interviews Podcast is Mike Eisenberg. He's been a filmmaker since 2010 with his production company, Tall Tale Productions, after completing his B.A. in Journalism at Marietta College in Ohio. Episode page with video, transcript, and more Mike's father, Dr. John Eisenberg, was a leader in national patient safety efforts as the director of the Agency for Healthcare Research & Quality (AHRQ) until his passing in 2002. His legacy is prevalent throughout Mike's presentation, as well as his approach. His new documentary, released last September, is titled “The Pitch: Patient Safety's Next Generation.”  He previously joined us in Episode #329, where we discussed his film "To Err is Human." In 2006, Mike was drafted by the Cleveland Indians in the MLB Draft and played 3 seasons of professional baseball before beginning his filmmaking career. He now speaks at hospitals, universities, and conferences, where his insight provides a new perspective on a problem that persists across the globe. In today's episode, we explore the evolution of patient safety and the transformative role of technology in healthcare. The conversation dives into how innovations—from advanced command centers to cutting-edge virtual reality and AI applications—are redefining how hospitals prevent and respond to medical errors. The discussion challenges the conventional blame-and-shame approach and instead highlights the importance of building systems that foster trust and resilience among healthcare professionals and patients alike. We also examine the nuances of integrating technology into complex healthcare environments, discussing how effective communication, standardized protocols, and smart design can work together to minimize human error. Drawing insightful parallels with industries like aviation, the episode offers a fresh perspective on the critical need for systemic improvements and the potential for new technological solutions to drive the next generation of patient safety. Questions, Notes, and Highlights: How is technology transforming patient safety in healthcare? What role do advanced command centers, virtual reality, and AI play in preventing medical errors? How can healthcare shift away from a blame-and-shame culture? What strategies build trust and resilience among healthcare professionals and patients? How do effective communication, standardized protocols, and smart design minimize human error? What lessons can be learned from the aviation industry regarding safety and error management? What challenges arise when integrating technology into complex healthcare environments? How can innovation drive the next generation of patient safety? This podcast is part of the #LeanCommunicators network. 

Clinical research is undergoing a revolution in light of new demands for speed and opportunities from a technological standpoint. These trends have given rise to a debate about the quality and clinical meaning of traditional methods of investigations versus modern types of clinical studies to collect real world evidence. This debate at the 3rd annual Medical Affairs Innovation Olympics #MAIO2024 in a unique and exciting format with a live poll at the conclusion, features an animated discussion from three speakers: Rashad Massoud, MD, MPH, CEO of Rashad Massoud Associates, LLC., globally recognized healthcare quality expert, physician, formerly visiting faculty at the T.H. Chan School of Public Health; Suzanne Pavon (moderator), Doctor of Pharmacy, Board Member at Iethico, former Vice President of Pharmacovigilance and Quality at Argenx; and Sana Syed, Senior Medical Director - Clinical Lead at Sanofi and public health expert formerly at T.H. Chang School of Public Health. Debate Objectives: ● To discuss the utility of RCTs in research and learning ● To discuss the challenges in translating RCT findings into the real-world environment ● To review the utility of the RCT approach to facilitate real world implementation ● To review the impact of the RCT approach for impact and limitations ● To discuss alternative research methods for research and learning ● To conclude with the research approaches that fit best for clinical trials and the real world; indicating a need for an adaptive, dual approach. 0:00 Alloutcoach Intro Music 0:09 Episode Highlight 3:09 Innovation Olympics Introduction 4:44 Debate Rules & Introduction 6:30 RCTs are the Gold Standard for Research and Learning - For the Motion - Sana Syed 8:12 The Scientific Method - Standard RCT Design 9:46 Rare Disease Case Study 11:38 Translating Biology vs Translating Real World Factors 14:34 Diversity of patients critical for data to represent populations 18:50 RCTs are NOT the Gold Standard for Research: Against the Motion - Rashad Massoud 20:27 Properties of an RCT 21:19 Other Research Questions to Eliminate Other Factors that may influence the results 24:13 Access Questions and Outcomes of Interest - Discovery and Delivery 24:48 Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ) - ~17 yrs to translate data into real world 26:33 Efficacy vs. Effectiveness Research 31:02 Concluding Remarks - case study in which RCT designs are not beneficial 35:30 Question: Health Avatar and AI to create real and virtual control arm Using virtual control arm using real world databases using Bayesian statistical methods 39:23 Case study to emphasize Harnessing Tacit knowledge 42:02 Comment: Weaknesses in generating data we can translate into populations 43:44 Question: Are we creating RCTs from virtual patients or classical RCT design? 47:34 Final Comments - For the Motion, Sana Syed Clinical Studies and Scientific Method - adjustments in diverse patient recruitment tactics 49:31 Final Comments - Against the Motion, Rashad Massoud 53:14 Live Voting Results

In this episode of the Healthy, Wealthy, & Smart podcast Dr. Karen Litzy hosted Dr. Tonya Miller and Dr. Laurie Brogan to discuss their new book, Professionalism and the Practice of Physical Therapy. The conversation highlighted the importance of professionalism in the field of physical therapy, emphasizing its relevance not only for students but also for practicing professionals throughout their careers. Time Stamps:  [00:01:27] Professionalism in physical therapy. [00:06:01] Professionalism in physical therapy. [00:10:20] Professional growth oak tree analogy. [00:12:43] Reflection in professional development. [00:17:16] Definition of professionalism. [00:21:10] Management of self through lifelong learning. [00:24:15] Mentorship's role in professionalism. [00:30:36] Importance of workbooks in learning. [00:32:01] Successful writing partnership dynamics. [00:36:10] Professionalism in physical therapy. [00:39:26] Health, wealth, and wellness.   More About Dr. Laurie Brogan: Laurie Brogan PT, DPT is a full-time faculty member of the Physical Therapy Department at Misericordia University, primarily responsible for teaching cardiopulmonary physical therapy, clinical skills, and professional development.  With strong interests in the needs of the older adult population and interprofessional education/practice, she is also an American Board of Physical Therapy Specialists (APBPTS) Board- Certified Clinical Specialist in Geriatric Physical Therapy, a Certified Exercise Expert for the Aging Adult, and a Certified Master Trainer for TeamSTEPPS, a program developed by the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ) and the Department of Defense as a solution to improving collaboration and communication in healthcare settings.  Her research and writing centers around interprofessional education and practice, socialization in interprofessional settings, and the development of clinical reasoning in PT education.     More About Dr. Tonya Miller: Tonya Miller, a national speaker, author, and founder of TYM Coaching, is deeply committed to personal growth and developing strong leaders. With over 25 years of executive leadership skills and a Ph.D. in Leadership Studies, Tonya combines real-world experience with academic expertise. She tailors her coaching programs to fit any individual or organization, from coaching front-line healthcare providers to board-room negotiations. Her recent book, “Professionalism in the Practice of Physical Therapy: A Case-Based Approach,” is a testament to her commitment, highlighting key elements of professional development for not only physical therapists but for healthcare clinicians and leaders. Tonya is also committed to integrity, accountability, and self-awareness.    In addition to owning TYM Coaching, Tonya is the Academic Program Lead for the Doctor of Physical Therapy program at Harrisburg University of Science and Technology. In this role, Tonya leads the Doctor of Physical Therapy faculty and guides developing professionals in leadership and understanding the healthcare industry.   Tonya believes in community engagement and is an active community volunteer. She serves on several boards, including the America Physical Therapy Association PT Proud Special Interest Group, where she serves as the Vice Chair, and PA Vent Camp, a camp for ventilator-dependent children, where she serves as the Executive Director.     Resources from this Episode: Professionalism and the Practice of Physical Therapy book Tonya Miller's Website Tonya on LinkedIn Laurie on LinkedIn Relationship between allied health student behavioral style and ideal clinical instructor behaviors- research publication   Jane Sponsorship Information: Book a one-on-one demo here Mention the code LITZY1MO for a free month   Follow Dr. Karen Litzy on Social Media: Karen's Twitter Karen's Instagram Karen's LinkedIn   Subscribe to Healthy, Wealthy & Smart: YouTube Website Apple Podcast Spotify SoundCloud Stitcher iHeart Radio

Is your CME content scratching the surface or truly addressing the core issues in healthcare practice? As a CME professional, you're constantly striving to create educational interventions that make a real difference. But sometimes, despite your best efforts, the impact falls short of expectations. Root cause analysis (RCA) could be the missing piece in your needs assessment toolkit, helping you uncover the true sources of performance gaps and design more effective CME programs. By listening to this episode, you'll discover: How to apply RCA techniques to enhance your needs assessments and identify the root causes of practice gaps Step-by-step guidance and practical tools for conducting RCA Real-world examples of how RCA can lead to measurable improvements in healthcare outcomes Tune in now to unlock the power of root cause analysis and revolutionize your approach to CME program development. Resources Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ). Root Cause Analysis. Institute for Healthcare Improvement. Improving Root Cause Analyses and Actions to Prevent Harm. Singh G et al. Root Cause Analysis and Medical Error Prevention. StatPearls. Driesen B et al. Root Cause Analysis Using the Prevention and Recovery Information System for Monitoring and Analysis Method in Healthcare Facilities: A Systematic Literature Review. J Patient Saf. 2022;18(4):342-350

Developed by the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ), Patient Safety Indicators, or PSIs, represent measurements of adverse events that enable healthcare organizations to gauge how they compare to others regarding patient safety. In addition, CMS looks at PSIs in scoring and penalizing organizations. In this series, Tomas talks with members of a clinical team that has seen great results in reducing PSIs throughout the organization.   Moderator: Tomas Villanueva, DO, MBA, FACPE, SFHM Senior Principal Clinical Operations and Quality Vizient Guests: Rachel Leyk, RN, CMSRN, CPHQ Improvement Advisor Quality and Safety – Fargo Sanford Health Devendranath (Dev) Mannuru, MD, CHCOM Internal Medicine Hospitalist CDI and Quality Physician Advisor Sanford Hospital – Fargo Khaled Zreik, MD Director, Critical Care Acute Care Surgeon Sanford Health   Show Notes: [02:00] Patient Safety Indicators (PSIs) defined [02:46] PSI-90 and individual PSIs [03:43] Hospital Acquired Conditions Reduction Program (HACRP) [05:06] Documentation and the “dotted line” to quality [05:44] Benchmarking with the Vizient Clinical Data Base [06:23] Focused objectives for the PSI reduction program [07:34] Steps in building the program structure [09:35] Addressing gaps in education – once clinicians know what to do, they don't fail   Links | Resources: To contact Modern Practice: modernpracticepodcast@vizientinc.com Rachel Leyk's email: rachel.leyk@sanfordhealth.org Dr. Mannuru's email: devendranath.mannuru@sanfordhealth.org Dr. Zreik's email: khaled.zreik@sanfordhealth.org PSI ACS Poster: PSI ACS Poster Final.pdf 2023 Quality and Safety Conference presentation: 2023-qsc-ppt-final presentation.pptx   Subscribe Today! Apple Podcasts Amazon Podcasts Android Spotify RSS Feed

Cindy Brach was the lead for health literacy and cultural competence at the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ) and co-chaired the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services' Health Literacy Workgroup. Brach led the creation of many important health literacy tools and resources including the AHRQ Health Literacy Universal Precautions Toolkit, the discussion […] The post Cindy Brach Talks About the Evolution of Health Literacy (HLOL #246) appeared first on Health Literacy Out Loud Podcast.

