Generalists as Clinical Physiologists: Bringing Science Back to the Bedside.

BACKGROUND: Few generalists engage in basic science research or feel comfortable teaching physiology at the bedside. This may reflect a lack of understanding or confidence teaching physiologic principles. AIM: To inspire general internists to relearn and teach physiology in clinical practice. SETTING: An active biomedical research laboratory. PARTICIPANTS: We educated 67 faculty participants (4 primary care, 59 hospitalists, and 4 other specialties) from 24 medical centers, representing 17 states. PROGRAM DESCRIPTION: The 5-day course was structured around re-learning basic physiology principles and developing teaching skills. Participants engaged in hands-on experiments through 4 modules using aquatic species, each paired with a physiology content primer. Participants also developed teaching scripts based on their experiments. PROGRAM EVALUATION: Post-course surveys revealed that 97% felt confident teaching physiology at the bedside, 100% felt the course enhanced their understanding of the mechanisms of disease, and there was a significant improvement in self-reported teaching ability. DISCUSSION: An immersive, hands-on faculty development course that integrated physiology with clinical decision-making increased participants' comfort level and self-rated ability to teach and incorporate physiology in their clinical work. We believe faculty development is one potential solution to the growing chasm between clinicians and scientists in general medicine.

Older Adult and Primary Care Practitioner Perspectives on Using, Prescribing, and Deprescribing Opioids for Chronic Pain.

Importance: Guidelines recommend deprescribing opioids in older adults due to risk of adverse effects, yet little is known about patient-clinician opioid deprescribing conversations. Objective: To understand the experiences of older adults and primary care practitioners (PCPs) with using opioids for chronic pain and discussing opioid deprescribing. Design, Setting, and Participants: This qualitative study conducted semistructured individual qualitative interviews with 18 PCPs and 29 adults 65 years or older prescribed opioids between September 15, 2022, and April 26, 2023, at a Boston-based academic medical center. The PCPs were asked about their experiences prescribing and deprescribing opioids to older adults. Patients were asked about their experiences using and discussing opioid medications with PCPs. Main Outcome and Measures: Shared and conflicting themes between patients and PCPs regarding perceptions of opioid prescribing and barriers to deprescribing. Results: In total, 18 PCPs (12 [67%] younger that 50 years; 10 [56%] female; and 14 [78%] based at an academic practice) and 29 patients (mean [SD] age, 72 [5] years; 19 [66%] female) participated. Participants conveyed that conversations between PCPs and patients on opioid use for chronic pain were typically challenging and that conversations regarding opioid risks and deprescribing were uncommon. Three common themes related to experiences with opioids for chronic pain emerged in both patient and PCP interviews: opioids were used as a last resort, opioids were used to improve function and quality of life, and trust was vital in a clinician-patient relationship. Patients and PCPs expressed conflicting views on risks of opioids, with patients focusing on addiction and PCPs focusing on adverse drug events. Both groups felt deprescribing conversations were often unsuccessful but had conflicting views on barriers to successful conversations. Patients felt deprescribing was often unnecessary unless an adverse event occurred, and many patients had prior negative experiences tapering. The PCPs described gaps in knowledge on how to taper, a lack of clinical access to monitor patients during tapering, and concerns about patient resistance. Conclusions and Relevance: In this qualitative study, PCPs and older adults receiving long-term opioid therapy viewed the use of opioids as a beneficial last resort for treating chronic pain but expressed dissonant views on the risks associated with opioids, which made deprescribing conversations challenging. Interventions, such as conversation aids, are needed to support collaborative discussion about deprescribing opioids.

Management of opioid use disorder and associated conditions among hospitalized adults: A Consensus Statement from the Society of Hospital Medicine.

Hospital-based clinicians frequently care for patients with opioid withdrawal or opioid use disorder (OUD) and are well-positioned to identify and initiate treatment for these patients. With rising numbers of hospitalizations related to opioid use and opioid-related overdose, the Society of Hospital Medicine convened a working group to develop a Consensus Statement on the management of OUD and associated conditions among hospitalized adults. The guidance statement is intended for clinicians practicing medicine in the inpatient setting (e.g., hospitalists, primary care physicians, family physicians, advanced practice nurses, and physician assistants) and is intended to apply to hospitalized adults at risk for, or diagnosed with, OUD. To develop the Consensus Statement, the working group conducted a systematic review of relevant guidelines and composed a draft statement based on extracted recommendations. Next, the working group obtained feedback on the draft statement from external experts in addiction medicine, SHM members, professional societies, harm reduction organizations and advocacy groups, and peer reviewers. The iterative development process resulted in a final Consensus Statement consisting of 18 recommendations covering the following topics: (1) identification and treatment of OUD and opioid withdrawal, (2) perioperative and acute pain management in patients with OUD, and (3) methods to optimize care transitions at hospital discharge for patients with OUD. Most recommendations in the Consensus Statement were derived from guidelines based on observational studies and expert consensus. Due to the lack of rigorous evidence supporting key aspects of OUD-related care, the working group identified important issues necessitating future research and exploration.

Management of opioid use disorder, opioid withdrawal, and opioid overdose prevention in hospitalized adults: A systematic review of existing guidelines.

