Importance of patient bed pathways and length of stay differences in predicting COVID-19 hospital bed occupancy in England.

Background: Predicting bed occupancy for hospitalised patients with COVID-19 requires understanding of length of stay (LoS) in particular bed types. LoS can vary depending on the patient’s “bed pathway” - the sequence of transfers of individual patients between bed types during a hospital stay. In this study, we characterise these pathways, and their impact on predicted hospital bed occupancy. Methods: We obtained data from University College Hospital (UCH) and the ISARIC4C COVID-19 Clinical Information Network (CO-CIN) on hospitalised patients with COVID-19 who required care in general ward or critical care (CC) beds to determine possible bed pathways and LoS. We developed a discrete-time model to examine the implications of using either bed pathways or only average LoS by bed type to forecast bed occupancy. We compared model-predicted bed occupancy to publicly available bed occupancy data on COVID-19 in England between March and August 2020. Results: In both the UCH and CO-CIN datasets, 82% of hospitalised patients with COVID-19 only received care in general ward beds. We identified four other bed pathways, present in both datasets: “Ward, CC, Ward”, “Ward, CC”, “CC” and “CC, Ward”. Mean LoS varied by bed type, pathway, and dataset, between 1.78 and 13.53 days. For UCH, we found that using bed pathways improved the accuracy of bed occupancy predictions, while only using an average LoS for each bed type underestimated true bed occupancy. However, using the CO-CIN LoS dataset we were not able to replicate past data on bed occupancy in England, suggesting regional LoS heterogeneities. Conclusions: We identified five bed pathways, with substantial variation in LoS by bed type, pathway, and geography. This might be caused by local differences in patient characteristics, clinical care strategies, or resource availability, and suggests that national LoS averages may not be appropriate for local forecasts of bed occupancy for COVID-19. Trial registration: The ISARIC WHO CCP-UK study ISRCTN66726260 was retrospectively registered on 21/04/2020 and designated an Urgent Public Health Research Study by NIHR.</p

A systematic review of faculty development initiatives designed to enhance teaching effectiveness: a 10-year update: BEME Guide No. 40

Background: This review, which focused on faculty development initiatives designed to improve teaching effectiveness, synthesized findings related to intervention types, study characteristics, individual and organizational outcomes, key features, and community building. Methods: This review included 111 studies (between 2002 and 2012) that met the review criteria. Findings: Overall satisfaction with faculty development programs was high. Participants reported increased confidence, enthusiasm, and awareness of effective educational practices. Gains in knowledge and skills, and self-reported changes in teaching behaviors, were frequently noted. Observed behavior changes included enhanced teaching practices, new educational initiatives, new leadership positions, and increased academic output. Organizational changes were infrequently explored. Key features included evidence-informed educational design, relevant content, experiential learning, feedback and reflection, educational projects, intentional community building, longitudinal program design, and institutional support. Conclusion: This review holds implications for practice and research. Moving forward, we should build on current success, broaden the focus beyond individual teaching effectiveness, develop programs that extend over time, promote workplace learning, foster community development, and secure institutional support. We should also embed studies in a theoretical framework, conduct more qualitative and mixed methods studies, assess behavioral and organizational change, evaluate transfer to practice, analyse key features, and explore the role of faculty development within the larger organizational context.Yvonne Steinert, Karen Mann, Brownell Anderson, Bonnie Maureen Barnett, Angel Centeno, Laura Naismith, David Prideaux, John Spencer, Ellen Tullo, Thomas Viggiano, Helena Ward and Diana Dolman