In this episode, host Dr. Aaron Fritts interviews vascular surgeon Dr. Syed Hussain and interventional radiologist Dr. Omar Saleh about new innovations in closure devices. --- CHECK OUT OUR SPONSOR Vasorum https://www.vasorum.ie/ --- SHOW NOTES We begin the episode by discussing how closure devices have evolved over recent years and gained popularity in both hospital and OBL settings. Dr. Hussain and Dr. Saleh highlight the logistical advantages associated with a consistent, reliable closure device. Both doctors speak about their patients' reported experiences and preferences for different types of closure devices and the importance of having a variety of options at hand. Dr. Saleh and Dr. Hussain also introduce the new CELT ACD closure device from Vasorum. We learn how to place a CELT, and Dr. Saleh highlights the ease of deployment and the reliability of results. Dr. Hussain also shares his experience in using the CELT, comparing its deployment to a “mic drop”. Additionally, we discuss if there are any potential drawbacks or special considerations that may exist in using CELT compared to other devices. The doctors cover the time from CELT closure to ambulation/discharge, citing an abstract published in Journal of Vascular Surgery (see resources below). Dr. Hussain and Dr. Saleh also report very few closure-site complications when using CELT, good outcomes with calcified arteries, and ease of bailout options. To conclude the episode, we discuss how physicians can get CELT and other products into their hospital or OBL through the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ), Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems (CAHPS) scores, and other methods. --- RESOURCES Safety and Efficacy of the CELT ACD Femoral Arteriotomy Closure Device in the Office-based Laboratory: https://www.jvascsurg.org/article/S0741-5214(22)00945-4/fulltext Silent cerebral infarct after cardiac catheterization as detected by diffusion weighted Magnetic Resonance Imaging: a randomized comparison of radial and femoral arterial approaches: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1896179/ Vasorum CELT ACD Closure Device: https://www.vasorum.ie/

Developed by the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ), Patient Safety Indicators, or PSIs, represent measurements of adverse events that enable healthcare organizations to gauge how they compare to others regarding patient safety. In addition, CMS looks at PSIs in scoring and penalizing organizations. In this series, Tomas talks with members of a clinical team that has seen great results in reducing PSIs throughout the organization.   Moderator: Tomas Villanueva, DO, MBA, FACPE, SFHM Senior Principal Clinical Operations and Quality Vizient   Guests: Rachel Leyk, RN, CMSRN, CPHQ Improvement Advisor Quality and Safety – Fargo Sanford Health   Devendranath (Dev) Mannuru, MD, CHCOM Internal Medicine Hospitalist CDI and Quality Physician Advisor Sanford Hospital – Fargo   Khaled Zreik, MD Director, Critical Care Acute Care Surgeon Sanford Health   Show Notes: [02:00] Patient Safety Indicators (PSIs) defined [02:46] PSI-90 and individual PSIs [03:43] Hospital Acquired Conditions Reduction Program (HACRP) [05:06] Documentation and the “dotted line” to quality [05:44] Benchmarking with the Vizient Clinical Data Base [06:23] Focused objectives for the PSI reduction program [07:34] Steps in building the program structure [09:35] Addressing gaps in education – once clinicians know what to do, they don't fail   Resources: To contact Modern Practice: modernpracticepodcast@vizientinc.com Rachel Leyk's email: rachel.leyk@sanfordhealth.org Dr. Mannuru's email: devendranath.mannuru@sanfordhealth.org Dr. Zreik's email: khaled.zreik@sanfordhealth.org   PSI ACS Poster: PSI ACS Poster Final.pdf 2023 Quality and Safety Conference presentation: 2023-qsc-ppt-final presentation.pptx   Subscribe Today! Apple Podcasts Amazon Podcasts Android Google Podcasts Spotify RSS Feed  

In this episode of Critical Matters, Dr. Zanotti is joined by Dr. Nitin Puri. As a critical care physician, Dr. Puri is the Division Head for Critical Care Medicine, and Co-Director for the Center for Critical Care Medicine at Cooper University Health System. He is an Associate Professor of Medicine at Cooper Medical School of Rowan University, in Camden, New Jersey. Together, they discuss medical errors in healthcare. Additional Resources: “To Err is Human: Building a Safer Health System.” The landmark publication y the Institute of Medicine highlighting medical errors as a critical cause of deaths in the US healthcare system: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25077248 Medical error – the third leading cause of death in the US: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27143499 The Safety of Inpatient Health Care. New England Journal of Medicine 2023; https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMsa2206117 The Communication and Optimal Resolution (CANDOR) toolkit from the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ). CANDOR is a process that health care institutions and providers can use to respond in a timely, thorough and fair way when medical errors occur and cause patient's harm: https://www.ahrq.gov/professionals/quality-patient-safety/patient-safety-resources/resources/candor/introduction.html A powerful video on to topic of disclosure of medical errors. Worth a view: https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=4&v=xeMWizTodYw Books Mentioned in this Episode: The Fearless Organization: Creating Psychological Safety in the Workplace for Learning, Innovation, and Growth. By Amy Edmondson: https://bit.ly/3OQe1zV Pachinko. By Min Lee Jee: https://bit.ly/3DNJegK

Contributor: Nicholas Tsipis, MD Educational Pearls: What study was Dr. Tsipis talking about? In December of 2022, the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ) put out a study titled “Diagnostic Errors in the Emergency Department: A Systematic Review.” This study triggered many news stories from prominent outlets with headlines such as, “More than 7 million incorrect diagnoses made in US emergency rooms every year, government report finds,” from CNN, and “E.R. Doctors Misdiagnose Patients With Unusual Symptoms,” from the New York Times. What was the response? Matt Bivens, MD from Emergency Medicine News responded to the original study in an article titled, “AHRQ Errors Report was ‘Outright Unconscionable.'” Dr. Bivens points out that AHRQ's biggest claims – including that 5.7% of patients are misdiagnosed in the ED and 2.0% suffer an adverse event as a result – were based only on three small studies out of Canada, Spain, and Switzerland (combined n=1,758). Spain and Switzerland did not have emergency medicine residency-trained physicians at the time of the studies. The Swiss study looked at when the diagnosis changed significantly between admittance and discharge to which Bivens responded, “Are we describing errors in this study or just an ongoing collaborative process?” The Canadian study looked at 503 high-acuity patients of which one died of a missed aortic dissection. Bivens notes that this is too small of sample size to be generalized to the American ER population which includes a mix of low and high acuity. Moral of the story? Mistakes do happen in the ED and they do negatively impact patients but be careful in how you interpret studies and news articles that report on them. References Newman-Toker DE, Peterson SM, Badihian S, Hassoon A, Nassery N, Parizadeh D, Wilson LM, Jia Y, Omron R, Tharmarajah S, Guerin L, Bastani PB, Fracica EA, Kotwal S, Robinson KA. Diagnostic Errors in the Emergency Department: A Systematic Review. Comparative Effectiveness Review No. 258. (Prepared by the Johns Hopkins University Evidence-based Practice Center under Contract No. 75Q80120D00003.) AHRQ Publication No. 22(23)-EHC043. Rockville, MD: Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality; December 2022. DOI: 10.23970/AHRQEPCCER258. Kounang, N. (2022, December 16). More than 7 million incorrect diagnoses made in US emergency rooms every year, government report finds. CNN. https://www.cnn.com/2022/12/15/health/hospital-misdiagnoses-study/index.html Abelson, R. (2022, December 15). E.R. Doctors Misdiagnose Patients With Unusual Symptoms. The New York Times. https://www.nytimes.com/2022/12/15/health/medical-errors-emergency-rooms.html?searchResultPosition=3 Bivens, Matt MD. Evidence-Based Medicine: AHRQ Errors Report was ‘Outright Unconscionable'. Emergency Medicine News 45(3):p 1,21, March 2023. | DOI: 10.1097/01.EEM.0000922716.51556.31  Summarized by Jeffrey Olson, MS1 | Edited by Meg Joyce & Jorge Chalit, OMSII

On episode 423 of The Nurse Keith Show nursing and healthcare career podcast, Keith interviews Dr. Jing Wang, PhD, MPH, RN, FAAN, Dean and Professor of the Florida State University College of Nursing, and Adjunct Professor in Biomedical Informatics and Public Health at the University of Texas Health Science Center at Houston. In the course of their conversation, Keith and Dr. Wang discuss the future of health and healthcare and how Florida State University College of Nursing is leading in this area. Other topics include the future of aging in place, the use of wearable tech, and the concept of a “high tech high touch” approach to nursing research and education. Jing Wang, PhD, MPH, RN, FAAN is Dean and Professor of the Florida State University College of Nursing, and Adjunct Professor in Biomedical Informatics and Public Health at the University of Texas Health Science Center at Houston. She serves as the Board of Trustee at the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation and HCA Florida Capitol Hospital. She's committed to nursing workforce development and High Tech High Touch approach in nursing education, research, and collaborative practice. Her interdisciplinary research uses mobile and connected health technologies to optimize multiple-behavior lifestyle interventions and improve patient-centered outcomes among the chronically ill and aging populations with multiple chronic conditions, especially among the rural and underserved populations. Dr. Wang is an elected Fellow of the American Academy of Nursing, 2013 Robert Wood Johnson Foundation Nurse Faculty Scholar, 2015 TEDMED Scholar, 2016 Josiah Macy Jr. Foundation Macy Faculty Scholar, and Harvard Macy Scholar where she continues to teach in the “Leading Innovations in Health Care & Education” program in the Harvard Macy Institute. As a Health and Aging Policy Fellow and American Political Science Association Congressional Fellow, she was a Senior Scientific Advisor to Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ), and works with Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) and the Office of the National Coordinator for Health Information Technology (ONC) as a senior policy advisor. Wang received her MSN and PhD from the University of Pittsburgh School of Nursing, her MPH from its Graduate School of Public Health, and Graduate Certificate in Clinical and Translational Science from its School of Medicine. Connect with Dr. Jing Wang and Florida State University School of Nursing: Florida State University College of Nursing Facebook Instagram Twitter LinkedIn Dr. Wang on LinkedIn ----------- Did you know that you can now earn CEUs from listening to podcasts? That's right — over at RNegade.pro, they're building a library of nursing podcasts offering continuing education credits, including episodes of The Nurse Keith Show! So just head over to RNegade.pro, log into the portal, select Nurse Keith (or any other Content Creator) from the Content Creator dropdown, and get CEs for any content on the platform! Nurse Keith is a holistic career coach for nurses, professional podcaster, published author, award-winning blogger, inspiring keynote speaker, and successful nurse entrepreneur. Connect with Nurse Keith at NurseKeith.com, and on Twitter, Facebook, LinkedIn, and Instagram. Nurse Keith lives in beautiful Santa Fe, New Mexico with his lovely fiancée, Shada McKenzie, a highly gifted traditional astrologer and reader of the tarot. You can find Shada at The Circle and the Dot. The Nurse Keith Show is a proud member of The Health Podcast Network, one of the largest and fastest-growing collections of authoritative, high-quality podcasts taking on the tough topics in health and care with empathy, expertise, and a commitment to excellence. The podcast is adroitly produced by Rob Johnston of 520R Podcasting, and Mark Capispisan is our stalwart social media manager and newsletter wrangler.