BACKGROUND: Hospitalizations related to the consequences of opioid use are rising. National guidelines directing in-hospital opioid use disorder (OUD) management do not exist. OUD treatment guidelines intended for other treatment settings could inform in-hospital OUD management. OBJECTIVE: Evaluate the quality and content of existing guidelines for OUD treatment and management. DATA SOURCES: OVID MEDLINE, PubMed, Ovid PsychINFO, EBSCOhost CINHAL, ERCI Guidelines Trust, websites of relevant societies and advocacy organizations, and selected international search engines. STUDY SELECTION: Guidelines published between January 2010 to June 2020 addressing OUD treatment, opioid withdrawal management, opioid overdose prevention, and care transitions among adults. DATA EXTRACTION: We assessed quality using the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation (AGREE) II instrument. DATA SYNTHESIS: Nineteen guidelines met the selection criteria. Most recommendations were based on observational studies or expert consensus. Guidelines recommended the use of nonstigmatizing language among patients with OUD; to assess patients with unhealthy opioid use for OUD using the Diagnostic Statistical Manual of Diseases-5th Edition criteria; use of methadone or buprenorphine to treat OUD and opioid withdrawal; use of multimodal, nonopioid therapy, and when needed, short-acting opioid analgesics in addition to buprenorphine or methadone, for acute pain management; ensuring linkage to ongoing methadone or buprenorphine treatment; referring patients to psychosocial treatment; and ensuring access to naloxone for opioid overdose reversal. CONCLUSIONS: Included guidelines were informed by studies with various levels of rigor and quality. Future research should systematically study buprenorphine and methadone initiation and titration among people using fentanyl and people with pain, especially during hospitalization.

Reducing Hospitalizations and Emergency Department Visits in Patients With Venous Thromboembolism Using a Multicomponent Care Transition Intervention.

Preventing utilization of hospital and emergency department after diagnosis of venous thromboembolism is a complex problem. The objective of this study is to assess the impact of a care transition intervention on hospitalizations and emergency department visits after venous thromboembolism. We randomized adults diagnosed with a new episode of venous thromboembolism to usual care or a multicomponent intervention that included a home pharmacist visit in the week after randomization (typically occurring at time of discharge), illustrated medication instructions distributed during home visit, and a follow-up phone call with an anticoagulation expert scheduled for 8 to 30 days from time of randomization. Through physician chart review of the 90 days following randomization, we measured the incidence rate of hospital and emergency department visits for each group and their ratio. We also determined which visits were related to recurrent venous thromboembolism, bleeding, or anticoagulation and which where preventable. We enrolled 77 intervention and 85 control patients. The incidence rate was 4.50 versus 6.01 visits per 1000 patient days in the intervention versus control group (incidence rate ratio = 0.71; 95% confidence interval = 0.40-1.27). Most visits in the control group were not related to venous thromboembolism or bleeding (21%) and of those that were, most were not preventable (25%). The adjusted incidence rate ratio for the intervention was 1.05 (95% confidence interval = 0.57-1.91). Our patients had a significant number of hospital and emergency department visits after diagnosis. Most visits were not related to recurrent venous thromboembolism or bleeding and of those that were, most were not preventable. Our multicomponent intervention did not decrease hospitalizations and emergency department visits.

Improving the Safety of Opioid Use for Acute Noncancer Pain in Hospitalized Adults: A Consensus Statement From the Society of Hospital Medicine.

Hospital-based clinicians frequently treat acute, noncancer pain. Although opioids may be beneficial in this setting, the benefits must be balanced with the risks of adverse events, including inadvertent overdose and prolonged opioid use, physical dependence, or development of opioid use disorder. In an era of epidemic opioid use and related harms, the Society of Hospital Medicine (SHM) convened a working group to develop a consensus statement on opioid use for adults hospitalized with acute, noncancer pain, outside of the palliative, end-of-life, and intensive care settings. The guidance is intended for clinicians practicing medicine in the inpatient setting (eg, hospitalists, primary care physicians, family physicians, nurse practitioners, and physician assistants). To develop the Consensus Statement, the working group conducted a systematic review of relevant guidelines, composed a draft Statement based on extracted recommendations, and obtained feedback from external experts in hospital-based opioid prescribing, SHM members, the SHM Patient-Family Advisory Council, other professional societies, and peer-reviewers. The iterative development process resulted in a final Consensus Statement consisting of 16 recommendations covering 1) whether to use opioids in the hospital, 2) how to improve the safety of opioid use during hospitalization, and 3) how to improve the safety of opioid prescribing at hospital discharge. As most guideline recommendations from which the Consensus Statement was derived were based on expert opinion alone, the working group identified key issues for future research to support evidence-based practice.

The Evaluation of Medical Inpatients Who Are Admitted on Long-term Opioid Therapy for Chronic Pain.

Individuals who are on long-term opioid therapy (LTOT) for chronic noncancer pain are frequently admitted to the hospital with acute pain, exacerbations of chronic pain, or comorbidities. Consequently, hospitalists find themselves faced with complex treatment decisions in the context of uncertainty about the effectiveness of LTOT as well as concerns about risks of overdose, opioid use disorders, and adverse events. Our multidisciplinary team sought to synthesize guideline recommendations and primary literature relevant to assessing medical inpatients on LTOT, with the objective of assisting practitioners in balancing effective pain treatment and opioid risk reduction. We identified no primary studies or guidelines specific to assessing medical inpatients on LTOT. Recommendations from outpatient guidelines on LTOT and guidelines on pain management in acute-care settings include the following: evaluate both pain and functional status, differentiate acute from chronic pain, investigate the preadmission course of opioid therapy, obtain a psychosocial history, screen for mental health conditions, screen for substance use disorders, check state prescription drug monitoring databases, order urine drug immunoassays, detect use of sedative-hypnotics, and identify medical conditions associated with increased risk of overdose and adverse events. Although approaches to assessing medical inpatients on LTOT can be extrapolated from related guidelines, observational studies, and small studies in surgical populations, more work is needed to address these critical topics for inpatients on LTOT.