Five Tips for Becoming an Ideal General Hospitalist

Coordinated empathy in attending general practitioners: an interpretive phenomenological approach to constructing a conceptual model of empathy

BACKGROUND

Empathy in general practice is important because it contributes to patient satisfaction and clinical outcomes. However, few studies have examined the perceptions of empathy of attending physicians, who are skilled medical practitioners. From the perspective of interpretive phenomenology, we conducted the present study to conceptualize perceptions of empathy in attending general practitioners, and to identify experiences that influenced these perceptions.

METHODS

We conducted four semi-structured interviews with three board-certified attending general practitioners. The transcripts were analyzed using the Steps for Coding and Theorization procedure. The four components of empathy (moral, emotional, cognitive, and behavioral) were used as the theoretical framework for the analysis.

RESULTS

We found that the participants exhibited the moral component of empathy, such that they felt they were on a mission to understand and support their patients. Furthermore, they mainly used cognitive empathy to understand the feelings and thoughts of their patients. The participants also used behavioral empathy to convey a sense of understanding to their patients, with the intent of building trust and creating an atmosphere in which the patients felt relaxed and able to speak freely. In contrast, emotional empathy was less frequent because the participants observed emotional boundaries related to professionalism.

CONCLUSIONS

This study revealed new details about how attending general practitioners coordinate the four components of empathy and how they balance humanistic care with their objective standpoint as physicians. These findings are important in that they provide a model for physicians in terms of providing empathetic care while maintaining professional boundaries.

A Questionnaire Study of Leadership in General Medicine: General Physicians in Japan are Facing Challenges in Education and Research

Purpose

General physicians are required to demonstrate diverse leadership skills depending on their environment. It is essential for them to understand the characteristics of the medical institutions to which they belong and put this understanding into practice. Leadership skills are acquired through experience and training, and their acquisition is a goal in various medical training programs. However, these leadership skills are difficult to acquire because the specific leadership skills required in clinical practice, education, and research are not well defined. For example, in clinical practice, general physicians need to lead initiatives to improve patient outcomes, resource utilization, and the quality of medical care. However, the specific leadership skills required for these tasks are not explicitly defined. Based on the survey results on the leadership types that general physicians value in clinical practice, research, and education, in addition to expert opinions and a literature survey, we aimed to establish the leadership type necessary in general medicine.

Patients and Methods

A cross-sectional anonymous questionnaire survey was conducted from February 2 to 29, 2024, using Google Forms sent through email, targeting members of the Japan Society of Hospital General Medicine. The survey comprised multiple-choice and descriptive questions.

Results

Notably, 286 physicians responded to the survey (response rate: 12.5%); 82.9% were males. Of these, 56.3% said they could explain what leadership constitutes, and 57.0% wanted to attend leadership training. When asked about the most-demanded leadership types in each scenario, democratic and transformational leadership were the most selected in clinical practice (52.4%) and in education and research (26.6% and 31.8%, respectively), respectively.

Conclusion

Transformational leadership was the most important leadership type in education and research, indicating that many general physicians face challenges in these areas. Therefore, developing strategies to improve leadership skills in education and research within general medicine is crucial.

Current management of Staphylococcus aureus bacteremia in a Japanese university hospital

Objectives

Consultation with infectious disease specialists is associated with reduced patient mortality in the care of patients with Staphylococcus aureus bacteremia (SAB) through appropriate management of complications including infective endocarditis. This study aimed to determine the rates of confirmation of a negative blood culture, implementation of echocardiography, and administration of appropriate antibiotics in patients with SAB at a university hospital in Japan that provides general internal medicine and not an infectious disease consultation service.

Methods

We conducted a retrospective cohort study at Dokkyo Medical University Hospital in Japan. Patients eligible for inclusion in the study were ≥20 years of age with ≥1 positive blood culture for S. aureus identified in a clinical microbiology laboratory. The primary outcome was the proportion of patients with confirmation of a negative blood culture, implementation of echocardiography, and administration of appropriate antimicrobial agents.

Results

A total of 109 patients with SAB were included in the analysis. Follow-up blood cultures were collected in 91 patients and negative results were documented in 88 patients. Follow-up blood culture collection was performed within 4 days of the initial blood culture collection in 49 patients. Echocardiography was performed appropriately in 40 patients. Appropriate antibiotic therapy was administered in 36 patients.

Conclusions

Quality-of-care indicators were more commonly implemented in patients with SAB who received general internal medicine consultation than in those who did not.

Hospitalists' COVID-19 management roles in hospitals without infectious disease specialists

BACKGROUND

Hospitalists may work in a variety of clinical settings to manage COVID-19 cases. However, the extent of their involvement in COVID-19 care is unknown, particularly in hospitals without infectious disease (ID) specialists.

METHODS

This study aimed to confirm whether hospitalists provided COVID-19 management in various clinical settings when ID specialists were unavailable. We conducted a multicenter cross-sectional study using a web-based questionnaire. The participants were full-time hospitalists working in Japanese academic community-based hospitals. The study period was from 15 January 2021 to 15 February 2021, during Japan's third wave of the COVID-19 pandemic. The primary outcome was the rate of hospitalists participating in COVID-19 inpatient management in hospitals with or without ID specialists.

RESULTS

ID specialists were absent in 31% of small hospitals (those with fewer than 249 registered beds), but only 4% of large hospitals (p < 0.001). Hospitalists were more likely to manage both COVID-19 inpatient care and emergency department care in hospitals without than with hospitals with ID specialists (76 versus 56% (p = 0.01) and 90 versus 73% (p = 0.01), respectively). After adjusting for confounders by multivariate analysis, hospitalists who worked in hospitals without ID specialists had higher odds of participating in COVID-19 inpatient care than those who worked in hospitals with such specialists (adjusted odds ratio: 3.0, 95% CI: 1.2-7.4).

CONCLUSION

Hospitalists were more likely to provide COVID-19 inpatient care in various clinical settings in hospitals without ID specialists.

Contributions of Japanese Hospitalists During the COVID-19 Pandemic and the Need for Infectious Disease Crisis Management Education for Hospitalists: An Online Cross-Sectional Study

Introduction

Hospitalists in Japan have been at the forefront of the COVID-19 pandemic. However, contributions of Japanese hospitalists during the COVID-19 pandemic and hospitalists' awareness of crisis management education remain unclear.

Material and Methods

We conducted a questionnaire survey to investigate the role of Japanese hospitalists during the COVID-19 pandemic. The questionnaire was conducted using email and Google Forms targeting the chairpersons of facilities certified by the Japanese Society of Hospital General Medicine (JSHGM). Members of the academic committee of the JSHGM and several hospitals conducted a narrative review and determined the questions for the survey in a discussion.

Results

We conducted descriptive statistics based on the responses of 97 hospitals that agreed to participate in this survey. In total, 91.8% of general medicine departments in the included hospitals were involved in the medical care of COVID-19 patients. Furthermore, in 73.2% of hospitals, hospitalists were involved in infection control for COVID-19 inside or outside the hospital. Our survey revealed that Japanese hospitalists were responsible for COVID-19 treatment in over 60% of hospitals and contributed to hospital management, infection control, and vaccination. In total, 79.4% of hospitals answered that "training of personnel who can provide practical care for emerging infectious diseases is necessary", 78.4% indicated that "the establishment of an infection control system in advance to prepare emerging infectious diseases in the hospital is necessary", and 74.2% stated that "the establishment of an educational system for responding to emerging infectious diseases is necessary.".

Conclusion

In conclusion, during the pandemic, in addition to inpatient care, Japanese hospitalists provided outpatient care for COVID-19, which is the role of primary care physicians in other countries. Furthermore, Japanese hospitalists who experienced the COVID-19 pandemic expressed the need for personnel development and education to prepare for future emerging infectious disease pandemics.

Roles considered important for hospitalist and non-hospitalist generalist practice in Japan: a survey study

BACKGROUND

An increased focus on quality and patient safety has led to the evolution of hospitalists. The number of hospitalists covering ward and outpatient care is on the rise in Japan. However, it is unclear what roles hospital workers themselves consider important in their practice. Therefore, this study investigated what hospitalists and non-hospitalist generalists in Japan consider important for the practice of their specialty.

METHODS

This was an observational study that included Japanese hospitalists (1) currently working in a general medicine (GM) or general internal medicine department and (2) working at a hospital. Using originally developed questionnaire items, we surveyed the items important to hospitalists and non-hospitalist generalists.

RESULTS

There were 971 participants (733 hospitalists, 238 non-hospitalist) in the study. The response rate was 26.1%. Both hospitalists and non-hospitalists ranked evidence-based medicine as the most important for their practice. In addition, hospitalists ranked diagnostic reasoning and inpatient medical management as the second and third most important roles for their practice, while non-hospitalists ranked inpatient medical management and elderly care as second and third.

CONCLUSIONS

This is the first study investigating the roles Japanese hospitalists consider important and comparing those to that of non-hospitalist generalists. Many of the items that hospitalists considered important were those that hospitalists in Japan are working on within and outside academic societies. We found that diagnostic medicine and quality and safety are areas that are likely to see further evolution as hospitalists specifically emphasized on them. In the future, we expect to see suggestions and research for further enhancing the items that hospital workers value and emphasise upon.

Comparing Japanese University Hospitals' and Community Healthcare Facilities' Research Contributions on PubMed

Purpose

Although research in general medicine is important, the contributions and characteristics of general medicine physicians (GMPs) in university hospitals (UH) and community healthcare facilities (CHF) remains unclear. Therefore, this study examines the popularity of research by affiliation, characteristics of journal publication, annual trends, and differences in impact factors (IFs) of journal publications.

Methods

This study is a secondary bibliometric analysis of articles in international journals published in PubMed over the past six years (2015-2020). The analysis compared English articles published by either UH- or CHF-affiliated GMPs in Japan in terms of, among other things, article type, research field, and IF.

Results

Of the 2372 articles analyzed, 1688 (71.2%) were published by physicians affiliated with UHs, 62.6% of which were original. Basic research, international collaboration, and ratio of IFs were significantly higher for such papers. In contrast, the number of CHF articles were significantly higher in the areas of clinical research and practice, with a greater proportion of case reports. There was no significant difference in IF between the disciplines within each affiliation, but the IF was the highest in experimental basic research and the lowest in medical and clinical education. In the six-year time series, the number of original papers by UHs and CHFs increased roughly twofold between 2015 and 2020, but the number of articles in the areas of medical education and healthcare quality and safety remained mostly unchanged.

Conclusion

The number of international papers published by Japanese GMPs has increased since 2015, particularly in terms of original papers and clinical research from UHs. However, there was no significant difference in the IF between UH and CHF publications. Our findings can guide the development of indicators, research, and education strategies regarding Japanese GMPs' research performance.

Hands-on Clinical Clerkship at the Department of General Medicine in a University Hospital Improves Medical Students' Self-Evaluation of Skills of Performing Physical Examinations and Informed Consent: A Questionnaire-Based Prospective Study

Introduction

The educational effects of a hands-on clinical clerkship on medical students at the Department of General medicine of Japanese university hospitals remain to be clarified. This study aimed to determine how such education affects medical students' self-evaluation of their clinical skills.

Methods

We enrolled 5th-year-grade students at the Department of General Medicine, Saga University Hospital, Japan in 2017. The students were divided into those who were going to have Japanese traditional-style observation-based training mainly in the outpatient clinic (Group O) and those in the 2018, new-style, hands-on clinical clerkship as one of the group practice members in outpatient and inpatient clinics (Group H). A questionnaire survey using the 4-point Likert scale for self-evaluation of the students' clinical skills at the beginning and the end of their training was conducted in both groups. The pre- and post-training scores of each item in both groups were compared and analyzed using the Mann-Whitney test.

Results

All 99 students in Group O and 121 of 123 students in Group H answered the questionnaires. The response rate was 99%. Two items regarding the abilities of "can perform a systemic physical examination quickly and efficiently" and "can clearly explain the current medical condition, therapeutic options, or risks associated with treatment, and discuss the process for obtaining informed consent" showed higher scores in the post-training survey in Group H than in Group O. There were no differences in these scores in the pre-training survey between the two groups.

Conclusion

A hands-on clinical clerkship at the Department of General medicine in a university hospital in Japan provided medical students with higher self-confidence in their skills of performing a physical examination and better understanding of patients' treatment options and the process of informed consent than observation-based training.