Krista Hughes, a nationally acclaimed patient health advocate, joins me to share about the importance of patient advocacy. Episode At A Glance: This week on The SavvyCast, Krista Hughes joins me to discuss patient health advocacy. Krista has over 25 years of medical experience and now serves as a nationally acclaimed patient advocate. She has clients all over the US, and she focuses on any type of healthcare. In this episode, Krista shares exactly what patient advocacy is, who can benefit from it, and how to be proactive about your health care! Who Is Krista Hughes?  Krista Hughes, BCPA, is a board-certified patient advocate and founder & CEO of Hughes Advocacy. Ms. Hughes advocates for better health care for her clients in Alabama and elsewhere. She has over 25 years of experience working in the medical industry, where she equips, empowers, educates, and teaches patients how to get the best care they need and deserve. Ms. Hughes has emerged as a national advocate for patients. She was appointed by U.S. Secretary of Health and Human Services Xavier Beccera to serve a three-year term on the National Advisory Council (NAC) for the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ). A resident of Birmingham, Ms. Hughes is the first Alabamian known to have ever served on the prestigious council that addresses the quality of care in the United States. Additionally, she is an ambassador and committed partner with the Patient Safety Movement Foundation, a Patients for Patient Safety US Champion, a member of the National Patient Safety Board, and an active member of the Greater National Advocates Organization and Solace Health.  She is also an APHA Emeritus member of The Alliance of Professional Health Advocates (APHA), a former Board President of the National Association of Healthcare Advocacy (NAHAC), a former Board Member of the Mountain Brook Chamber of Commerce, and a former Emerging Leader of The Women's Network (TWN). Ms. Hughes believes in healthcare for all; patients should be treated equally with dignity, compassion, and respect. It is an honor and privilege to assist patients and their loved ones in their healthcare journey. Ms. Hughes is a graduate of Auburn University and the University of Alabama, where she earned a degree in communicative disorders. Questions Answered In This Episode:  What is a patient advocate? How did it become Krista's passion & profession? What is Hughes Advocacy? How frequently do people die from preventable medical errors? What are the most common kinds of medical errors? How can someone be proactive with their healthcare? What does a patient advocate do? Why is it important to have one? Resources Mentioned In This Episode: Connect With Krista Hughes on Instagram Hughes Advocacy Website Connect With Krista Hughes on LinkedIn Hospital Compare Hospital Safety Grades Leapfrog Hospital & Surgery Center Ratings Patient Safety Bill IHI Conference Forum 2022: Carole Hemmelgarn IHI Conference Forum 2022: Soojin Jun Family Savvy Smashed Potatoes recipe I hope you enjoyed this episode! As always, if you have time to rate, review and subscribe to The SavvyCast on Apple Podcasts, it would be SO appreciated! If you would prefer to watch the podcast interview, check it out on Youtube. Blessings to you!!! If you like this podcast, check these out:  Vaginal Health: Best Practices + Tips with Lizzie Harbin 3 Main Movements to Yield the Greatest Health ROI  

The Agency for Healthcare research and Quality (AHRQ) estimates that the direct medical costs (total of all health care costs) for cancer in the US in 2015 were $80.2 billion.52% of this cost is for hospital outpatient or doctor office visits38% of this cost is for inpatient hospital staysOne of the major costs of cancer is cancer treatment. But lack of health insurance and other barriers to health care prevent many Americans from getting optimal health care.According to the US Census Bureau, about 28 million people (9%) in the US were uninsured in 2016.The percentage of uninsured ranged from 3% in Massachusetts to 17% in Texas.And according to Cancer Facts & Figures 2018, “Uninsured patients and those from many ethnic minority groups are substantially more likely to be diagnosed with cancer at a later stage, when treatment can be more extensive, costlier, and less successful.”This year, about 609,640 Americans are expected to die of cancer – that's more than 1,670 people a day. Cancer is the second most common cause of death in the US, exceeded only by heart disease.The Emotional Meatball is back for another episode of The Rocci Stucci Show!Watch or Listen here: https://roccistuccishow.comALL Links: linktapgo.com/roccihttps://paypal.me/roccistucciWe are grateful for any contributions! https://fundingfreespeech.com/rocci7:00PM CST - TRSS

Join Dr. Kathy Wood, PhD, RN, FAHA, FAAN, as she explores utilizing shared decision-making for your AFib patients. Leave this conversation with tools and resources to activate your patient's engagement in their AFib care. Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ) website for Shared Decision Making (the SHARE mnemonic): https://www.ahrq.gov/health-literacy/professional-training/shared-decision/index.html Choosing antithrombotic therapy for elderly patients with atrial fibrillation who are at risk for falls: https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamainternalmedicine/fullarticle/484991 US hospital webpages on atrial fibrillation ablation: A potential source for misinformation: https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/jce.15606Cardiac tachyarrhythmias and patient values and preferences for their management: the European Heart Rhythm Association (EHRA) consensus document endorsed by the Heart Rhythm Society (HRS), Asia Pacific Heart Rhythm Society (APHRS), and Sociedad Latinoamericana de Estimulación Cardíaca y Electrofisiología (SOLEACE): https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/26108807/Provider Decision Aid Information:Univ of CO Shared Decision Making website, Colorado Program for Patient Centered Decisions: https://patientdecisionaid.org/ Ottawa Hospital Research Institute: https://decisionaid.ohri.ca/AZlist.html). Dartmouth Center for Shared Decision Making: https://www.dartmouth-hitchcock.org/shared-decision-makingACC's CardioSmart page on Shared Decision Making: https://www.cardiosmart.org/topics/decisions/shared-decisions Health IT.gov Shared Decision Making tip sheet: https://www.healthit.gov/sites/default/files/nlc_shared_decision_making_fact_sheet.pdf Patient Resources: American Heart Association (AHA) sponsored website “My Afib Experience”: https://supportnetwork.heart.org/s/myafibmain StopAFib.org patient site: https://www.stopafib.org/ Ongoing Trials:ENHANCE AF: https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04096781 Univ of Colorado' Patient Centered Decisions Research Group: https://patientdecisionaid.org/icd/atrial-fibrillation/ See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

