Leveraging Technology in the Classroom

Posted on January 24, 2012 by | 2 Comments

In the ever-changing world of technology, finding a place for it in the classroom can be a challenging and laborious task. From implementing new technology to actually getting students to use it, it is often an uphill battle.

But at The Ohio State University College of Medicine, Doug Danforth, PhD, has emerged as a leader for implementing new technology and creating smart classrooms.

When the LeadServeInspire curriculum rolls out this year, Danforth will be the leader for Part I of the new curriculum. “With the new curriculum, we’re trying to reduce our emphasis on traditional lectures to deliver content. That type of learning doesn’t always promote long-term retention or significant learning with students,” explains Danforth. “Students typically remember 10 to 20 percent of what’s in those lectures. Retention rates are much higher when material is presented in an interactive way.”

Continue reading →

→ 2 Comments

Posted in Behavior, Communication, Culture, Education, Engagement, Leadership, Relationships

Tagged , , , , , , , , , ,

Pete Geier: View on Healthcare Reform

Posted on January 10, 2012 by | 1 Comment

We sat down and interviewed Pete Geier, CEO of the OSU Health System and COO of OSU Medical Center to get his view on healthcare reform and how The Ohio State University Medical Center is positioned to handle the coming changes.


1. Timing-wise, when do you foresee healthcare reform happening and how do you see it affecting the University?
I think it’s happening right now, maybe not from all the provisions of the healthcare reform law going into affect on items like exchanges, but I think a lot of the factors and forces that are not going to go away are already affecting us. Issues like the continuing emphasis on quality, bringing readmissions down, population management, those things are all happening now. So I think the impact of reform is here sooner than I think a lot of people have realized.

2. What do you think healthcare reform means for academic medical centers?
I think there are challenges and there are opportunities. I think academic medical centers are really well positioned. I think OSU is well positioned for a number of reasons: our electronic medical record implementation, our own health plan, and our Faculty Group Practice is integrated into the University and our scores are ranked nationally in the Quality and Safety outcomes by the University Health System Consortium. I think the challenge for academic medical centers is how do you fund the research and teaching missions under healthcare reform, and that will be a challenge for us.

Continue reading →

→ 1 Comment

Posted in Healthcare Reform, Leadership, Relationships

Tagged , , , ,

The Ohio State College of Medicine – Year in Review

Posted on December 28, 2011 by | Leave a comment


As we near the end of 2011, we thought we’d compile a list of the biggest stories from The Ohio State University College of Medicine from the past year.

2011 has truly been a great year, from the addition of our new dean, Dr. Charles Lockwood to the rollout of our new Lead. Serve. Inspire Curriculum, we have made great progress in reaching our goals of improving people’s lives through innovation in research, education and patient care. We will continue to work towards our goals and we know that 2012 will be even better!

• Meet Our New Dean, Dr. Charles Lockwood!
• Lead. Serve. Inspire, Curriculum for Tomorrow’s Medicine
• The Johanna and Ralph DeStefano Personalized Health Care Conference
• Schlesinger Named Chair of Microbial Infection and Immunity
• OSU Students Forge Careers in Biomedical Science Research
• OSU Medical Programs Ranked Among Nation’s Best
• Graduation Celebration Marks “New Beginnings” for College Diversity Efforts
• NIH Funds OSU Medical Scientist Training Program
• OSU Researchers Receive R01 Grants
• Alumni Reunion – More Than 350 Buckeyes Return to Campus for Medical

→ Leave a comment

Posted in Leadership

Dr. Steven Gabbe: Insight and Opportunity

Posted on August 1, 2011 by | 1 Comment

Dr Steven Gabbe, Ohio State Medical CenterDr. Steven Gabbe is featured in a recent issue of Weill Cornell Medicine, the magazine of Weill Cornell Medical College and Weill Cornell Graduate School of Medical Sciences.

The feature article focuses on how his leadership and research has improved the care of patients with diabetes, particularly pregnant women.

In his four decades as a scientist and physician, Gabbe has helped countless diabetic women—who otherwise might have delivered stillborn or disabled children—to have healthy babies. One of his basic science findings, in 1972, had important clinical implications: while doctors previously believed that the placenta was not affected by a pregnant woman’s insulin levels, Gabbe showed that insulin could, in fact, alter its ability to provide energy to a growing fetus. The finding suggested that artfully controlling an expectant mother’s diabetes— whether she already had the disease or developed it during pregnancy— could prevent its associated malformations, stillbirths, and obesity. In two large trials, he proved it.

Read the full article here.

→ 1 Comment

Posted in Leadership, Research

Tagged , , ,

Where We Stand Now

The Cancer Drug Development Roundtable ended Wednesday afternoon, and I left it feeling we’d achieved what we set out to accomplish. As we’d hoped, the event – organized and sponsored by the OSUCCC – James and the Friends of Cancer Research – was a good next step toward solving the problems that currently make it impossible to conduct clinical trials that evaluate two or more experimental drugs simultaneously in patients.

The Roundtable was the first time that the key players have come together with the goal of addressing this challenge to cancer drug development. The fact that they made the time to attend the Roundtable shows that these representatives from the cancer-research and patient-advocacy communities, the pharmaceutical industry, and the FDA and NCI recognize the importance of solving the problem.

