急诊医师生产力和监督实践评估。

IF 1.8 3区 医学 Q2 EMERGENCY MEDICINE
Kraftin Schreyer, Diane Kuhn, Vicki Norton
{"title":"急诊医师生产力和监督实践评估。","authors":"Kraftin Schreyer, Diane Kuhn, Vicki Norton","doi":"10.5811/westjem.19417","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Despite a lack of data guiding safe standards for physician productivity and supervision of non-physician practitioners (NPP), legislation dictating supervision ratios for emergency physicians (EP) has been enacted in Florida and elsewhere across the country. To inform future legislation, we aim to identify current productivity and supervision practices among practicing EPs as well as those physicians' safety assessments of their current practices.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We conducted a cross-sectional observational study regarding EPs' perspectives on safe staffing and supervision models. A survey, consisting of 14 questions examining different variables affecting supervision and productivity, was used to determine physicians' opinions on the safety of productivity and supervision models across a range of annual volumes, employers, and years of experience. We coded safety assessments as binary (yes/no) and measured productivity by patients treated per hour. Ratios of physician to supervisee (either resident physician or or NPP) were given as number of supervisees: EP.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The survey response rate was 4.8% (196/4,004). On average, most EPs treated 2.6 patients per hour, regardless of years of experience, employment model, or supervision model. More than 80% of EPs felt that their current patients-per- hour practice was safe. Direct supervision represented 59% of total visits and the majority in all employment models except for community contract-management groups (CMG). A minimum of 80% of physicians felt that their current supervision practices were safe across employment models, with the notable exception of community CMGs. Most felt that a safe ratio for direct supervision of NPPs was 1:1. Over 30% reported there was no safe staffing ratio for indirect supervision.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>With the exception of those employed by community contract-management groups, EPs felt that their current productivity and supervision practices were safe; however, average productivity and supervision ratios are much lower than prior estimates and in current legislation governing emergency department practice. Standards of care for both productivity and supervision that take into account current practices and safety assessments should be established and considered when future policies and legislation are developed.</p>","PeriodicalId":23682,"journal":{"name":"Western Journal of Emergency Medicine","volume":"26 3","pages":"500-506"},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12208038/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Emergency Physician Assessment of Productivity and Supervision Practices.\",\"authors\":\"Kraftin Schreyer, Diane Kuhn, Vicki Norton\",\"doi\":\"10.5811/westjem.19417\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Despite a lack of data guiding safe standards for physician productivity and supervision of non-physician practitioners (NPP), legislation dictating supervision ratios for emergency physicians (EP) has been enacted in Florida and elsewhere across the country. To inform future legislation, we aim to identify current productivity and supervision practices among practicing EPs as well as those physicians' safety assessments of their current practices.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We conducted a cross-sectional observational study regarding EPs' perspectives on safe staffing and supervision models. A survey, consisting of 14 questions examining different variables affecting supervision and productivity, was used to determine physicians' opinions on the safety of productivity and supervision models across a range of annual volumes, employers, and years of experience. We coded safety assessments as binary (yes/no) and measured productivity by patients treated per hour. Ratios of physician to supervisee (either resident physician or or NPP) were given as number of supervisees: EP.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The survey response rate was 4.8% (196/4,004). On average, most EPs treated 2.6 patients per hour, regardless of years of experience, employment model, or supervision model. More than 80% of EPs felt that their current patients-per- hour practice was safe. Direct supervision represented 59% of total visits and the majority in all employment models except for community contract-management groups (CMG). A minimum of 80% of physicians felt that their current supervision practices were safe across employment models, with the notable exception of community CMGs. Most felt that a safe ratio for direct supervision of NPPs was 1:1. Over 30% reported there was no safe staffing ratio for indirect supervision.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>With the exception of those employed by community contract-management groups, EPs felt that their current productivity and supervision practices were safe; however, average productivity and supervision ratios are much lower than prior estimates and in current legislation governing emergency department practice. Standards of care for both productivity and supervision that take into account current practices and safety assessments should be established and considered when future policies and legislation are developed.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":23682,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Western Journal of Emergency Medicine\",\"volume\":\"26 3\",\"pages\":\"500-506\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-04-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12208038/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Western Journal of Emergency Medicine\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.5811/westjem.19417\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"EMERGENCY MEDICINE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Western Journal of Emergency Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5811/westjem.19417","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"EMERGENCY MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