An interview with Dr. David Schiff from the University of Virginia Medical Center in Charlottesville, VA, Dr. Michael Vogelbaum from Moffitt Cancer Center in Tampa, FL, and Dr. Vinai Gondi from Northwestern Medicine Cancer Center Warrenville and Proton Center in Warrenville, IL, authors on "Radiation Therapy for Brain Metastases: American Society of Clinical Oncology Guideline Endorsement of the American Society for Radiation Oncology Guideline." An ASCO endorsement panel endorsed the "Radiation Therapy for Brain Metastases: an ASTRO Clinical Practice Guideline," and the authors review the endorsement process and key points in this episode. Read the full guideline endorsement at www.asco.org/neurooncology-guidelines.   TRANSCRIPT Brittany Harvey: Hello and welcome to the ASCO Guidelines podcast series, brought to you by the ASCO Podcast Network, a collection of nine programs covering a range of educational and scientific content and offering enriching insight into the world of cancer care. You can find all the shows including this one at asco.org/podcasts. My name is Brittany Harvey, and today I'm interviewing Dr. David Schiff, from the University of Virginia Medical Center in Charlottesville, Virginia, Dr. Michael Vogelbaum from Moffitt Cancer Center in Tampa, Florida, and Dr. Vinai Gondi from Northwestern Medicine Cancer Center Warrenville and Proton Center in Warrenville, Illinois, authors on 'Radiation Therapy for Brain Metastases: American Society of Clinical Oncology Guideline Endorsement of the American Society for Radiation Oncology Guideline'. Thank you for being here, Dr. Schiff, Dr. Vogelbaum, and Dr. Gondi. Drs. Schiff, Vogelbaum, and Gondi: Our pleasure. Brittany Harvey: First, I'd like to note that ASCO takes great care in the development of its guideline products and ensures that the ASCO conflict of interest policy is followed for each guideline product. The full conflict of interest information for this guideline endorsement panel is available online with the publication in the Journal of Clinical Oncology. Dr. Schiff, do you have any relevant disclosures that are directly related to this topic? Dr. David Schiff: No relevant disclosures, Brittany. Brittany Harvey: Thank you. And Dr. Vogelbaum, do you have any relevant disclosures that are related to this topic? Dr. Michael Vogelbaum: I have no relevant disclosures. Brittany Harvey: Thank you. And Dr. Gondi, do you have any relevant disclosures that are related to this topic? Dr. Vinai Gondi: Brittany, my only relevant disclosure is that I served as vice-chair of the guidelines that we're discussing today, but otherwise, no relevant disclosures. Brittany Harvey: Excellent! Thank you all. So, then starting us off, Dr. Schiff, what is the scope of this guideline endorsement? And how does it intersect with the recently published 'Treatment for Brain Metastases: ASCO-SNO-ASTRO Guideline'? Dr. David Schiff: Sure. A little bit of background, from the start of the joint ASCO and SNO guideline effort, we had the participation of radiation oncologists, in addition to neurosurgeons, medical oncologists, and neuro-oncologists. As we were getting underway, ASTRO reached out asking to participate formally as well. They had been planning to update their brain metastasis guidelines but were a year or two away from getting started. And they recognized it would be redundant for them to create comprehensive guidelines that covered chemotherapy, immunotherapy, and surgery as our guidelines were poised to do. By participating with ASCO and SNO, they were able to have their task force focus specifically on key questions related to radiation oncology practices. In particular, the ASTRO project went into considerable depth on issues of radiation and radiosurgery dose, fractionation schemes, and the risk of radiation complications. These were areas that our guidelines didn't address. Several members of the ASTRO task force including their chair, Paul Brown, and co-chair Dr. Gondi were members of our committee, and we added Dr. Brown as a co-chair to our committee when ASTRO came on board. The overlap between our two groups helped ensure that our recommendations were in harmony. Brittany Harvey: So, then, Dr. Vogelbaum, can you provide us with an overview of how the ASCO guideline endorsement process works? Dr. Michael Vogelbaum: Sure, Brittany. So, as Dr. Schiff mentioned, ASCO had convened a guidelines panel to develop the new 'Treatment for Brain Metastasis: ASCO-SNO-ASTRO Guideline'. And this was a multidisciplinary panel that he and I co-chaired and was anchored by a guideline specialist from ASCO, Hans Messersmith, and the process was that we had evaluated recent literature pertaining to the treatment of the brain metastases, and so, we had a very good understanding of what was supported by high-quality evidence and what was not there yet, as a group. So, when ASTRO came to ASCO and asked whether or not we would be interested in endorsing their guidelines, we were already prepared with all the evidence. And so, the same panel got together again, to evaluate the ASTRO guidelines. And we did this, again, in a very structured manner. We reviewed the guideline questions and recommendations, compared them to the evidence, and went through the same type of review and polling process that we had when we had developed our own original guidelines. In the end, we had a conversation with the ASTRO guidelines leadership about some of the points that we raised questions about, and we were able to reach an accommodation that allowed us to fully endorse the ASTRO guidelines. Brittany Harvey: Thank you, Dr. Vogelbaum for that overview of the endorsement process. So, then, Dr. Gondi, what are the key recommendations of the ASTRO guideline? Dr. Vinai Gondi: Thank you, Brittany. As Dr. Schiff and Dr. Vogelbaum outlined, ASTRO commissioned a list of key questions that they sought to address specifically to inform the radiotherapeutic management of brain metastases. And to address these questions, ASTRO not only convened a panel of expert radiation oncologists across the country but also engaged with the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ) to create a comparative effectiveness evidence review, in addition to our own high-level evidence review to address these questions. The four key questions that were addressed in the ASTRO guidelines are: Number one: What are the indications for stereotactic radiosurgery alone for patients with intact brain metastases? Number two: What are the indications for observation, preoperative radiosurgery or post-operative radiosurgery, or whole-brain radiotherapy in patients with resected brain metastases? Number three: What are the indications for whole-brain radiotherapy for patients with intact brain metastases? Number four: What are the risks of symptomatic radionecrosis with whole-brain radiotherapy and/or stereotactic radiosurgery for patients with brain metastases? The recommendations that were made are based on a high-level review of a considerable amount of literature over the past several years that addressed these specific questions. I would encourage the listeners to this podcast to read through the guidelines to understand the specific nuances of each of those recommendations. Brittany Harvey: Excellent! Thank you for that overview. Then, in addition to what Dr. Gondi just said, Dr. Vogelbaum, were there any additional points of discussion raised by the ASCO endorsement panel? Dr. Michael Vogelbaum: Brittany, yes, there was an area of discussion where we needed to interact with the ASTRO guidelines leadership, as I mentioned earlier, and it really related to that key question one that Dr. Gondi described, which is what are the indications for SRS alone for patients with intact brain metastasis. The approach that had been strongly endorsed by ASCO was that there would be a multidisciplinary approach to decision making. And really the benefit of that, the value of that radiosurgery really comes in the form of the interaction between the radiation oncologist and the neurosurgeon. The way that the original proposal had been formulated, there was a size cut-off that was higher than we thought was appropriate for really endorsing that kind of conversation between the radiation oncologist and the neurosurgeon. And so really, we proposed that we bring that cut-off down further, there actually was another subpart to the guideline that had looked at a lower cut-off, but did not specifically call out that interaction between the neurosurgeon and the radiation oncologist. And we felt it would be more appropriate to insert that at that cut-off rather than the larger lesion cut-off. And after a conversation, there was agreement, that was really the only guideline or subpart of the guidelines where there was any real debate or discussion. For the rest of it, the comments that came up from the panel were easily addressed and it really just came down to this one modification. And fortunately, ASTRO agreed, and we were able to go ahead and complete the endorsement. Brittany Harvey: Great! It's great that this was able to be a complete endorsement of that guideline. So, then, Dr. Gondi, in your view, what is the importance of this guideline endorsement? And how will it affect ASCO members? Dr. Vinai Gondi: Thank you, Brittany. A number of responses to that. Number one is, as Dr. Vogelbaum, outlined the purpose of these guidelines was meant to be patient-centric and patient-focused, that we had patient champions who had navigated, who are part of the guideline development team, but also to be multidisciplinary. And so, the type of input and feedback we received from the ASCO team was super valued and valuable, as we were formulating these guidelines and Dr. Vogelbaum outlined a good example. Number two, it had been almost a decade since the last guidelines had come out from ASTRO related to brain metastases management. And much has happened in our field over the past several years that has been practice-changing. We have several novel and innovative radiotherapy technologies and techniques, such as the emergence of radiosurgery, the use of novel radioprotectants, such as hippocampal avoidance, and memantine, but also the emergence of innovative and novel neurosurgical interventions and CNS active systemic therapies. So, the modern management of brain metastases has really undergone quite a revolution over just the past few years, and it is important that these guidelines be updated to reflect those changes, but also to inform radiation oncologists on the contemporary management of brain metastases and in evidence-based care. So, we believe that these guidelines will significantly impact ASCO members. Certainly, those who are radiation oncologists, as brain metastases are some of the most common patients that radiation oncologists manage in the community and in academic centers, but also for other members of ASCO medical oncologists, surgeons to understand sort of the nuances of radiotherapy management that is evidence-based, so they can have a patient-centered, patient-focused, multidisciplinary discussion with their radiation oncologist as well. Brittany Harvey: Those are excellent points for clinicians on the management for brain metastases. So, then finally, Dr. Schiff, Dr. Gondi just mentioned how these guidelines are patient-centric. So, how will these guideline recommendations impact patients with brain metastases? Dr. David Schiff: Yeah, well, I think what I'm about to say is really going to echo what Dr. Gondi just said. You know, 20 years ago, patients diagnosed with brain metastases were typically immediately referred to a radiation oncologist, they almost always got whole-brain radiation therapy, the median survival was about four months, and many, if not most patients, died from their brain metastases. The situation has really changed recently. With the rapid advances in management from new therapies, and well-designed clinical trials in recent years, outcomes have markedly improved, it's probably less than a quarter of patients now who succumb to their intracranial disease. But at the same time, decision-making for patients has become much more complicated. Nowadays, medical oncologists may reach out initially to neurosurgeons for consideration of radiosurgery or surgical resection, or in some circumstances utilize systemic therapy as a first step. Conversely, a patient might see a neurosurgeon first, who may or may not be aware that there's appropriate immunotherapy or targeted agent that might make sense prior to going on to radiosurgery. It's obviously a challenge for sub-specialists to keep up with all the emerging clinical trial data and new drugs. Our two sets of guidelines provide a roadmap for physicians of different expertise to help determine what types of therapies or referral should be considered when brain metastases are found. The end result of all this is improved control of intracranial disease and improved quality of life for the patients. Brittany Harvey: Absolutely. Those are key points. It's excellent to see these guidelines, and the overarching 'Treatment for Brain Metastases: ASCO-ASTRO-SNO Guideline' be published. So, I want to thank you all for your time today, Dr. Schiff, Dr. Vogelbaum, and Dr. Gondi. Thank you for all of your work on these guidelines. Dr. Michael Vogelbaum: My pleasure. Dr. Vinai Gondi: Thank you for having us. Dr. David Schiff: Thank you, Brittany. It was great to participate in this important project. Brittany Harvey: And thank you to all of our listeners for tuning in to the ASCO Guidelines podcast series. To read the full guideline endorsement go to www.asco.org/neurooncology-guidelines. You can also find many of our guidelines and interactive resources in the free ASCO Guidelines app available in iTunes or the Google Play Store. If you have enjoyed what you've heard today, please rate and review the podcast and be sure to subscribe so you never miss an episode.   The purpose of this podcast is to educate and to inform. This is not a substitute for professional medical care and is not intended for use in the diagnosis or treatment of individual conditions. Guests on this podcast express their own opinions, experience and conclusions. Guest statements on the podcast do not express the opinions of ASCO. The mention of any product, service, organization, activity or therapy should not be construed as an ASCO endorsement.

This episode demystifies clinical medical care ‘best practices' — clinical guidelines & outcome measures. These are regularly created, validated & updated, by expert teams and organizations. This rigorous, evidence-based process provides the USA with a quality and up to date clinical health care system.  [261 characters].   Guest:  John L. Gore, M.D. Professor of Urology, Professor of Surgery, Health Services Researcher, University of Washington. Urologist, surgeon, clinician, researcher, educator and expert in clinical care guidelines and outcomes. Dr. Gore is the PI of a large pragmatic trial in bladder cancer, and a quality of care expert. He previously served as the American Urological Association (AUA) representative to the National Quality Forum, which endorses national health care performance measures, and has been on guidelines panels for the National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) for kidney cancer, and the AUA for bladder cancer.   Resources: Avedis Donabedian — author of a classic core framework for evaluating the quality of medical care, laid out 50 years ago; the basis of our system today. This link is to a recent article about Donabedian and his work, and is helpful for understanding how and why outcome measures and clinical guidelines are needed and beneficial for quality health care. American Urological Association (AUA) Guidelines for Urology Care — find current health care guidelines for prostate conditions, bladder cancer, erectile dysfunction, etc. National Quality Forum  (NQF)— nonprofit US organization that sets standards for quality health care, and provides other services that advance quality health care. National Committee for Quality Assurance (NCQA)— nonprofit US organization that works to improve health care quality through the administration of evidence-based standards, measures, programs, and accreditation. Agency for Health Care Research and Quality (AHRQ) — lead US Federal agency charged with improving the safety and quality of healthcare for all Americans. AHRQ develops the knowledge, tools, and data needed to improve the healthcare system and help consumers, healthcare professionals, and policymakers make informed health decisions   Podcast Webstie & Social Media: Podcast Website: theoriginalguidetomenshealth.org Facebook Page: https://www.facebook.com/theoriginalguidetomenshealth/ Twitter: https://twitter.com/guide2menshlth LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/company/the-original-guide-to-mens-health/

“For me, the beauty of diabetes was that it was the anchor but it allowed me to explore so many different areas of research and interest.” -Robert A. Gabbay, MD, PhD   In episode 158 of the podcast, we welcome Dr. Robert Gabbay. Dr. Gabbay is Chief Scientific and Medical Officer of the American Diabetes Association and Associate Professor at Harvard Medical School. DocWorking Founder and CEO, Dr. Jen Barna talks with Dr. Gabbay about how it all started for him, his journey in medicine, how he balances it all and what advice he was given and what advice he would give to his younger self. He speaks about difficult decisions he made that affected the direction of his career. Dr. Gabbay also talks about the importance that mentors have had in his life and how they helped to shape him.    Robert A. Gabbay, MD, PhD is Chief Scientific and Medical Officer of the American Diabetes Association and Associate Professor at Harvard Medical School. His research focuses on innovative models of diabetes care to improve diabetes outcomes and the lives of people with diabetes. Throughout his vibrant career he has had many accomplishments as a basic science researcher, developer of patient communication tools, creator of the first broad scale diabetes registry, designer of care management training programs, and leader of one of the largest primary care transformation efforts in the US around the Patient Centered Medical Home. The reach of his work has been recognized through leadership roles around the world to transform diabetes care including leading the International Diabetes Federation BRIDGES program that implements evidence based translational research to low resource global settings. Dr. Gabbay has received funding from the National Institute of Health Diabetes, Digestive and Kidneys Diseases (NIDDK), the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ), and the Center for Medicare and Medicaid Innovation for his care transformation work. Along with an extensive peer reviewed publication record, his views have appeared in popular press such as the New York Times, CNN, the Washington Post, People, Oprah, and National Public Radio. Formerly, he held the role of Chief Medical Officer at Joslin Diabetes Center.   Find full transcripts of DocWorking: The Whole Physician Podcast episodes on the DocWorking Blog  DocWorking empowers physicians and entire health care teams to get on the path to achieving their dreams, both in and outside of work, with programs designed to help you maximize life with minimal time.   Are you a physician who would like to tell your story? Please email Amanda, our producer, at Amanda@docworking.com to be considered.   And if you like our podcast and would like to subscribe and leave us a 5 star review, we would be extremely grateful!   We're everywhere you like to get your podcasts! Apple iTunes, Spotify, iHeart Radio, Google, Pandora, Stitcher, PlayerFM, ListenNotes, Amazon, YouTube, Podbean   You can also find us on Instagram, Facebook, LinkedIn and Twitter.    Some links in our blogs and show notes are affiliate links, and purchases made via those links may result in payments to DocWorking. These help toward our production costs. Thank you for supporting DocWorking: The Whole Physician Podcast!   Occasionally, we discuss financial and legal topics. We are not financial or legal professionals. Please consult a licensed professional for financial or legal advice regarding your specific situation.   Podcast produced by: Amanda Taran

