Applying an implementation science lens to understand physician-level variation in patient length of stay in internal medicine.

IF 3 3区 医学 Q2 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES
Diya Srinivasan, Ruoxi Wang, Surain B Roberts, Lauren Lapointe-Shaw, Terence Tang, Sarah Abigail Birken, Alexandra Harris, Noah M Ivers, Fabiana Lorencatto, Nicola McCleary, Justin Presseau, Geneviève Rouleau, Mina Tadrous, Simona C Minotti, Fahad Razak, Amol Verma, Laura Desveaux
{"title":"Applying an implementation science lens to understand physician-level variation in patient length of stay in internal medicine.","authors":"Diya Srinivasan, Ruoxi Wang, Surain B Roberts, Lauren Lapointe-Shaw, Terence Tang, Sarah Abigail Birken, Alexandra Harris, Noah M Ivers, Fabiana Lorencatto, Nicola McCleary, Justin Presseau, Geneviève Rouleau, Mina Tadrous, Simona C Minotti, Fahad Razak, Amol Verma, Laura Desveaux","doi":"10.1186/s12913-025-13304-5","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background & objectives: </strong>Length of Stay (LoS) is a critical quality metric and focus of improvement efforts in healthcare. Successfully managing LoS depends on understanding the drivers of variation amenable to change. This study aims to (1) characterize physician-level variation in LoS; (2) identify physician actions associated with LoS; and (3) explore the individual-, team-, and hospital-level factors influencing this variation to generate hypotheses for further study.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This mixed-methods comparative case study approach examined six General Internal Medicine (GIM) departments in Toronto, Ontario. Physician-level variation in LoS was calculated using a random-intercept negative binomial regression model and sensitivity analysis. Semi-structured interviews and ethnographic observations were conducted and analyzed using the AACTT Framework (Action-Actor-Context-Target-Time), the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR), and the Theoretical Domains Frameworks (TDF). Hospitals with the lowest and highest physician-level variation in LoS were compared.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Physician-level variation in LoS ranged from 1.7 to 7.0%, which-though modest numerically-represents meaningful differences in physician decision-making not explained by patient complexity, and no significant hospital-level effect was observed. Qualitative analysis from 12 observations and 67 interviews (32 GIM physicians and residents, 35 nurses and other health professionals) identified eight discrete physician actions influencing LoS, along with five individual-level factors and five team- and hospital-level factors. The nature of these factors was different when comparing hospitals with the lowest and highest variation. Organizational culture and perceptions of the patient population shaped physician perceptions of their professional role, while GIM departmental culture, structural characteristics, and communication networks informed physician beliefs about team capabilities and consequences of action (or inaction).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>This study highlights the complex interplay between physician actions and factors influencing physician-level variation in LoS. Interventions that target physicians but do not attend to team and hospital factors are likely insufficient to achieve sustained improvements in LoS. Aligning individual-level feedback and environmental restructuring with organizational values and needs of the patient population may offer a more promising approach to sustained improvement.</p>","PeriodicalId":9012,"journal":{"name":"BMC Health Services Research","volume":"25 1","pages":"1292"},"PeriodicalIF":3.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-10-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"BMC Health Services Research","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s12913-025-13304-5","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background & objectives: Length of Stay (LoS) is a critical quality metric and focus of improvement efforts in healthcare. Successfully managing LoS depends on understanding the drivers of variation amenable to change. This study aims to (1) characterize physician-level variation in LoS; (2) identify physician actions associated with LoS; and (3) explore the individual-, team-, and hospital-level factors influencing this variation to generate hypotheses for further study.

Methods: This mixed-methods comparative case study approach examined six General Internal Medicine (GIM) departments in Toronto, Ontario. Physician-level variation in LoS was calculated using a random-intercept negative binomial regression model and sensitivity analysis. Semi-structured interviews and ethnographic observations were conducted and analyzed using the AACTT Framework (Action-Actor-Context-Target-Time), the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR), and the Theoretical Domains Frameworks (TDF). Hospitals with the lowest and highest physician-level variation in LoS were compared.

Results: Physician-level variation in LoS ranged from 1.7 to 7.0%, which-though modest numerically-represents meaningful differences in physician decision-making not explained by patient complexity, and no significant hospital-level effect was observed. Qualitative analysis from 12 observations and 67 interviews (32 GIM physicians and residents, 35 nurses and other health professionals) identified eight discrete physician actions influencing LoS, along with five individual-level factors and five team- and hospital-level factors. The nature of these factors was different when comparing hospitals with the lowest and highest variation. Organizational culture and perceptions of the patient population shaped physician perceptions of their professional role, while GIM departmental culture, structural characteristics, and communication networks informed physician beliefs about team capabilities and consequences of action (or inaction).

Conclusion: This study highlights the complex interplay between physician actions and factors influencing physician-level variation in LoS. Interventions that target physicians but do not attend to team and hospital factors are likely insufficient to achieve sustained improvements in LoS. Aligning individual-level feedback and environmental restructuring with organizational values and needs of the patient population may offer a more promising approach to sustained improvement.

应用实施科学的视角来理解内科病人住院时间在医生水平上的差异。
背景与目的:住院时间(LoS)是一个关键的质量指标,也是医疗保健改进工作的重点。成功地管理LoS依赖于理解可改变的变化的驱动因素。本研究旨在(1)表征LoS的医师水平差异;(2)识别与LoS相关的医生行为;(3)探讨影响这种差异的个体、团队和医院层面的因素,为进一步研究提出假设。方法:这种混合方法比较案例研究方法检查了安大略省多伦多的六个普通内科(GIM)部门。医师水平的LoS变化采用随机截距负二项回归模型和敏感性分析进行计算。使用AACTT框架(行动-行动者-情境-目标-时间)、实施研究综合框架(CFIR)和理论领域框架(TDF)进行半结构化访谈和民族志观察并进行分析。比较医师水平差异最大与最小的医院。结果:医生水平的LoS变化范围为1.7 - 7.0%,虽然数值适中,但这代表了医生决策的有意义差异,而不是由患者复杂性解释的,并且没有观察到显著的医院水平影响。从12次观察和67次访谈(32名GIM医生和住院医生,35名护士和其他卫生专业人员)中进行的定性分析确定了8个独立的医生行为影响LoS,以及5个个人层面的因素和5个团队和医院层面的因素。这些因素的性质不同,在医院的差异最小和最高。组织文化和对患者群体的看法塑造了医生对其专业角色的看法,而GIM部门文化、结构特征和沟通网络则影响了医生对团队能力和行动(或不作为)后果的看法。结论:本研究强调了医师行为与影响医师水平差异的因素之间复杂的相互作用。针对医生而不考虑团队和医院因素的干预措施可能不足以实现LoS的持续改善。将个人层面的反馈和环境重组与组织价值观和患者群体的需求结合起来,可能是一种更有希望的持续改善方法。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
BMC Health Services Research
BMC Health Services Research 医学-卫生保健
CiteScore
4.40
自引率
7.10%
发文量
1372
审稿时长
6 months
期刊介绍: BMC Health Services Research is an open access, peer-reviewed journal that considers articles on all aspects of health services research, including delivery of care, management of health services, assessment of healthcare needs, measurement of outcomes, allocation of healthcare resources, evaluation of different health markets and health services organizations, international comparative analysis of health systems, health economics and the impact of health policies and regulations.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信