Collaborations with Pediatric Hospitalists: National Surveys of Pediatric Surgeons and Orthopedic Surgeons
To understand characteristics of pediatric hospitalist (PH) involvement in the care of children admitted to surgical services and explore surgeons’ perspectives of PH effectiveness, we conducted a cross-sectional, web-based survey of pediatric surgical (PS) and pediatric orthopedic subspecialists (OS) from professional organizations. We used basic analyses to compare responses between the 2 surgical groups. The initial response rate was 48% (291/606) for PS and 59% (415/706) for OS. Among 185 PS and 212 OS unique programs, PH were routinely engaged (69% and 75%) in the care of surgical patients, particularly in patients with medical complexity (64% PS vs 81% OS; P = .003). PS and OS perceived positive PH impact on care coordination and comorbidity management but little on pain management or length of stay. OS were more likely than PS to view PH involvement positively (64% vs 42%; P < .001). Further research on care models, especially for children with medical complexity, is needed.
© 2018 Society of Hospital Medicine
Pediatric expertise is critical in caring for children during the perioperative and postoperative periods.1,2 Some postoperative care models involve pediatric hospitalists (PH) as collaborators for global care (comanagement),3 as consultants for specific issues, or not at all.
Single-site studies in specific pediatric surgical populations4-7and medically fragile adults8 suggest improved outcomes for patients and systems by using hospitalist-surgeon collaboration. However, including PH in the care of surgical patients may also disrupt systems. No studies have broadly examined the clinical relationships between surgeons and PH.
The aims of this cross-sectional survey of US pediatric surgeons (PS) and pediatric orthopedic surgeons (OS) were to understand (1) the prevalence and characteristics of surgical care models in pediatrics, specifically those involving PH, and (2) surgeons’ perceptions of PH in caring for surgical patients.
METHODS
The target US surgeon population was the estimated 850 active PS and at least 600 pediatric OS.9 Most US PS (n = 606) are affiliated with the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) Section on Surgery (SoSu), representing at least 200 programs. Nearly all pediatric OS belong to the Pediatric Orthopedic Society of North America (POSNA) (n = 706), representing 340 programs; a subset (n = 130) also belong to the AAP SoSu.
Survey Development and Distribution
Survey questions were developed to elicit surgeons’ descriptions of their program structure and their perceptions of PH involvement. For programs with PH involvement, program variables included primary assignment of clinical responsibilities by service line (surgery, hospitalist, shared) and use of a written service agreement, which defines each service’s roles and responsibilities.
The web-based survey, created by using Survey Monkey (San Mateo, CA), was pilot tested for usability and clarity among 8 surgeons and 1 PH. The survey had logic points around involvement of hospitalists and multiple hospital affiliations (supplemental Appendix A). The survey request with a web-based link was e-mailed 3 times to surgical and orthopedic distribution outlets, endorsed by organizational leadership. Respondents’ hospital ZIP codes were used as a proxy for program. If there was more than 1 complete survey response per ZIP code, 1 response with complete data was randomly selected to ensure a unique entry per program.
Classification of Care Models
Each surgical program was classified into 1 of the following 3 categories based on reported care of primary surgical patients: (1) comanagement, described as PH writing orders and/or functioning as the primary service; (2) consultation, described as PH providing clinical recommendations only; and (3) no PH involvement, described as “rarely” or “never” involving PH.
Clinical Responsibility Score
To estimate the degree of hospitalist involvement, we devised and calculated a composite score of service responsibilities for each program. This score involved the following 7 clinical domains: management of fluids or nutrition, pain, comorbidities, antibiotics, medication dosing, wound care, and discharge planning. Scores were summed for each domain: 0 for surgical team primary responsibility, 1 for shared surgical and hospitalist responsibility, and 2 for hospitalist primary responsibility. Composite scores could range from 0 to 14; lower scores represented a stronger tendency for surgeon management, and higher scores represented a stronger tendency toward PH management.
Data Analysis
For data analysis, simple exploratory tests with χ2 analysis and Student t tests were performed by using Stata 14.2 (StataCorp LLC, College Station, TX) to compare differences by surgical specialty programs and individuals by role assignment and perceptions of PH involvement.
The NYU School of Medicine Institutional Review Board approved this study.
RESULTS
Respondents and Programs
Among the unique 185 PS programs and 212 OS programs represented, PH were often engaged in the care of primary surgical patients (Table).