You're at the doctor's office, the visit is just about over, and you completely forgot why you're there in the first place. Trust me, I've been there before too. But fear not! Getting ready for a routine visit is as easy as walking the dog or minting an NFT.You can prepare yourself well for a regular physical before you even set foot in the exam room. Besides reviewing everything I've noticed from my own experience running a clinic, I checked out a few sources including the government's Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ), the New York Times, and comments from Aetna's chief medical officer talking about how to get ready for a routine visit.Let's start with the thing you should get done even if you forget everything else I'm going to say. It's astonishingly simple: just write down two or three items or major questions you want to cover at the visit. This checklist of your mission-critical concerns focuses your visit and helps the doctor guide you through what you need to know. One example of a list would be: 1) discuss how to keep my blood pressure down, 2) what lab tests are best to run at this point in my life, and 3) can you or a specialist help me with condition X? This is not homework for you to turn in—this prep is just for yourself and for communicating with the clinic staff at the appropriate time. Making the checklist is easier when you nail down what your aims for the visit really are. Are you just wanting to check the boxes for making sure you are doing well? Are you having a new health issue that you need treatment for? Or do you want to focus on preventative care due to upcoming life transitions? These are the broad categories I've found useful for thinking of visit goals.Now let's approach your prep from the other side of the exam room: what do physicians wish for patients to bring to the clinic? If you are joining a clinic as a new patient, bringing your complete medication, vitamin, and supplement list is a must that is easily overlooked. You should leave no stone unturned for spelling out what you put in your body. Your doctor will also appreciate you explaining a rough timeline of your symptoms whenever a new health issue comes up. Of course, if you know what your symptoms are suggesting and you already have a treatment in mind, then you would not be going to the clinic in the first place. That being said, you can still be in tune with your well-being to make the doctor's job easier which makes the visit better.If you've been seen by another provider already, you should bring records of previous visits, especially when you switch between health systems and clinics using medical record data that cannot talk to each other. Once you have your shortlist of visit goals and basic history in order, more than half the battle of having a great visit is done.Before we keep going though, let's back up for a second. The reason why I am talking about all this preparation is because the length your actual visit itself is painfully short. According a retroactive study by the American Public Health Association's Journal of Medical Care, the average length of a primary care visit was 18 minutes. This conclusion was drawn from data covering over 21 million primary care appointments. The study's authors, who originally got the data from the IT company Athenahealth, also noted the average excess visit run time as 1.2 minutes. Put yourself in your provider's shoes for a moment. Imagine trying to get someone's history, perform an exam, suggest treatment, and answer questions in 18 minutes. And the doctor has to document all that in a chart note, then see another 50 patients after you. This is why you need to take advantage of every second in the clinic. You may not even be meeting with the doctor the entire time during the exam room, which is why you should communicate your visit goals and major questions to the medical assistant or nurse bringing you to the exam room and taking the initial history.Asking why primary care visits are this compressed is not too different from asking why we use quarters and halves for sports games. There are a variety of reasons, some of which are arbitrary, for why medical visits are like this, but that is missing the point for now when we have the ability to make the most of the time we do have.Now we can talk more about things to consider during the performance of your visit. You'll want to balance going with the flow of the exam while also circling back to your primary concerns when needed. Depending on how the exam is going so far, you should not hesitate to put in a clarifying question or two like “how is X procedure done, can you define XYZ condition, or what should my expectations be for results.” Just avoid breaking your provider's rhythm by asking something every two seconds.If you are legitimately worried about some particular health condition, it does not hurt to ask point-blank how concerned you should be. Then you can gauge your provider's reaction, assurances, and comments on treatment. When you get to the point where the doctor seems to be giving you clean bill of health so far, it would also be in your best interest to get feedback on what preventative care to get depending on where you are in life right now. This could take form in asking something like: do I need to get any screening tests within in the next few years?Every question and prompt we have talked about so far got us through the meat and potatoes of the visit. With that done we can move to the appointment's endgame or two-minute drill. You should not leave the clinic without getting a visit summary from your PCP. Usually, a visit summary would include your documented meds/symptoms, the doctor's comments, and most importantly the assessment and plan for what you need to do next. The office can print this for you or have the summary forwarded to your electronic medical record. This is also a great time to check if your doc wants you back at the clinic in a year or another time. Since your health priorities will be fresh in your mind right after the appointment, or at least until you start looking at your emails and social media again, you should put any necessary calendar events on your phone to confirm any future appointments, prescription pick-up, and lab orders. If for whatever reason the visit is winding down and you have not had your main visit goals addressed, it is worth politely redirecting the conversation with your PCP to talk about those aims.All that appointment prep we spent this episode talking about so far sets you up for healthcare success, but now let's recap the two essential things to do even if you forgot everything else. Writing a couple visit goals before the visit and making sure to get a written summary after the visit greatly enhances the value of even a routine physical.“We have the ability to make the most of the time we do have.”You will realize that in the coming weeks after the visit you will probably get a strange letter from your insurance that claims not to be a bill but has a lot of distressing dollar signs and funny terms on it. In the next episode we'll talk about how to translate those explanations and other medical codes into plain English. Subscribe to Friendly Neighborhood Patient for more healthcare tips and tricks. I'll catch you at the next episode. This is a public episode. If you would like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit rushinagalla.substack.com

Join your cohosts, Dr. Starlin and Sarah, as they interview Andrew Watkins, PharmD about what an ID Pharmacist does and his special role with Nebraska Antimicrobial Stewardship Assessment and Promotion (ASAP) Program. Some great resources that were mentioned in the episode include: Nebraska ASAP: https://asap.nebraskamed.com Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ): https://www.ahrq.gov CDC Antimicrobial Stewardship: https://www.cdc.gov/antibiotic-use/core-elements/index.html This podcast is brought to you by Nebraska ICAP. This team is grant funded to provide infection control and infectious disease support for facilities across Nebraska. You can find more information about Nebraska at https://icap.nebraskamed.com/ Don't forget to follow us on Twitter at @dirty_drinks and reach out to us if you want to be a guest on the show!

Questions and concerns about the recent and significant updates to Patient Safety Indicators (PSI) by the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ) has prompted the return of Dr. James Kennedy, a subject matter expert on PSIs, to the next live edition of Talk Ten Tuesdays.The live broadcast will also feature these other segments:Coding Report: Senior healthcare consultant and well-known national coding and health information management (HIM) leader Gloryanne Bryant will substitute for Laurie Johnson to report the latest coding news.CDI Report: Nationally recognized clinical documentation improvement (CDI) expert Cheryl Ericson, clinical program manager for Iodine Software, will have the Talk Ten Tuesdays CDI Report.RegWatch: Stanley Nachimson, former Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) career professional-turned-well-known healthcare IT authority, will report on the latest regulatory news coming out of Washington, D.C.News Desk: Timothy Powell, compliance expert and ICD10monitor national correspondent, will anchor the Talk Ten Tuesdays News Desk.TalkBack: Erica Remer, MD, founder and president of Erica Remer, MD, Inc., and Talk Ten Tuesdays co-host, will report on a subject that has caught her attention during her popular segment.Town Hall: Your questions will be answered live during this special interactive broadcast.

Rural hospitals have many challenges, and the Center for Optimizing Rural Health (CORH) was created to help overcome those challenges. Housed within the Rural & Community Health Institute at Texas A&M University, CORH works with the rural facilities, their providers and their communities to improve the quality of care, maintain access to care and address the challenges unique to small hospitals and the towns they serve. We're having this conversation with Bree Watzak, a true rural health leader who wears many hats. Bree is the Director of Rural Access Programs, Director of Technical Assistance (CORH), and Patient Safety Organization (PSO #79) Pharmacist. “The themes we are seeing in the Bright Spots are leadership, culture and upstream thinking.” ~Bree Watzak Bree Watzak has been a pharmacist since 2008, she joined the Texas A&M Health Science Center in 2011. She is a board-certified pharmacotherapy specialist and a TeamSTEPPS master trainer. Bree received her Doctor of Pharmacy degree from the University of Houston and completed residency training at The Methodist Hospital in Houston, Texas. Bree is the pharmacist on the PSO #79 team, listed by the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ).  As Director of Technical Assistance for the Center for Optimizing Rural Health, Bree spends her time working with rural communities to improve the quality of care, maintain access to care, and address the challenges unique to rural hospitals and the communities they serve.  Bree was a 2020 Rural Health Fellows with the National Rural Health Association and currently serves as a Research and Education Constituency Group Representative on the Rural Health Congress. You can learn more about CORH by clicking here.

A key (and occasionally overlooked) role of the physician advisor is advocacy: advocacy for physician partners, advocacy for quality patient outcomes, and advocacy for clinical medicine represented on committees, in board rooms, and to agencies defining national standards.During the next live edition of Talk Ten Tuesdays, Dr. Drew Updike, medical director of coding at UCHealth, and Dr. Debra Anoff, senior medical director of clinical documentation improvement (CDI) for UCHealth, will offer a blueprint on how they solved a local problem on a national level.They identified a blind spot in Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ) criteria that was negatively impacting their organization's PSI-06 Quality ranking, as a result of their being a regional referral center for a highly specialized congenital corrective surgery (the “Nuss” procedure).After collaborating cross-sectionally within their organization, they engaged in advocacy to AHRQ; the result was successful modification of PSI-06 criteria, based in sound clinical reasoning.The live broadcast will also feature these other segments:Coding Report: Laurie Johnson, senior healthcare consultant with Revenue Cycle Solutions, LLC, will have the Talk Ten Tuesdays Coding Report, along with the broadcast’s weekly Listeners Survey.News Desk: Timothy Powell, compliance expert and ICD10monitor national correspondent, will anchor the Talk Ten Tuesdays News Desk.TalkBack: Erica Remer, MD, founder and president of Erica Remer, MD, Inc. and Talk Ten Tuesdays co-host, will report on a subject that has caught her attention during her popular segment.This episode is sponsored by:AHIMA, MRA and AHDAM

What is Candor? How does it benefit patients and providers? Dr. Zacharias is joined by Dr. Sue Sgambati, the medical director at COPIC, to answer these questions and provide some insight. In this context, Candor refers to a framework that emerged out of efforts by the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ) to encourage an environment that supports open, honest conversations with patients after adverse outcomes occur. It is also designed to investigate and learn from what happened, to address the patients' needs alongside providers' needs, and to disseminate any lessons learned in order to improve future outcomes. Dr. Sgambati talks about how COPIC guides providers through Candor, especially In Colorado and Iowa where there is legislation that formalizes this process, and some of the key lessons learned from managing these types of cases.  Podcast Email: wnlpodcast@copic.com