The group mapped out specific areas on which to focus and agreed to continue working together until a plan is hammered out. Dr. Janet Woodcock, director of the FDA’s Center for Drug Evaluation and Research, and Dr. James Doroshow, director of NCI’s Division of Cancer Treatment and Diagnosis, both agreed to return to continue the conversation.

Here are a few key points that emerged:

  • This problem is not new, but participants agreed that no one has stepped up to address it the way that the OSUCCC – James and Friends of Cancer Research have done.
  • Participants pinpointed specific barriers that need resolving. They include scientific and logistics issues, competitive and business obstacles, needed regulatory clarifications and a model mechanism that allows different stakeholders to work together.
  • Participants were enthusiastic about solving these problems and agreed that, while scientists’ discoveries and companies’ investments are critical considerations, it is most important to focus on the patient.

We are committed to seeing this through and have offered to host the group’s next gathering. We will keep you informed.

Check out ONN’s “Ohio Means Business” starting May 11, 2011 at 7:30pm to learn more about the business barriers of cancer drug development and how they’re affecting cancer researchers at The Ohio State University.

→ 1 Comment

Posted on May 10, 2011 by

Cancer Drug Development Roundtable at The Ohio State University

Posted on May 3, 2011 by | 4 Comments

Click the picture to learn more about Dr. Caligiuri

By: Michael Caligiuri, MD
Chief Executive Officer, The James Cancer Hospital & Solove Research Institute
Vice President for Health Sciences, Cancer Programs
Director, The OSU Comprehensive Cancer Center

Want to frustrate a cutting-edge clinical cancer researcher? Suggest that he or she organize a clinical trial that combines two experimental targeted agents that together could paralyze cancer cells in multiple ways. No matter how convincing or brilliant the evidence that the combination could benefit patients, such trials are off-limits. Frustration is an understatement.

Currently, two compounds can be tested together in clinical trials only after both agents are approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA). Additionally, if the two agents are owned by different pharmaceutical companies, it raises business, legal, liability and intellectual property issues that are so thorny no one has wanted to touch them.

Recognizing the seriousness of the problem, the FDA last December released a draft guidance document that provides recommendations for addressing certain scientific and regulatory issues that arise during co-development of two or more experimental drugs. The business world, however, has yet to figure out how to move quickly and successfully to co-develop drugs that are owned by different companies. Solving that problem is the goal of this roundtable.

The Ohio State University Comprehensive Cancer Center – James Cancer Hospital and Solove Research Institute and Friends of Cancer Research have organized this Cancer Drug Development Roundtable to address the industry hurdles and make co-development of two or more experimental drugs a reality. The recommendations will be announced later this year.

There are tremendous rewards in store if we can overcome these obstacles. I applaud the FDA for issuing its Guidance Document and setting up the scientific framework to co-develop two investigational drugs. If we can now solve the legal and business side of the problem, we can achieve our ultimate goal—to speed life-saving treatments to our patients and create a cancer-free world.

Tomorrow’s Roundtable brings together leaders in cancer research, the pharmaceutical industry, the FDA and cancer advocacy. We will begin with an open session that will enable researchers, advocates, patients and media to learn more about the issue and ask questions of a panel. That will be followed by a closed working session lasting the remainder of the day. The open-session panel participants include:

  • Michael Caligiuri, M.D. – Director of The Ohio State Comprehensive Cancer Center and CEO of the James Cancer Hospital and Solove Research Institute
  • Jim Doroshow, M.D. – Director of the Division of Cancer Treatment and Diagnosis at the National Cancer Institute
  • Eric Rubin, M.D. – Vice President, Oncology Clinical Research, Merck
  • Ellen Sigal, Ph.D. – Chair and Founder, Friends of Cancer Research
  • Janet Woodcock, M.D. – Director, Center for Drug Evaluation and Research, FDA

For more about co-development of experimental agents, we recommend the following:
“Development of Rational Drug Combinations with Investigational Targeted Agents” Friends of Cancer Research document

“When it takes two to tango, FDA suggests a new regulatory dance” article from Nature, March 2011, summarizes the early work on this topic

“Utilizing targeted cancer therapeutic agents in combination: novel approaches and urgent requirements” article from Nature Reviews, Nov. 2010

→ 4 Comments

Posted in Ethics, Healthcare Reform, Leadership, Relationships, Research

Principles of Accountable Care

Posted on December 7, 2010 by | 1 Comment

By Mark Notestine:
Last week I attended a medical center leadership retreat and listened to Dr. James L. Field , general manager of the Advisory Board’s health care research department talk about “Care Coordination in the Era of Accountable Care.” In building the framework for his discussion he introduced Mark McClellan’s three defining principles for accountable organizations as:
 
1.)    Provider-led organizations with a strong base of primary care that are collectively accountable for quality and total per capita costs across the full continuum of care for a population of patients.
2.)    Payments linked to quality improvement that also reduce overall costs.
3.)  Reliable and progressively more sophisticated performance measurement, to support improvement and provide confidence that savings are achieved through improvements in care.
 

