Prior to the COVID-19 pandemic, numerous studies had described gaps in hospital preparedness for natural and man-made disasters and public health emergencies. These gaps were especially evident during the COVID-19 pandemic and recent catastrophes, such as hurricanes, earthquakes, wildfires, and cyberattacks, highlighting the lack of organizational preparedness and response. This study aims to understand the training that healthcare executives should receive in order to prepare for future disasters and health emergencies.

African Americans lack participation in clinical trials, and therefore, are underrepresented in medical initiatives that can provide life-saving treatment. This research examines the attitudes, beliefs, and perceptions of African Americans toward participation in clinical trials.

Healthcare administrators have historically accepted patient-level information asymmetry as an unavoidable complication of healthcare delivery, addressing it primarily through policy intervention and improved educational materials. This essay presents an innovative strategy leveraging artificial intelligence (AI) to bridge this communication gap. Beginning with an analysis of asymmetry's impact on healthcare delivery, the discussion examines how emerging AI capabilities could transform patient education and provider communication. The growing adoption of telehealth services demonstrates an increasingly tech-savvy patient population receptive to digital healthcare solutions. This essay also addresses implementation concerns, including technical infrastructure requirements, and provides recommendations for overcoming these challenges. Finally, a cost-benefit analysis examines initial investment requirements and projected organizational savings, offering healthcare administrators a framework for evaluating a technological solution to persistent information asymmetry in healthcare.

Solutions to address healthcare worker well-being since the COVID-19 pandemic have been tested with varying acceptance and effectiveness. Little is known about how the values underpinning medical professionalism might be leveraged to support healthcare workers during a public health emergency. We sought to characterize the experiences of frontline physicians and nurses during the pandemic through the lens of medical professionalism and identify potential levers that could be activated in future emergencies to better protect the healthcare workforce.

Healthcare professionals (HCPs) working long shifts are prone to physical, emotional, and psychological stress leading to harmful effects on their mental health, an issue compounded by the COVID-19 pandemic. Novel efforts such as virtual reality (VR)-based immersion have been explored to mitigate this problem in HCPs. However, the studies vary in their clinical settings, scales used for measuring outcomes related to mental health, sample size, and other relevant parameters. We conducted a systematic review (SR) to collate all available evidence on the feasibility and efficacy of VR-based interventions for reducing stress, burnout, fatigue, and anxiety in HCPs.

The role of artificial intelligence (AI) continues to grow in healthcare. It is important to gain a deeper understanding of how patients and care providers perceive its use in patient care and whether they are satisfied with the AI experience. This study performed a scoping review of the published research on patient and physician satisfaction with AI used in healthcare delivery.

The purpose of the research is to explore, through the lens of organizational performance and staff satisfaction, the characteristics of administrative leaders working as dyad partners with physician leaders.

Despite the well-documented mental health impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on healthcare workers (HCWs), the literature holds limited research on their use of mental healthcare. This study assessed the prevalence and correlates of mental healthcare utilization among US HCWs, which can be used as baseline measurements to guide the evaluation of interventions and guide the development of those interventions.

In 2024, the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) introduced equity metrics for healthcare systems to document social determinants of health (SDOH). Payment determinations were also linked to readmission performance measures. Readmission prevention programs for vulnerable patients, defined by CMS as dually eligible (DE) for Medicare and Medicaid, racial/ethnic minorities, and those with disabling conditions, have the potential to reduce readmission disparities. Our goal was to develop a systematic and pragmatic approach to collect, analyze, and utilize SDOH and insurance status to assign patients to an intensified protocol for reducing readmission disparities after coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG).

Maternal mortality rates in the United States are far exceeding those of other developed nations. This healthcare crisis is disproportionately affecting marginalized populations, including Black women and women living in rural communities. The MEND framework-developed through extensive research and informed by real-world case studies-offers a comprehensive and equity-driven solution to address existing disparities and improve maternal health outcomes nationwide. This framework emphasizes four objectives (or pillars), named after the first letter of each pillar: (1) Maternal care integration, (2) Equity-driven policies, (3) Navigated support, and (4) Driving collaboration. Each pillar presents actionable strategies to reduce maternal mortality and morbidity in the United States. The MEND framework offers a comprehensive, scalable roadmap for systemic change to help ensure equitable, high-quality care for all mothers.

In today's healthcare ecosystem, quality measures are theorized to inform the spectrum of healthcare delivery and evaluation, including specific functional areas such as quality improvement, regulation, accreditation, and value-based payment. Yet, the ways in which expectations about quality-real or perceived-shape and inform transactional relationships between healthcare stakeholders have not been well elucidated. We elicited the perspectives of healthcare decision-makers to understand their experiences with quality and how they may influence transactions and strategic alliances.

Employee well-being surveys are essential tools used by healthcare leaders to assess workforce functioning, such as burnout, team dynamics, and perceptions of support, but surveys frequently have low response rates, which may skew results. Research on nonresponse bias is limited because of the difficulty in sourcing data on outcomes of interest from nonrespondents. This study aimed to examine whether nonrespondents and respondents differed on key outcomes of interest to healthcare leaders to understand whether results of an employee well-being survey were valid. Specifically, we examined differences between respondents and nonrespondents in terms of demographics, turnover over one-year postsurvey, and employee functioning such as productivity and work outside of regular work hours. By using objective data as a proxy for physician functioning, our innovative approach allowed us to study nonresponse bias without relying on a follow-up survey of nonrespondents. The goal was to inform leaders about potential biases that impact survey conclusions and, therefore, better interpret the survey results in decision-making.