Introducing the AHRQ ECHO National Nursing Home COVID-19 Action Network  "The goal of the COVID-19 Action Network is to collaboratively advance improvements in COVID-19 prevention and infection management.”— Alice Bonner, Ph.D., RN Covid-19 exacerbated nursing homes' conditions; everyone was taken aback and did not anticipate the virus's overwhelming spread. It brought unprecedented challenges to nursing homes, considering older adults and immunocompromised patients are more vulnerable to the virus.   With that, the call for nursing homes to adapt changes in administering care amidst the pandemic is necessary and urgent.  In this episode, Alice Bonner will share with you what the Covid-19 Action Network is doing to advance improvements in COVID-19 prevention and infection management in nursing homes during this pandemic. Discover how they are actively recruiting training centers (health systems) and nursing homes worldwide to join in on promoting health and well-being of residents and staff.  Part One of 'National Nursing Home COVID-19 Action Network’  What Is Covid-19 Action Network All About? Alice Bonner is a senior adviser for the aging at the Institute for Health Care Improvement (IHI) in Boston, Massachusetts, and is also an adjunct faculty at Johns Hopkins University.   With her expertise in the field, Alice Bonner in collaboration with IHI and Project ECHO and with the support from the CARES Act Provider Relief Fund for Nursing Homes, and the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ) launched the COVID-19 Action Network.  “Supported by the federal Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ) and in collaboration with the Institute for Healthcare Improvement (IHI), Project ECHO is launching a National Nursing Home COVID-19 Action Network.” -Alice Bonner, Ph.D., RN What Are The Goals Of the Covid-19 Action Network? The Covid-19 Action Network program aims to promote the health and well-being of nursing home residents and staff.  Towards that end, they've been recruiting Training Centers to provide interactive training to nursing home staff.  The primary goal of which is to advance improvements in COVID-19 prevention and infection control.  Specifically, the program implement evidence-based best practices to help nursing homes;  Keep the  Coronavirus out.  Identify residents and staff who have been infected with the virus early. Prevent the spread of the virus among staff, residents, and visitors.  Provide safe, appropriate care to residents with mild and asymptomatic cases.  Ensure staff practice safety measures to protect residents and themselves.  Reduce social isolation for residents, families, and staff. Part Two of 'National Nursing Home COVID-19 Action Network’  How Are The Covid-19 Action Network Goals Achieved? Alice highlighted that Covid-19 Action Network is not a model where a bunch of experts swoop in and say, "We're going to do all these webinars and give you all this important information." Instead, it's an all teach and all learn style of interacting among nursing homes.  Thus, to achieve their goals, the collaborators walked the extra mile to;  Provide no-cost training and mentorship to thousands of nursing homes nationwide. Create a virtual learning community where nursing home staff can learn from experts and each other to expand the use of proven best practices. The COVID-19 Action Network's Approach  The team comes up with a COVID-19 Action Network's Approach, which includes weekly sessions over 16 weeks. The virtual sessions are in concise presentation coupled with case-based learning and discussion. Essentially, these sessions are facilitated by small interprofessional teams of subject matter and quality improvement experts.  On top of that, there will be a sharing of best practices that nursing home staff can implement immediately. Furthermore, the sessions follow a standardized curriculum updated regularly to reflect new evidence and best practices.  The highlights of the curriculum are; PPE current practices Infection management practices COVID-19 testing Clinical management of asymptomatic and mild cases Minimizing the spread of COVID-19 Managing social isolation "What nursing home staff need is the skill set of how to talk with families, how to think about the questions to ask, and how actually to improve systems of care and workflow." — Alice Bonner, Ph.D., RN Why Should Nursing Homes Participate? Alice believes that nursing home staff are stretched and strained because of the pandemic.  Project ECHO and Covid-19 Action Network inspires and motivates people who work in long-term care to take charge and be the champions and be the leaders.  They're encouraged to participate so they can gain practical information, skills, and resources to deal with the prevention and management of the Coronavirus. In joining the program, they'll be a part of a virtual learning community of specialists and peers.  Plus, the good thing about it is that participation is free and voluntary. Moreover, nursing homes that participate will receive $6,000 to compensate for staff time. Nursing homes can join through their local training center or by using The Project Echo form through January 2021. If you have enrolled with a training center, there is no need to fill out our form.  Nursing homes, sign up here if you haven’t already enrolled with a Training Center: https://hsc.unm.edu/echo/institute-programs/nursing-home/pages/ Questions? Email Alice Bonner: abonner@ihi.org Resources Mentioned In Podcast:   CDC Long-Term Care Facility Toolkit AHCA/NCAL's #GetVaccinated Campaign Leading Age Vaccination Toolkit   About Melissa Batchelor, Ph.D., RN, FNP, FAAN: I earned my Bachelor of Science in Nursing ('96) and Master of Science in Nursing ('00) as a Family Nurse Practitioner (FNP) from the University of North Carolina Wilmington (UNCW) School of Nursing (SON). I genuinely enjoy working with the complex medical needs of older adults. I worked full-time for five years as FNP in geriatric primary care across many long-term care settings (skilled nursing homes, assisted living, home, and office visits), then transitioned into academic nursing in 2005, joining the faculty at UNCW SON as a lecturer. I obtained my Ph.D. in Nursing and a post master's Certificate in Nursing Education from the Medical University of South Carolina College of Nursing ('11) and then joined the faculty at Duke University School of Nursing as an Assistant Professor. My family moved to northern Virginia in 2015 and led to me joining the faculty at George Washington University (GW) School of Nursing in 2018 as a (tenured) Associate Professor, where I am also the Director of the GW Center for Aging, Health, and Humanities. Find out more about her work at https://melissabphd.com/.

Engage academia and hospitals with patient family advisors. Not rocket science, not window dressing. Basic stuff, yet a challenge. With James Harrison at UCSF. Blog subscribers: Listen to the podcast here. Scroll down through show notes to read the post. Subscribe to Health Hats, the Podcast, on your favorite podcast player Please support my podcast. CONTRIBUTE HERE Episode Notes Prefer to read, experience impaired hearing or deafness? Find FULL TRANSCRIPT at the end of the other show notes or download the printable transcript here Contents with Time-Stamped Headings to listen where you want to listen or read where you want to read (heading. time on podcast xx:xx. page # on the transcript) Proem 00:53. 1 Introducing James Harrison 02:30. 1 Eyes open to engagement in research 05:16. 2 PFAC Patient Family Advisory Council 09:43. 3 Partnering with communities 12:37. 3 Recruiting PFAC members 15:10. 4 Recovery plan 18:29. 4 Back to basics 22:15. 5 Computerizing decision support 26:28. 6 Involve stakeholders early 31:01. 7 CDS Connect 32:20. 7 The elephant in the room 36:41. 8 Reflection 39:56. 9 Please comments and ask questions at the comment section at the bottom of the show notes on LinkedIn via email DM on Instagram or Twitter to @healthhats Credits Music by permission from Joey van Leeuwen, Boston Drummer, Composer, Arranger Sponsored by Abridge Thanks to these fine people who inspired me for this episode: Libby Hoy, Lisa Stewart, Beverly Rodgers,  Tracy Carney, Maureen Fagan, Crispin Goytia-Vasquez, Brendaly Rodriguez, Beverly Rogers, Norah Schwartz, Freddie White-Johnson, Neely Williams Umair Shah, Matthew Hudson, Gwen Darien, Libby Hoy Bio James Harrison's career has focused on research and quality improvement efforts that seek to improve the delivery and experiences of healthcare for people who have been hospitalized. He joined the UCSF Division of Hospital Medicine (DHM) in 2012 and is an Assistant Professor of Medicine. Before UCSF, James was based at the Surgical Outcomes Research Centre (SOuRCe) at the University of Sydney and Royal Prince Alfred Hospital in Australia. It was in Sydney that James completed his Masters of Public and PhD. James is an inaugural Scholar of the Learning Health System K12 Career Development Program funded by the Agency for Health Research & Quality (AHRQ) and the Patient Centered Outcomes Research Institute (PCORI). This Program supports scientists who conduct patient-centered outcomes research within learning health systems in order to help accelerate the translation of research and evidence into practice. His K12 focuses on research and training that supports the goal of creating age-friendly care transitions of older adults using telehealth technologies.  In addition, James' growing area of research interest and expertise relates to engagement science. He has a completed a number of PCORI-funded studies seeking to explore, and describe, the methods and best practices of engaging patients and caregivers as partners and co-investigators in research and quality improvement. He has applied his research to practice and now leads two Patient & Family Advisory Councils (PFACs) – the first for a national research collaborative (www.hospitalinnovate.org) and the second for the DHM. These PFACs ensure patients and caregivers are central to research and quality improvement efforts. James is also a member of the PCORI Patient Engagement Advisory Panel and is an PCORI Ambassador.  Links UCSF www.ucsf.edu  UCSF Division of Hospital Medicine - https://ucsfhealthhospitalmedicine.ucsf.edu  UCSF Division of Hospital Medicine PFAC https://ucsfhealthhospitalmedicine.ucsf.edu/quality-and-safety/division-hospital-medicine-patient-and-family-advisory-council Hospital Medicine Reengineering Network https://hospitalinnovate.org Hospital Medicine Reengineering Network PFAC https://hosp...

