Attention: Restrictions on use of AUA, AUAER, and UCF content in third party applications, including artificial intelligence technologies, such as large language models and generative AI.
You are prohibited from using or uploading content you accessed through this website into external applications, bots, software, or websites, including those using artificial intelligence technologies and infrastructure, including deep learning, machine learning and large language models and generative AI.

UPJ INSIGHT The M-PROVE Model: Redesigning the Urological Morbidity and Mortality Conference

By: Max Bowman, MD, University of California San Francisco; Heiko Yang, MD, PhD, University of California San Francisco; Justin Ahn, MD, University of California San Francisco; Peter R. Carroll, MD, MPH, University of California San Francisco; Lindsay A. Hampson, MD, MAS, University of California San Francisco | Posted on: 30 Aug 2023

Bowman M, Yang H, Ahn J, Carroll PR, Hampson LA. A novel standardized morbidity and mortality process to promote discourse, improve education, and facilitate practice change: the M-PROVE model. Urol Pract. 2023;10(4):390-398.

Study Need and Importance

Ideally, the morbidity and mortality conference (MMC) is free of judgment and concisely focused on education and practice improvement. However, this is often not the case. These aims can be achieved by standardizing the process with emphasis on altering practice, promoting education, and fostering positive attendee perceptions. We redesigned our MMC process by forming a committee to select cases and follow up improvement efforts, creating an online tool for reporting events in real time, establishing faculty facilitators, and standardizing case presentations to focus on systems and quality improvement. This novel approach is known as the Morbidity and Mortality Process Redesign to Optimize Value and Education (M-PROVE) model (see Figure).

image
Figure. Flowchart of the Morbidity and Mortality Process Redesign to Optimize Value and Education model.

What We Found

Overall attendee perceptions of the MMC significantly improved after implementation of the new model. This was true regarding the perceived quality of discussion, relevance to practice, ability to identify systems and practice change opportunities, allowance of multiple perspectives, openness to all levels of participant, educational value, and overall satisfaction. Although not statistically significant, there was also an increase in the perception that MMC was nonthreatening. These results were true regardless of gender or seniority of the attendees.

Limitations

This study was of a single urology department consisting of 49 faculty and trainee members. It was conducted over the course of 3 months, so metrics were limited to attendee perception before and after the intervention. More impactful measures, such as reduction in patient harm, will require a longitudinal study and are a direction for future research.

Interpretation for Patient Care

An iterative process of appraisal and practice improvement is vital to constantly improve and adapt the care we deliver to patients. Standardized MMC processes lead to meaningful improvements in attendee perception of quality and value of the conference, and resultant quality improvement initiatives will ultimately reduce harm to patients.

advertisement

advertisement