An Exploration of Productivity Measurement for Pediatric Inpatient Consultation-Liaison Psychology
Presenter Status
Resident/Psychology Intern
Abstract Type
Clinical Research
Primary Mentor or Principal Investigator
Casey Lawless, Ph.D.
Presentation Type
Poster
Start Date
20-5-2026 11:00 AM
End Date
20-5-2026 12:00 PM
Abstract Text
Background: There is an increasing need for accurate and efficient methods for measuring clinical productivity for psychologists in academic medical centers. Inpatient consultation-liaison (C/L) psychologists experience specific challenges with measuring productivity due to the scope of their job responsibilities and competing demands across patient care, teaching, mentorship/supervision, research, quality improvement, advocacy, and staff education and support. Existing productivity measurement systems, initially developed for medical physicians, are largely reliant on metrics related to billing and reimbursement, providing a poor fit for the work of C/L psychologists. Amid a national mental health crisis, the need for C/L psychologists to demonstrate their productivity and value while considering an increased risk for burnout is paramount.
Objectives/Goal: The aim of this project was to 1) Review the current methods for clinical productivity measurement across psychology and other healthcare disciplines, 2) Outline the current limitations of historic and existing productivity measurement systems across fields, 3) Present relevant insights into productivity measurement from other healthcare disciplines, and 4) Highlight opportunities and future directions to improve productivity measurement for C/L psychologists.
Methods/Design: We reviewed the extant literature on productivity measurement for various subspecialties of psychology, including C/L psychology, and other related health disciplines. We synthesized and summarized current insights and areas for ongoing innovation, resulting in a manuscript and an accompanying figure to conceptualize a multifactorial model of productivity measurement in C/L psychology.
Results: A review of the current literature revealed several limitations of the traditional productivity measurement system for C/L psychologists. Multiple areas of innovation in productivity measurement were reviewed, including novel approaches for capturing clinical and non-clinical activities for psychologists across subspecialties (e.g., primary care, neuropsychology, psycho-oncology) and across healthcare professions (e.g., C/L psychiatry, hospital medicine, solid organ transplant, allied health therapies). Novel approaches included utilizing economic modeling, incorporating conversion factors for productivity calculation, including teaching and academic activities, and developing customized relative value units (cRVUs). Additional approaches suggest incorporating more nuanced variables including the complexity of patient presentations, early detection of concerns, patient-centered outcomes (e.g., functioning), and process outcomes (e.g., length of stay, rate of re-admission) in productivity measurement. Several recommendations for C/L psychology productivity measurement were elucidated from the literature for standardizing inter-institutional productivity measurement for C/L psychology.
Conclusions: More research is necessary to develop best practices for productivity measurement in C/L psychology. However, existing research provides several important insights for productivity measurement including the need for productivity metrics which are multi-factorial, value-based, specific to the unique demands of C/L psychology and calculated as part of a comprehensive model which accounts for all the responsibilities of C/L psychologists. Our synthesis of the literature informs improvements to productivity measurement in C/L psychology and may ultimately reduce cognitive load, improve job satisfaction, and enhance patient care.
An Exploration of Productivity Measurement for Pediatric Inpatient Consultation-Liaison Psychology
Background: There is an increasing need for accurate and efficient methods for measuring clinical productivity for psychologists in academic medical centers. Inpatient consultation-liaison (C/L) psychologists experience specific challenges with measuring productivity due to the scope of their job responsibilities and competing demands across patient care, teaching, mentorship/supervision, research, quality improvement, advocacy, and staff education and support. Existing productivity measurement systems, initially developed for medical physicians, are largely reliant on metrics related to billing and reimbursement, providing a poor fit for the work of C/L psychologists. Amid a national mental health crisis, the need for C/L psychologists to demonstrate their productivity and value while considering an increased risk for burnout is paramount.
Objectives/Goal: The aim of this project was to 1) Review the current methods for clinical productivity measurement across psychology and other healthcare disciplines, 2) Outline the current limitations of historic and existing productivity measurement systems across fields, 3) Present relevant insights into productivity measurement from other healthcare disciplines, and 4) Highlight opportunities and future directions to improve productivity measurement for C/L psychologists.
Methods/Design: We reviewed the extant literature on productivity measurement for various subspecialties of psychology, including C/L psychology, and other related health disciplines. We synthesized and summarized current insights and areas for ongoing innovation, resulting in a manuscript and an accompanying figure to conceptualize a multifactorial model of productivity measurement in C/L psychology.
Results: A review of the current literature revealed several limitations of the traditional productivity measurement system for C/L psychologists. Multiple areas of innovation in productivity measurement were reviewed, including novel approaches for capturing clinical and non-clinical activities for psychologists across subspecialties (e.g., primary care, neuropsychology, psycho-oncology) and across healthcare professions (e.g., C/L psychiatry, hospital medicine, solid organ transplant, allied health therapies). Novel approaches included utilizing economic modeling, incorporating conversion factors for productivity calculation, including teaching and academic activities, and developing customized relative value units (cRVUs). Additional approaches suggest incorporating more nuanced variables including the complexity of patient presentations, early detection of concerns, patient-centered outcomes (e.g., functioning), and process outcomes (e.g., length of stay, rate of re-admission) in productivity measurement. Several recommendations for C/L psychology productivity measurement were elucidated from the literature for standardizing inter-institutional productivity measurement for C/L psychology.
Conclusions: More research is necessary to develop best practices for productivity measurement in C/L psychology. However, existing research provides several important insights for productivity measurement including the need for productivity metrics which are multi-factorial, value-based, specific to the unique demands of C/L psychology and calculated as part of a comprehensive model which accounts for all the responsibilities of C/L psychologists. Our synthesis of the literature informs improvements to productivity measurement in C/L psychology and may ultimately reduce cognitive load, improve job satisfaction, and enhance patient care.
Comments
Full text not provided by primary author
Poster Board Number: 19