RESUMEN

The American Journal of Critical Care's Junior Peer Reviewer program aims to mentor novice reviewers in the peer review process. To grow their critical appraisal skills, the participants take part in discussion sessions in which they review articles published in other journals. Here we summarize the articles reviewed during the second year of the program, which again focused on the care of critically ill patients with COVID-19. This article aims to share these reviews and the reviewers' thoughts regarding the relevance, design, and applicability of the findings from the selected studies. High rates of delirium associated with COVID-19 may be impacted by optimizing sedation strategies and allowing safe family visitation. Current methodology in crisis standards of care may result in inequity and further research is needed. The use of extracorporeal carbon dioxide removal to facilitate super low tidal volume ventilation does not improve 90-day mortality outcomes. Continued research to better understand the natural history of COVID-19 and interventions useful for improving outcomes is imperative.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

The Junior Peer Reviewer program of the American Journal of Critical Care provides mentorship in the peer review process to novice reviewers. The program includes discussion sessions in which participants review articles published in other journals to practice and improve their critical appraisal skills. The articles reviewed during the first year of the program focused on caring for patients with COVID-19. The global pandemic has placed a heavy burden on nursing practice. Prone positioning of patients with acute respiratory failure is likely to improve their outcomes. Hospitals caring for patients needing prolonged ventilation should use evidence-based, standardized care practices to reduce mortality. The burden on uncompensated caregivers of COVID-19 survivors is also high, and such caregivers are likely to require assistance with their efforts. Reviewing these articles was helpful for building the peer review skills of program participants and identifying actionable research to improve the lives of critically ill patients.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

INTRODUCTION: The Hospital Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems (HCAHPS) is a national survey sent to patients to measure their inpatient experience. Graduate medical education programs may affect a sponsoring institution in various ways, but there has been little research into the effect of teaching hospitalist faculty on HCAHPS scores in a community-based hospital. The aim of the current study is to evaluate if the introduction of internal medicine resident physicians would affect the HCAHPS scores of patients admitted by hospitalist faculty physicians. METHODS: This was a retrospective analysis of anonymous patient satisfaction survey data for internal medicine hospitalist teams from January 2019 to December 2019. Data were retrieved from the Press Ganey database. We compared two groups: teaching hospitalists (N = 12) and non-teaching hospitalists (N = 34). Data were divided into two time periods: January to June (pre-residents) and July to December (post-residents). RESULTS:  From January to June (pre-residents), 646 HCAHPS surveys were returned. For the post-resident cohort (July to December), a total of 487 surveys were returned. The "Recommend" domain, showed a significant improvement in the mean pre-resident to post-resident (57% to 69%; p = 0.0351). CONCLUSION: There was a significant increase in the mean rating of the "Recommend" hospital domain for the teaching hospitalists when compared to the non-teaching after the addition of a new internal medicine residency program.