Do you agree with the premise that these principles are essential?  Are there other core principles?
Would you share “best in class” examples of organizations employing these (and potentially other) principles?

→ 1 Comment

Posted in Accountable Care Organization, Behavior, Communication

Tagged , , , , ,

A New Kind of Leadership: Inspired by the AMC

Posted on November 7, 2010 by | 3 Comments

In the AAMC Leadership Plenary, Debra Powell, Darell Kirch and Malcolm Gladwell challenged the AMC to a new kind of leadership.

Dr. Powell asked that we reflect on what Flexner would think  and what Osler would do.  Intergration was a key theme — integrating studens into interprofessional teams for education and care and intergrating UGME, GME and CME in a competency based curriculum.

Darrell Kirch reminded us that we are facing challenging times and that we cannot be passive observers.  He laid out a five point action agenda:

  1. Initiate a new approach to leadership development.
  2. Consider resources in a new way.
  3. Create the continuum of medical education in a unified, competency based way.
  4. Extend research beyond “bench to bedside” to directly serve the community.
  5. “Heal thyself” by developing systems that encourage wellness and lower healthcare costs among physicians.

Malcolm Gladwell, reminded us about the nuances of  ”expert failure” and encouraged us to lead with humility.

In these challenging times, we cannot merely stay the course — we must  inspire and lead.

What is the first step for you in this new leadership paradigm?



→ 3 Comments

Posted in Community Partnership, Education, Leadership, Relationships

Ohioans in the Forefront of Patient Centered Medical Home PCMH Movement

Posted on November 1, 2010 by | Leave a comment

By: Sarah Sams, MD, FAAFP 
President of the Ohio Academy of Family Physicians
OSU College of Medicine, Class of 1991

Medical education in Ohio is at the forefront of the Patient Centered Medical Home (PCMH) movement.  House Bill 198 passed the Ohio General Assembly in spring 2010 and established the PCMH education pilot project to select 40 physician practices to train medical students and residents in the PCMH care delivery model.

Ohio Academy of Family Physicians (OAFP) supported the bill because primary care physicians are integral to the success of a PCMH.  The OAFP believes in the fundamental principles of the PCMH including encouraging coordinated care delivery which focuses on wellness and prevention, as well as whole person care.

PCMH initiatives are expanding in Ohio.  There are four new initiatives being developed in conjunction with University of Toledo, Wright State, NEOUCOM and Ohio University.  Existing initiatives are also expanding: 

  • Access Health Columbus helps central Ohio primary care practices through process of NCQA certification and providing learning collaboratives for practices that are already certified or in the process of becoming certified. 
  • Better Health Greater Cleveland is working  with federally qualified health centers and building collaboration among Cleveland-based health systems. 
  • CareSource in Dayton is a Medicaid managed care health plan while Aligning Forces for Quality in Cincinnati was funded through Robert Wood Johnson Foundation.

How do you see medical education changing in light of  the PCMH movement?

→ Leave a comment

Posted in Communication, Community Partnership, Education, Healthcare Reform

Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

What’s So Great about the PCMH Model of Care?

Posted on October 26, 2010 by | 3 Comments

By: Mary Jo Welker, MD
Chair and Professor, Department of Family Medicine
The Ohio State University College of Medicine
and
Karen Towslee Keenan, MD
Director, Department of Family Medicine
The Ohio State University College of Medicine

The Patient Centered Medical Home (PCMH)  is a new model of care (originally described by the American Academy of Pediatrics in 1967) that is at the forefront of primary care redesign. The major principles of the PCMH model include:
  1. Each patient should have a personal physician
  2. Physicians direct and lead the medical practice
  3. Whole person integrated care
  4. Enhanced access to care (including same day)
  5. Payment reform to support the framework needed to provide PCMH care.

Clear evidence exists which has shown that the PCMH model of care improves outcomes, reduces cost, and improves patient and physician satisfaction. As such, the Department of Family Medicine, with the backing and support of leadership at the Ohio State University Medical Center, has embarked on practice transformation to create PCMH’s across the Ohio State University Ambulatory Network.  

CarePoint Gahanna is the first ambulatory location to embark on this endeavor. The family medicine physicians at this location have been preparing for National Committee for Quality Assurance (NCQA) certification as a level 3 PCMH for the past three months with a target of achieving certification by January 2011.

The family physicians at CarePoint Gahanna have committed to increasing access by implementing a same day “sick call” plan to decrease urgent care and emergency room utilization. Population health for improving chronic disease will be improved by leveraging the capabilities of the Electronic Health Record to provide family physicians the ability to better coordinate and facilitate care. Inter-Departmental collaboration has lead to pharmacy, nutritional, and social work services being established within the family practice itself, along with other speciality care services offered at CarePoint Gahanna. This allows the family practice physicians at CarePoint Gahanna to provide patients a PCMH within a neighborhood of a medical community. The goal is to provide patients the care they need, when they need it, and all at one location.

What is your opinion of the PCMH model of health care?

→ 3 Comments

Posted in Community Partnership, Education, Healthcare Reform, Leadership

Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , ,