Creation of a medical procedure service in a tertiary medical center: Blueprint and procedural outcomes.

BACKGROUND Medical Procedure Services (MPS) may represent a solution to the educational gap in procedural training among internal medicine residents and the unmet need for the clinical provision of non-urgent inpatient procedures. However, there is little guidance available to help launch an MPS. Furthermore, procedural outcomes from a newly initiated MPS, including those comparing trainees versus attending physicians, are lacking. OBJECTIVE To describe the blueprint used in the design, implementation, and ongoing oversight of an MPS and to report its procedural outcomes. DESIGN, SETTINGS AND PARTICIPANTS Vanderbilt University Medical Center (VUMC), Nashville, Tennessee. INTERVENTION The launch of an MPS at a large tertiary academic hospital. MAIN OUTCOME AND MEASURES 6,152 procedural consultations resulting in 5,320 attempted procedures over a four-and-a-half year period. RESULTS The primary proceduralist was a supervised resident in 58.7% (3124 /5,320) and an attending in 41.3% (2,196/5,320) of procedures. The overall success rate was 91.1% (95% CI: 90.3-91.9%) and the major complication rate was 0.7% (95% CI: 0.5-1.0%). There was no difference in the mean number of attempts required to complete a procedure (1.6 vs 1.5 attempts, p=0.68) and the complication rates between supervised residents and attending proceduralists, respectively (20/3,124 vs 20/2,196, p=0.26). CONCLUSION At a tertiary academic medical center, the implementation and maintenance of MPS is feasible, safe, and results in high rates of successful procedures performed by supervised residents. Procedures performed by supervised residents require comparable number of attempts for completion and carry similar risks as those performed alone by attendings.

[1]  Ria Dancel,et al.  Implementation of an academic hospital medicine procedure service: 5-year experience , 2021, Hospital practice.

[2]  J. Mcpherson,et al.  Medical Procedure Services in Internal Medicine Residencies in the US: a Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis , 2021, Journal of General Internal Medicine.

[3]  William C McGaghie,et al.  Clinical outcomes after bedside and interventional radiology paracentesis procedures. , 2013, The American journal of medicine.

[4]  J. Maselli,et al.  Patient satisfaction with a hospitalist procedure service: is bedside procedure teaching reassuring to patients? , 2011, Journal of hospital medicine.

[5]  J. Maselli,et al.  Supervising the Supervisors—Procedural Training and Supervision in Internal Medicine Residency , 2010, Journal of General Internal Medicine.

[6]  A. de Gottardi,et al.  Risk of complications after abdominal paracentesis in cirrhotic patients: a prospective study. , 2009, Clinical gastroenterology and hepatology : the official clinical practice journal of the American Gastroenterological Association.

[7]  A. Mariam,et al.  The incidence of complications of central venous catheters at an intensive care unit , 2007, Annals of thoracic medicine.

[8]  Roger B. Davis,et al.  Creation of an innovative inpatient medical procedure service and a method to evaluate house staff competency , 2004, Journal of General Internal Medicine.

[9]  R. Fincher Procedural competence of internal medicine residents: Time to address the gap , 2000, Journal of General Internal Medicine.

[10]  Saul N Weingart,et al.  Beyond the comfort zone: residents assess their comfort performing inpatient medical procedures. , 2006, The American journal of medicine.

[11]  P. Kamath,et al.  Performance standards for therapeutic abdominal paracentesis , 2004, Hepatology.

[12]  V. Raptopoulos,et al.  Complications associated with thoracentesis. A prospective, randomized study comparing three different methods. , 1990, Archives of internal medicine.