Acknowledgment
Fostering Clinical Excellence Across an Academic Health System
Abstract
Objectives: Changes in the US healthcare economic system are requiring academic health centers (AHCs) to restructure in pursuit of their traditional tripartite missions; engaging the individuals focused on clinical care is becoming more important. We conducted this study to guide our institution’s transformation by identifying ways to formally recognize clinicians who are excelling in patient care and understand which forms of acknowledgment would be acceptable and motivating.Methods: A survey was developed by a large committee with representation spanning the AHC and was sent electronically in spring 2014 to stakeholders across the institution. Items assessed perceptions of the importance and present state of valuing clinical excellence, the utility of 14 potential metrics to assess clinical excellence, and the meaningfulness of seven potential rewards for clinical excellence. Bivariate and multivariate logistic regression models analyzed differences ( P < 0.05) by respondent sex, ethnicity, academic rank, primary clinical affiliation, and time spent in patient care and research activities.
Results: A total of 1716 of 3168 (54%) stakeholders responded, including 1198 of 2151 (56%) individuals from academic hospitals, 114 of 276 (41%) from the outpatient affiliated practices, and 304 of 741 (54%) from satellite locations. Nearly everyone (96%) agreed that clinical accomplishments should be recognized, although a minority (47%) believed that clinicians were already valued. Most respondents selected 7 or more of 14 metrics as valid and reasonable for assessing clinical excellence. Popular metrics (eg, clinical productivity) were not believed to represent clinical excellence as much as others (eg, professionalism). Multivariate analysis found the least agreement among stakeholders on using published scholarship as evidence for clinical excellence, with the widest differences comparing senior faculty versus nonfaculty (88% vs 27%) and those with >75% of their time spent in patient care versus others (37% vs 73%). Most (six of seven) types of reward were perceived as meaningful by the majority of respondents, with little variation among subgroups across bivariate and multivariate analyses.
Conclusions: This system-wide assessment was successful at identifying new strategies for recognizing clinical excellence. Other AHCs seeking institutional transformation may wish to perform a similar assessment.
This content is limited to qualifying members.
Existing members, please login first
If you have an existing account please login now to access this article or view purchase options.
Purchase only this article ($25)
Create a free account, then purchase this article to download or access it online for 24 hours.
Purchase an SMJ online subscription ($75)
Create a free account, then purchase a subscription to get complete access to all articles for a full year.
Purchase a membership plan (fees vary)
Premium members can access all articles plus recieve many more benefits. View all membership plans and benefit packages.
References
1. Fuchs VR. Current challenges to academic health centers. JAMA 2013;310:1021-1022.
2. Stein D, Chen C, Ackerly DC. Disruptive innovation in academic medical centers: balancing accountable and academic care. Acad Med 2015;90:594-598.
3. Berkowitz SA, Pahira JJ. Accountable care organization readiness and academic medical centers. Acad Med 2014;89:1210-1215.
4. Enders T, Conroy J. Advancing the academic health system for the future: a report from the AAMC Advisory Panel on Health Care. https://www.aamc.org/download/370550/data/advancing.pdf. 2014. Accessed August 20, 2015.
5. Berkowitz SA, Miller ED. Accountable care at academic medical centers-lessons from Johns Hopkins. N Engl J Med 2011;364:e12.
6. Carey RM, Wheby MS, Reynolds RE. Evaluating faculty clinical excellence in the academic health sciences center. Acad Med 1993;68:813-817.
7. Jones RF. Clinician-educator faculty tracks in U.S. medical schools. J Med Educ 1987;62:444-447.
8. Pololi LH, Krupat E, Civian JT, et al. Why are a quarter of faculty considering leaving academic medicine? A study of their perceptions of institutional culture and intentions to leave at 26 representative U.S. medical schools. Acad Med 2012;87:859-869.
9. Durso SC, Christmas C, Kravet SJ, et al. Implications of academic medicine’ failure to recognize clinical excellence. Clin Med Res 2009;7:127-133.