Factors associated with delayed diagnosis of appendicitis in adults: A single-center, retrospective, observational study

Appendicitis is one of the most common causes of acute abdominal pain; yet the risk of delayed diagnosis remains despite recent advances in abdominal imaging. Understanding the factors associated with delayed diagnosis can lower the risk of diagnostic errors for acute appendicitis. These factors, including physicians’ specialty as a generalist or non-generalist, were evaluated through a retrospective, observational study of adult acute appendicitis cases at a single center, between April 1, 2014, and March 31, 2021. The main outcome was timely diagnosis, defined as "diagnosis at the first visit if the facility had computed tomography (CT) capability" or "referral to an appropriate medical institution promptly after the first visit for a facility without CT capability," with all other cases defined as delayed diagnosis. The frequency of delayed diagnosis was calculated and associated factors evaluated through multivariate and exploratory analyses. The overall rate of delayed diagnosis was 26.2% (200/763 cases). Multivariate analysis showed that tenderness in the right lower abdominal region, absence of diarrhea, a consultation of ≤6 h after symptom onset, and consultation with a generalist were associated with a decreased risk of delayed diagnosis of acute appendicitis. Exploratory analysis found that generalists performed more physical findings related to acute appendicitis, suggesting that this diagnostic approach may be associated with timely diagnosis. Future studies should adjust for other potential confounding factors, including patient complexity, consultation environment, number of physicians, diagnostic modality, and physician specialties.

Real opinions on general medicine residency programs in Japan: Perspectives from medical students, residents, and young academic generalists

Medical students and junior residents have five concerns about general medicine training, and senior residents and young academic generalists respond to these concerns. We hope that this paper will help to dispel some common concerns for those who wish to become specialists in general medicine.

Research Trends and Impact Factor on PubMed Among General Medicine Physicians in Japan: A Cross-Sectional Bibliometric Analysis

Background

Japan created a specialty system for general medicine in 2018. However, Japanese academic generalists’ contribution to research remains unclear. This study examines the popularity of Japanese general medicine research, the characteristics of journal publications, annual trends, and the characteristics/differences among publications in journals with an impact factor (IF).

Methods

This bibliometric analysis extracted international, English-language, journal articles published on PubMed between January 1, 2015, and December 31, 2020. Analysis included articles with either the first, second, or last author in general medicine. We classified articles according to publication or article type and field of research. We obtained standard descriptive statistics for each publication type. Chi-squared test or Fisher’s exact test was used to compare nominal variables. For continuous variables, t-tests or Wilcoxon rank-sum tests were used, as appropriate.

Results

Of the 2372 articles analyzed, original articles were most common (56.3%), followed by case reports (30.1%), reviews (7.63%), and letters/others (5.9%). Publication volume increased 2.64-fold annually over 5 years. Clinical research (60.5%) was most common among original articles, followed by basic experimental research (17.5%) and public health/epidemiology (12.7%). Medical quality and safety (4.1%), medical and clinical education (3.1%), and health services (1.42%) received comparatively little attention. Eighty percent of articles were published in journals with IF; however, these journals rarely published case reports. Among original articles, the likelihood of publishing in journals with IF was high for basic laboratory medicine articles with higher IF (median IF 3.83, OR 1.71, 95% CI 2.20–5.95, p=0.044) and lower for clinical education research with the lowest IF (median IF 1.83, OR 0.56, 95% CI 01.8–0.75, p<0.001).

Discussion

General medicine physicians’ international research output is increasing in Japan; however, research achievements have not been generalized, but rather much influenced by clinical subspecialty backgrounds. This will likely continue unless an academic generalist discipline is established.

Increasing the Status of Hospital General Medicine Departments with Emphasis on Outpatient Care in Japan

Demand is increasing for general medicine services in Japan, a super-aged society. The new medical specialty system introduced in 2019 obligates physicians to obtain a qualified specialty from among 19 basic specialty fields, including general medicine, before obtaining more advanced qualified subspecialties. The role of the department of general medicine in Japan varies in each hospital. Remuneration for medical services obtained by general medicine departments that mainly provide outpatient care is relatively low, making it difficult to fill positions in this department within a hospital. We conducted a narrative review and discussed ways to increase the status of hospital general medicine departments that mainly provide outpatient care. We consider the following four points to be important: improvement of diagnostic capabilities in the outpatient setting; playing a central role in education for medical students and residents; active involvement with patients who have diagnostic difficulties or social problems; and branding and promotion of the general medicine department. We envision that adopting an active approach to these points will increase the status of general medicine departments that mainly provide outpatient care within the hospital, allowing such newly established departments to start easily in Japanese hospitals in the future.