Engage academia and hospitals with patient family advisors. Not rocket science, not window dressing. Basic stuff, yet a challenge. With James Harrison at UCSF. Blog subscribers: Listen to the podcast here. Scroll down through show notes to read the post. Subscribe to Health Hats, the Podcast, on your favorite podcast player Please support my podcast. CONTRIBUTE HERE Episode Notes Prefer to read, experience impaired hearing or deafness? Find FULL TRANSCRIPT at the end of the other show notes or download the printable transcript here Contents with Time-Stamped Headings to listen where you want to listen or read where you want to read (heading. time on podcast xx:xx. page # on the transcript) Proem 00:53. 1 Introducing James Harrison 02:30. 1 Eyes open to engagement in research 05:16. 2 PFAC Patient Family Advisory Council 09:43. 3 Partnering with communities 12:37. 3 Recruiting PFAC members 15:10. 4 Recovery plan 18:29. 4 Back to basics 22:15. 5 Computerizing decision support 26:28. 6 Involve stakeholders early 31:01. 7 CDS Connect 32:20. 7 The elephant in the room 36:41. 8 Reflection 39:56. 9 Please comments and ask questions at the comment section at the bottom of the show notes on LinkedIn via email DM on Instagram or Twitter to @healthhats Credits Music by permission from Joey van Leeuwen, Boston Drummer, Composer, Arranger Sponsored by Abridge Thanks to these fine people who inspired me for this episode: Libby Hoy, Lisa Stewart, Beverly Rodgers,  Tracy Carney, Maureen Fagan, Crispin Goytia-Vasquez, Brendaly Rodriguez, Beverly Rogers, Norah Schwartz, Freddie White-Johnson, Neely Williams Umair Shah, Matthew Hudson, Gwen Darien, Libby Hoy Bio James Harrison's career has focused on research and quality improvement efforts that seek to improve the delivery and experiences of healthcare for people who have been hospitalized. He joined the UCSF Division of Hospital Medicine (DHM) in 2012 and is an Assistant Professor of Medicine. Before UCSF, James was based at the Surgical Outcomes Research Centre (SOuRCe) at the University of Sydney and Royal Prince Alfred Hospital in Australia. It was in Sydney that James completed his Masters of Public and PhD. James is an inaugural Scholar of the Learning Health System K12 Career Development Program funded by the Agency for Health Research & Quality (AHRQ) and the Patient Centered Outcomes Research Institute (PCORI). This Program supports scientists who conduct patient-centered outcomes research within learning health systems in order to help accelerate the translation of research and evidence into practice. His K12 focuses on research and training that supports the goal of creating age-friendly care transitions of older adults using telehealth technologies.  In addition, James' growing area of research interest and expertise relates to engagement science. He has a completed a number of PCORI-funded studies seeking to explore, and describe, the methods and best practices of engaging patients and caregivers as partners and co-investigators in research and quality improvement. He has applied his research to practice and now leads two Patient & Family Advisory Councils (PFACs) – the first for a national research collaborative (www.hospitalinnovate.org) and the second for the DHM. These PFACs ensure patients and caregivers are central to research and quality improvement efforts. James is also a member of the PCORI Patient Engagement Advisory Panel and is an PCORI Ambassador.  Links UCSF www.ucsf.edu  UCSF Division of Hospital Medicine - https://ucsfhealthhospitalmedicine.ucsf.edu  UCSF Division of Hospital Medicine PFAC https://ucsfhealthhospitalmedicine.ucsf.edu/quality-and-safety/division-hospital-medicine-patient-and-family-advisory-council Hospital Medicine Reengineering Network https://hospitalinnovate.org Hospital Medicine Reengineering Network PFAC https://hosp...

In this episode Lamaze certified childbirth educator and doula LaToya is sharing evidence based research and exposing myths about TOLAC (Trial of Labor After Cesarean) & VBAC (Vaginal Birth After Cesarean). Would you like to hear certain topics discussed? Feel free to send and email to latoya@lamazedoula.com or an inbox message on the social media outlets listed below! It's a pleasure serving you! www.lamazedoula.com Meet her on the GRAM!: www.instagram.com/doulaviewllc and on Facebook: www.facebook.com/TheLamazeDoula References: National Guideline Clearinghouse (NGC). Guideline synthesis: Vaginal birth aftercesarean (VBAC). In: National Guideline Clearinghouse (NGC) http://www.guideline.gov/syntheses/synthesis.aspx?id=25231. Rockville (MD): Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ); 2011 Jan. [cited 2015 April 13]. Available: http://www.guideline.gov. 2 Osterman, M.J.K., Martin, J.A. (2014). Trends in low-risk cesarean delivery in the United States, 1990–2013. National vital statistics reports; vol 63 no 6. National Center for Health Statistics. Retrieved from http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/nvsr/nvsr63/nvsr63_06.pdf 4 Crowther, C.A., Dodd, J.M., Hiller, J.E., Haslam, R.R., Robinson, J.S., … (2012). Planned Vaginal Birth or Elective Repeat Caesarean: Patient Preference Restricted Cohort with Nested Randomised Trial. PLoS Med. 2012; 9(3). doi: 10.1371/journal.pmed.100119 6 Mercer, B., Gilbert, S., Landon, M.B., Spong, C.Y., Leveno, K.J., Rouse, D.J., … Ramin, S.M. (2008). Labor Outcomes with Increasing Number of Prior Vaginal Births after Cesarean Delivery. Obstetrics & Gynecology. 2008; 111(2-1): 285-291. doi 10.1097/AOG.0b013e31816102b9 --- Support this podcast: https://anchor.fm/thelamazedoula/support

In this episode, we're talking about measuring safety culture in healthcare, particularly in light of an updated Culture of Safety Survey released by the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ). The changes affect how organizations will be able to use the results of past surveys to track their own growth and how they'll be able to compare results to AHRQ's national database. We'll talk about why and how safety culture should be assessed, some common pitfalls we've seen in helping organizations do an assessment, and strategies for a successful initiative. ECRI’s Proactive Risk Assessment team works with hospitals, medical offices, ambulatory surgery centers, and nursing homes to develop surveys that not only assess safety culture, but also assess clinical and operational risks. Interested in learning more? Contact us at (610) 825-6000 or clientservices@ecri.org.

Our case study is set at a medium size regional hospital, working to develop strong credentials from a variety of agencies like Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ). Over time hospital leadership had sought to improve patient experience scores and had tried a number of efforts, typically in specific, siloed operational departments. Few of these efforts brought significant improvement, which, over time, was becoming a challenge for the organization. 0:42 Today’s Episode1:20 Definition: HRO 2:25 Case Study Intro2:48 Part I: Accepting a Simple Cause4:08 Part II: The Review8:17 Part III: Weak Signals11:07 Part IV: Lessons Learned

September 19, 2019 Featuring: Tejal K. Gandhi, MD, MPH, CPPS, Chief Clinical and Safety Officer, Institute for Healthcare Improvement (IHI)​ Rear Admiral Jeffrey Brady, MD, MPH, United States Public Health Service, Director, Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality's Center for Quality Improvement and Patient Safety  Helen Haskell, President, Mothers Against Medical Error and Consumers Advancing Patient Safety Jay Bhatt, DO, MPH, MPA, FACP, Senior Vice President & Chief Medical Officer, American Hospital Association; President, Health Research and Educational Trust It’s been 20 years since the renamed National Academy of Medicine (former Institute of Medicine) first shined light on the unintended consequences of medical errors in American health care. Their report, To Err is Human: Building a Safer Health System, has served as a catalyst for safety initiatives at health systems, and progress has been made on multiple fronts — from significant reductions in health care - associated infections, to an embrace of quality improvement and patient safety solutions that now encompass the entire continuum of care. Even with this progress, obstacles to safe and reliable care persist. Systems are confronting a new payment environment, it remains difficult to sustain improvement gains, there are EHR headaches, and ongoing concerns about physician and staff burnout. These are just some of the reasons IHI convened national safety leaders and stakeholders to form the National Steering Committee for Patient Safety (NSC). Co-chaired by IHI and the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ), the NSC is hard at work on a new National Action Plan it expects to release in early 2020. In light of these developments, and in support of World Patient Safety Day on 9/17, we’re focusing this edition of WIHI: No Let Up on Safety, on the work of the NSC and their bold intention to re-energize the safety movement in the US with foundational safety principles and priorities.  If you’re looking to continue the conversation, join industry leaders at this year’s IHI National Forum on Quality Improvement in Health Care and attend a special interest breakfast with members of the NSC.

In this episode of Critical Matters, we continue the discussion of medical errors in healthcare with a specific focus on how to disclose medical errors to patients. Our guest is Dr. Nitin Puri, a practicing intensivist and medical educator at the Cooper Medical School of Rowan University and the Cooper Health System in Camden, New Jersey. Additional Resources: This is a CNN story on cardiothoracic fellow wrongly accused and sued for lying about a medical error: https://cnn.it/2vFEnLf The Communication and Optimal Resolution (CANDOR) toolkit from the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ). CANDOR is a process that health care institutions and providers can use to respond in a timely, thorough and fair way when medical errors occur and cause patients harm: https://bit.ly/2m9fch7 A powerful video on the topic of the disclosure of medical errors: https://bit.ly/2DaD6TD Article Mentioned in This Episode: Mistakes Were Made (but Not by Me): Why We Justify Foolish Beliefs, Bad Decisions, and Hurtful Acts: https://amzn.to/2NorssU

Sponsors: Fairfax City, Lookingglasscyber Host: Cindy Gurne, My View Asaad Taha is a leading Social Impact Entrepreneur and Senior Principle Adviser with multisectoral expertise on the continuum of social impact programs—from the strategic level to frontline delivery. He has a special interest in the Health Science. His background shows a quality education in multidisciplinary fields and 14-plus years in health, development, and management. In-the-trenches experiences have built his reputation in systems thinking and development, program design and execution, results-based monitoring and management, and implementation and oversight of donor and government-funded programs. Asaad's record includes working engagement with national and global agencies, institutions, international non-governmental organizations (INGOs), non-governmental organizations (NGOs), and community-based organizations (CBOs), as well as: • The Department for International Development (DFID) • United States Agency for International Development (USAID) • Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis, and Malaria (GFATM) • United States Department of State (DoS) • United Nations Department for International Department Pro-active engagement in this work has strengthened his skills and abilities in mobilizing multidisciplinary and multisectoral best practices. In practice and person, Asaad conveys his passion for creative, innovative, and best-of-breed solutions. Resilient but persistent, he exploits his frontline experience and international partnerships to promote, develop, mentor, deliver, and support sustainable growth. Asaad Taha is Arab/English bi-lingual consultant, speaker, and thought leader in Social Impact strategy, systems design, and delivery solutions. Founder and Managing Partner of S4F Solutions, he currently works with the Program Design Topical Interest Group at The American Evaluation Association (AEA) and Patient Safety Cultural Technical Expert Panel at the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ).

Christina Mack, Ph.D., MSPH is Sr. Director of Epidemiology and Clinical Evidence in the IQVIA Real-World Insights division. She is a recognized expert in effectiveness studies for medical devices and pharmaceutical products, sports injury research, and pharmacoepidemiology methods including the use of external comparators, propensity scores, instrumental variables, and missing data.   Her work focuses on the use of electronic health record systems and claims data for research, with a focus in study design methodology, maternal health, orthopedics, oncology, and infectious disease.   Dr. Mack oversees development of large evidence hubs and novel studies that augment primary data collection with existing data and leads the IQVIA Injury Surveillance and Analytics team which serves as the epidemiologic research arm of the NFL and NBA. She is an epidemiologist and computer engineer by training, with Ph.D. and master’s degrees from the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill and an engineering degree from the University of Notre Dame.   Currently, Dr. Mack holds an academic appointment as Adjunct Assistant Professor of Epidemiology at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill and serves on the Advisory Board of the Carolina Health Informatics Program. Dr. Mack has published manuscripts in leading journals and authored several chapters in the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ) landmark publication "Registries for Evaluating Patient Outcomes: A User's Guide" on the topics of designing registries for studies of medical devices, selection of data elements for observational research, missing data, and research networks.   She is a speaker at regulatory, governmental, and academic forums on epidemiologic methods and novel study designs as well as careers in research. Last but not the least, she has over fifteen years of scientific and technical experience working for Johnson & Johnson, GlaxoSmithKline, IBM, and the World Health Organization in addition to her work at IQVIA. Her regulatory experience includes advising the FDA, most recently as faculty at the 2017 MDEpiNet Annual Meeting and at the FDA Cardiac Research Safety Consortium discussing novel research methods and use of electronic medical records for outcomes trials.   Please join me in welcoming Dr. Mack on the Clinical Trial Podcast. Resources and organizations mentioned in this episode: IQVIA Food and Drug Administration (FDA) Pubmed ClinicalTrials.Gov Norwegian Mother and Child Cohort Study (MoBa) Global Fund Clinton Foundation World Health Organization and HIV IBM Johnson and Johnson Organization of Eastern Caribbean Islands Outcomes Sciences MIT Harvard School of Public Health University of Lusaka Quintiles Healthcare Business Women's Association Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ) landmark publication “Registries for Evaluating Patient Outcomes: A User’s Guide” on the topics of designing registries for studies of medical devices, selection of data elements for observational research, missing data, and research networks American College of Cardiology National Cancer Institute FDA's Sentinel Initiative NBA NFL MDEpinet University of North Carolina Chapel Hill New York Times People mentioned in this episode: Manuel Prado Dr. Nancy Dreyer Dr. Mark Travis Rob Cahill