10. Bucklin BA, Valley M, Welch C, et al. Predictors of early faculty attrition at one academic medical center. BMC Med Educ 2014;14:27.
11. Lowenstein SR, Fernandez G, Crane LA. Medical school faculty discontent: prevalence and predictors of intent to leave academic careers. BMC Med Educ 2007;7:37.
12. Akl EA, Meerpohl JJ, Raad D, et al. Effects of assessing the productivity of faculty in academic medical centres: a systematic review. CMAJ 2012;184:E602-E612.
13. Filler G, Burkoski V, Tithecott G. Measuring physicians’ productivity: a three-year study to evaluate a new remuneration system. Acad Med 2014;89:144-152.
14. Wright SM, Kravet S, Christmas C, et al. Creating an academy of clinical excellence at Johns Hopkins Bayview Medical Center: a 3-year experience. Acad Med 2010;85:1833-1839.
15. Christmas C, Kravet SJ, Durso SC, et al. Clinical excellence in academia: perspectives from masterful academic clinicians. Mayo Clin Proc 2008;83:989-994.
16. Wright SM, Gozu A, Burkhart K, et al. Clinicians’ perceptions about how they are valued by the academic medical center. Am J Med 2012;125:210-216.
17. Kairouz VF, Raad D, Fudyma J, et al. Assessment of faculty productivity in academic departments of medicine in the United States: a national survey. BMC Med Educ 2014;14:205.
18. Andreae MC, Freed GL. The rationale for productivity-based physician compensation at academic health centers. J Pediatr 2003;143:695-696.
19. Summer R, Wiener RS, Carroll D, et al. Physician perception of the impact of productivity measures on academic practice. Arch Intern Med 2012;172:967-969.
20. Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services. Improving Quality of Care for Medicare Patients: Accountable Care Organizations. https://www.cms.gov/medicare/medicare-fee-for-service-payment/sharedsavingsprogram/downloads/aco_quality_factsheet_icn907407.pdf. Accessed May 23, 2016.
21. Eidus R, Pace WD, Staton EW. Managing patient populations in primary care: points of leverage. J Am Board Fam Med 2012;25:238-244.
22. Houle SK, McAlister FA, Jackevicius CA, et al. Does performance-based remuneration for individual health care practitioners affect patient care? A systematic review. Ann Intern Med 2012;157:889-899.
23. Block SM, Sonnino RE, Bellini L. Defining "faculty" in academic medicine: responding to the challenges of a changing environment. Acad Med 2015;90:279-282.
24. Yeh HC, Bertram A, Brancati FL, et al. Perceptions of division directors in general internal medicine about the importance of and support for scholarly work done by clinician-educators. Acad Med 2015;9:203-208.
25. Coleman MM, Richard GV. Faculty career tracks at U.S. medical schools. Acad Med 2011;86:932-937.
26. Warner ET, Carapinha R, Weber GM, et al. Considering context in academic medicine: differences in demographic and professional characteristics and in research productivity and advancement metrics across seven clinical departments. Acad Med 2015;90:1077-1083.
27. Boyer EL. Scholarship Reconsidered: Priorities of the Professoriate. Princeton, NJ: Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching; 1990.
28. Glassick CE, Huber MT, Maeroff GI. Scholarship Assessed: Evaluation of the Professoriate. San Francisco, Calif: Jossey-Bass; 1997.
29. Gusic ME, Baldwin CD, Chandran L, et al. Evaluating educators using a novel toolbox: applying rigorous criteria flexibly across institutions. Acad Med 2014;89:1006-1011.
30. Ratanawongsa N, Howell EE, Wright SM. What motivates physicians throughout their careers in medicine? Compr Ther 2006;32:210-217.
31. Bassett‐ N, Lloyd GC. Does Herzberg’ motivation theory have staying power? J Manag Dev 2005;24:929-943.
32. Birden H, Glass N, Wilson I, et al. Defining professionalism in medical education: a systematic review. Med Teach 2014;36:47-61.