导语:尽管缺乏指导医生生产力和监督非医生从业人员(NPP)的安全标准的数据,但在佛罗里达州和全国其他地方已经颁布了规定急诊医生(EP)监督比率的立法。为了为未来的立法提供信息,我们的目标是确定执业医师目前的生产力和监管做法,以及这些医生对其目前做法的安全评估。方法:我们对EPs对安全人员配备和监管模型的看法进行了横断面观察研究。一项由14个问题组成的调查,检查了影响监督和生产力的不同变量,用于确定医生对生产力和监管模式安全性的看法,这些模型涉及年度数量、雇主和多年经验。我们将安全性评估编码为二进制(是/否),并以每小时治疗的患者来衡量生产率。医师与受督导医师(住院医师或非住院医师)的比率作为受督导人数:EP。结果:调查回复率为4.8%(196/ 4004)。无论经验年限、雇佣模式或监督模式如何,大多数EPs平均每小时治疗2.6例患者。超过80%的内科医生认为他们目前每小时治疗一个病人的做法是安全的。直接监督占总访问量的59%,除社区合同管理小组(CMG)外,在所有就业模式中占多数。至少有80%的医生认为他们目前的监督实践在就业模式中是安全的,但社区cmg除外。大多数人认为直接监管核电站的安全比例是1:1。超过30%的受访者表示没有安全的间接监管人员配置比例。结论:除了那些受雇于社区合同管理小组的外,EPs认为他们目前的生产力和监督实践是安全的;然而,平均生产力和监督比率远低于先前的估计和现行有关急诊科实践的立法。在制定未来的政策和立法时,应制定并考虑到目前的做法和安全评估的生产力和监督方面的护理标准。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Emergency Physician Assessment of Productivity and Supervision Practices.

Introduction: Despite a lack of data guiding safe standards for physician productivity and supervision of non-physician practitioners (NPP), legislation dictating supervision ratios for emergency physicians (EP) has been enacted in Florida and elsewhere across the country. To inform future legislation, we aim to identify current productivity and supervision practices among practicing EPs as well as those physicians' safety assessments of their current practices.

Methods: We conducted a cross-sectional observational study regarding EPs' perspectives on safe staffing and supervision models. A survey, consisting of 14 questions examining different variables affecting supervision and productivity, was used to determine physicians' opinions on the safety of productivity and supervision models across a range of annual volumes, employers, and years of experience. We coded safety assessments as binary (yes/no) and measured productivity by patients treated per hour. Ratios of physician to supervisee (either resident physician or or NPP) were given as number of supervisees: EP.

Results: The survey response rate was 4.8% (196/4,004). On average, most EPs treated 2.6 patients per hour, regardless of years of experience, employment model, or supervision model. More than 80% of EPs felt that their current patients-per- hour practice was safe. Direct supervision represented 59% of total visits and the majority in all employment models except for community contract-management groups (CMG). A minimum of 80% of physicians felt that their current supervision practices were safe across employment models, with the notable exception of community CMGs. Most felt that a safe ratio for direct supervision of NPPs was 1:1. Over 30% reported there was no safe staffing ratio for indirect supervision.

Conclusion: With the exception of those employed by community contract-management groups, EPs felt that their current productivity and supervision practices were safe; however, average productivity and supervision ratios are much lower than prior estimates and in current legislation governing emergency department practice. Standards of care for both productivity and supervision that take into account current practices and safety assessments should be established and considered when future policies and legislation are developed.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Western Journal of Emergency Medicine
Western Journal of Emergency Medicine Medicine-Emergency Medicine
CiteScore
5.30
自引率
3.20%
发文量
125
审稿时长
16 weeks
期刊介绍: WestJEM focuses on how the systems and delivery of emergency care affects health, health disparities, and health outcomes in communities and populations worldwide, including the impact of social conditions on the composition of patients seeking care in emergency departments.
×
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