Anne C. Beal, MD, MPH, is dedicated to improving health care in the United States, particularly for vulnerable patient groups. Her career is devoted to providing access to high quality health care and has included delivering health care services, teaching, research, public health, and philanthropy. Dr. Beal is Senior Vice President and Head of Global Patient Solutions for Sanofi, an integrated, global health care company focused on patient needs and engaged in the research, development, manufacturing, and marketing of health care products. In that role, she is supporting a culture of patient-centeredness that ensures patients, their needs and priorities, come first in all of the work of Sanofi. Prior to that, she was the Deputy Executive Director and Chief Engagement Officer for the Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute (PCORI) in the US, which was created by the Affordable Care Act to improve health care delivery and outcomes by helping people make informed health care decisions based on research that is guided by patients, caregivers, and the broader health care community. As PCORI's first Chief Officer for Engagement, Dr. Beal was charged with ensuring that the voices of patients and other stakeholders are reflected in their research portfolio. In her role as Deputy Executive Director, she helped to see that PCORI worked efficiently and effectively to carry out its mission as the nation's largest research institute focused on patient-centered outcomes research. Earlier in her career, Dr. Beal was President of the Aetna Foundation, the independent charitable and philanthropic arm of Aetna Inc. The Foundation promotes wellness, health, and access to high-quality health care for everyone, and its programs focused on addressing the rising rate of adult and childhood obesity in the US; promoting racial and ethnic equity in health and health care; and advancing integrated health care and care coordination. Dr. Beal's career in philanthropy started at the Commonwealth Fund where she was Assistant Vice President for the Program on Health Care Disparities and oversaw their programs on eliminating health disparities, collecting race/ethnicity data in health care, cultural competency, supporting the safety net, and training and development of minority health policy leaders. Early in her career, Dr. Beal, who is a board certified pediatrician, worked with a mobile medical unit project delivering health care services to children living in homeless shelters throughout New York City. She was also a health services researcher at Harvard Medical School in the Center for Child & Adolescent Health Policy at Massachusetts General Hospital. In addition, she was Associate Director of the Multicultural Affairs Office of Massachusetts General Hospital, an attending pediatrician in the division of General Pediatrics, and held faculty positions both in Harvard Medical School and the Harvard School of Public Health. Dr. Beal's research interests include social influences on preventive health behaviors for minorities, racial disparities in health care, and quality of care for child health. While at Harvard, she was the principal investigator of research projects supported by the National Institute of Health (NIH), the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ), the Commonwealth Fund, and other private foundations. She has served on several regional and national advisory boards including the Institute of Medicine (IOM) Committee on Future Directions for the National Healthcare Quality and Disparities Reports, the New York State Public Health Council, served as Chair for the New York State Minority health Council, was co-chair of the Healthcare Disparities Technical Advisory Panel for the National Quality Forum (NQF) Ambulatory Care Measures' Project, and was elected to the Board of Grantmakers in Health, as well as AcademyHealth, the professional society for health services researchers and health policy analysts. In addition to publishing in the peer-reviewed medical literature, Dr. Beal is also the author of The Black Parenting Book: Caring for Our Children in the First Five Years. Dr. Beal has been a pediatric commentator and medical correspondent for Essence Magazine, The American Baby Show, ABC News, and NBC News. Dr. Beal holds a BA from Brown University, an MD from Cornell University Medical College, and an MPH from Columbia University. She completed her internship, residency, and National Research Service Award fellowship at Albert Einstein College of Medicine/Montefiore Medical Center in the Bronx. 00:00 What Patient centricity means. 03:00 Sanofi's definition of patient centricity. 04:30 The 3 pillars of Dr. Beal's strategic framework. 05:25 Patient input developing patient insights (patients as partners). 06:00 Patient business strategy. 06:30 Patient outcomes and solutions. 08:15 Navigating and improving patient outcomes through physicians. 12:00 EP168 with Gary Frazier of Om Healthcare. 19:30 Market access capability and how we need a similar capability around patients. 20:50 “So there's the research that needs to be done as your bringing a product to market, but then there's the real world impact.” 21:40 “The more we have the data to understand that, the more we can say ‘OK, here's how things should really work for patients and for which patients.'” 22:25 “There a gap between prescription and outcomes.” 22:40 We we need real-world trials. 26:35 How Dr. Beal sees pharma collaborating with payers and providers. 26:45 “Around the patient is always a win-win situation.” 29:25 Sanofi's new initiatives. 31:50 You can learn more by visiting www.sanofi.com and search for “patient centricity” and “patient engagement.”

Listen Now A 2012 National Academy of Sciences (Institute of Medicine) study titled, "Best Care and Lower Cost," found about one quarter of all medical spending is wasted, much of this excessive spending going to pay for treatments that are of unknown effectiveness.   With medical spending now accounting  for one-sixth of the nation's GDP, or over $3 trillion annually, how do we limit spending to treatments that are proven effective or are of high value.  How do we increase the use of evidence-based medicine.  While this issue or problem has been, or is being, addressed by several federal health care agencies including the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ) and the the ACA-created Patient Centered Outcomes and Research Institute (PCORI), progress has been frustratingly slow.   (For example, a day prior to this interview a Health Affairs blog post discussed the persistent use, despite clinical evidence to the contrary, of pre-cataract surgery blood analysis and EKG testing.)      During this 23-minute conversation Dr. Feinman discusses how his background as a hospitalist led to his co-founding Doctor Evidence, what explains the variation in the use of evidence based medicine, how Doctor Evidence is working to improve the timely collection, dissemination and use of evidence-based medicine, how his work is related to the Cochrane Collaborative, and how work by Doctor Evidence can influence quality measurement and drive or improve health care value, or patient outcomes achieved relative to spending. Dr. Todd Feinman is the Chief Medical Officer and co-founder of Doctor Evidence where he works to create evidence technologies that will lead to improved care, better health care outcomes, greater patient satisfaction and reduced spending growth.  Among other partnerships, Doctor Evidence works with the USC Center of Body Computing and with several medical associations and pharmaceutical companies.  Dr. Feinman began his career as a hospitalist, developing the first such programs in Southern California.   He is a board certified internist.   Dr. Feinman earned his medical degree at UCLA's David Geffen School of Medicine and did his residency work at Cedars-Sinai Medical Center in Los Angeles and at Huntington Memorial Hospital in Pasadena. For information on the firm Doctor Evidence go to: http://drevidence.com. This is a public episode. If you would like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.thehealthcarepolicypodcast.com

As a member of the committee that developed the CDC opioid guidelines and a primary care physician who treats chronic pain patients, Dr. Roger Chou is a uniquely situated authority in the conversation on opioid management. In episode one Dr. Chou talked about the guidelines themselves and, in this episode, he rejoins the podcast to discuss his personal experiences in applying the CDC guidelines in challenging patient cases and gives his impressions on sample cases physicians often encounter. Dr. Chou serves as an Associate Professor of Medicine/General Internal Medicine and Geriatrics and Medical Informatics and Clinical Epidemiology at Oregon Health & Science University. He is also Scientific Director of the Oregon Evidence-based Practice Center, funded by the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ), and an Investigator for the Scientific Resource. 

Listen NowMeasuring health care quality and outcomes effectively and efficiently remains a daunting task.  Quality measures are largely seen as too process versus outcome focused, substantially irrelevant to patients and insufficiently aligned between and among payers.  Measuring care or care quality, ironically, can and does detract from actual care delivery, can have no relationship to spending efficiency and on its own is costly.  A recent article published in Health Affairs found physician practices spent over $15 billion in 2014 in reporting quality measures.  Concerning the Medicare program's quality measurement activities, MedPAC in a 2014 report to the Congress went so far as to state, "Medicare's current quality measurement approach as gone off the rails." During this 23 minute conversation Dr. Burstin briefly describes the work of the National Quality Forum (NQF), the work done by the CMS-led Core Measure Collaborative, quality measurement under the CMS proposed MACRA (Medicare Access and CHIP Reauthorization Act) rule, risk adjusting measures for socio-demographic factors, the role of PREMS and PROMS or patient reported experience and outcome measures and correlating care quality and spending or measuring for healthcare value.  Dr. Helen Burstin is the Chief Scientific Officer at the NQF.  Prior to serving in her current position, Dr. Burstin was NQF's Senior Vice President for Performance Measurement.  Prior to NQF Dr. Burstin was the Director of the Center for Primary Care at the DHHS Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ).  Prior to AHRQ, Dr. Burstin was an Assistant Professor at Harvard Medical School and the Director of Quality Measurement at the Brigham and Woman's Hospital in Boston.  Dr. Burstin has published more than 80 articles and book chapters on quality, safety and disparities.  She was recently selected as a 2015-2016 Baldridge Executive Fellow.  She currently is also is a Professorial Lecturer in the Department of Health and Policy and a Clinical Associate Professor of Medicine at George Washington University and serves as a preceptor in internal medicine.For information concerning NQF go to: http://www.qualityforum.org/Home.aspx This is a public episode. If you would like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.thehealthcarepolicypodcast.com

Welcome to episode 1 of the American Academy of Addiction Psychiatry podcast hosted by Lysander Jim, MD and Mauro Zappaterra, MD-PhD. Our first guest is Dr. Roger Chou. As a member of the committee that developed the CDC opioid guidelines released this April, Dr. Chou has a unique perspective on the development, rationale and scientific evidence for the recommendations. Dr. Chou serves as an Associate Professor of Medicine/General Internal Medicine and Geriatrics and Medical Informatics and Clinical Epidemiology at Oregon Health & Science University. He is also Scientific Director of the Oregon Evidence-based Practice Center, funded by the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ), and an Investigator for the Scientific Resource.  

The U.S. Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ) notes that one in seven hospitalized Medicare patients experience a medical error. That's too many, despite the efforts of doctors and other health care provider to improve patient safety. If you are sick or hospitalized, there are many things you can do to avoid medical errors. […] The post Getting Better Health Care – 20 Tips To Help Prevent Medical Errors appeared first on WebTalkRadio.net.

The most controversial aspect of healthcare reform is the possibility of rationing. The Federal government's Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ) is already supporting guidelines and studying efficiencies. Is that code for developing ways to ration our healthcare? Dr. Carolyn Clancy, Director of AHRQ tells us what the Agency is really doing. The post Getting Better Health Care – A government agency devoted to improving healthcare quality? appeared first on WebTalkRadio.net.

Lieut. Karen Ho, with the US Public Health Service, the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ) and the Center for Quality Improvement and Patient Safety, speaks about the data just published by AHRQ on the trends, quality, and disparities in the delivery of health care regarding obesity.