Currently at UCSF medicine patients are distributed to different floors and wings of the hospital with no consideration given to which primary team will be managing the patients.  This results in providers moving from one floor to another and back and forth between Moffitt, Long, and the ICUs on rounds and later in the day when providing patient care activities.  In many other teritiary care institutions across the United States, medical teams have a designated wing or floor where their admissions are automatically placed.  Not only does this streamline rounds, it also allows for providers

At SFGH it is common for a patient to be assigned several diffierent medical records and there is minimal efficiency with which information is merged into one record or that it is made clear a patient may have additional infomation (including testing and imaging results) under another medical record number.  This leads to expensive tests, and images potentially being repeated since providers are not aware the results are listed under a different medical record.  There are also clearly possible ramifications for patient safety as well.

I work with the Cancer Genetics group here at UCSF. I triage, on my own, up to 300 unscheduled referrals at a time which is a large amount. I handle the workqueue alone and feel that we should address the way that referrals are sent to allow patient coordinators to sort referrals and create folders for organization.

Issue: To evaluate for possible intraabdominal fluid infection in pts with ascites, providers typically will send cell ct/diff and cultures (innoculated in aerobic/anaerobic blood culture bottles).  However, a positive culture representing true infection in the absence of the cell count revealing >250 PMNs is quite rare (often representing inadvertent contamination).  As the cell count is typically processed within a few hours, a provider will know the whether a pt meets cell count criteria for bacterial peritonitis: if it has <250 PMNs, this rules out infection in th