The one cloud on a sunny day: Using emotional intelligence to manage emotions from negative written feedback.

Physician trainees receive anonymous written feedback about their clinical performance, which can be challenging to interpret. Negative written feedback can evoke a strong emotional response. An educational gap exists on how to handle receiving negative written feedback and the accompanying emotions. Teaching trainees the tenets of emotional intelligence, including emotional self-awareness and self-management, could be an avenue to improve the experience of receiving feedback. Face-to-face coaching may also help improve the emotional experience of receiving written feedback.

Predispose, precipitate, perpetuate, and protect: how diet and the gut influence mental health in emerging adulthood.

Medicine often employs the 4Ps of predisposing, precipitating, perpetuating, and protective factors to identify salient influences on illness states, and to help guide patient care. Mental illness is a significant cause of morbidity and mortality worldwide. Mental health is a complex combination of biological, psychological, environmental, and social factors. There is growing interest in the gut-brain-microbiome (GBM) axis and its impact on mental health. We use the medical model of the 4Ps to explore factors involving the connection between nutrition and the GBM axis and their associated risks with mental health problems in emerging adults (EAs), a life stage when mental illness onset is the most common. We review the impact of current dietary trends on the GBM and on mental health, and the role that gut microbiome-based interventions can have in modulating the GBM axis of EAs. We discuss the implications of gut health on the GBM and areas for clinical intervention.

Improving Anesthesia Start Time Documentation Through a Departmental Education Initiative at Yale New Haven Hospital, New Haven, United States.

Background Reimbursement for anesthetic services in the United States utilizes a formula that incorporates procedural and patient factors with total anesthesia time. According to the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services and the American Society of Anesthesiologists, the period of billable time starts when the anesthesia practitioner assumes care of the patient and may include transport to the operating room from the preoperative holding area. In this report on a quality improvement effort, we implemented a departmental education initiative aimed at improving the accuracy of anesthesia start-time documentation. Methods Utilizing de-identified, internal data on surgical procedures at Yale New Haven Hospital (YNHH), New Haven, United States, the difference between documented anesthesia start and patient in-room time was determined for all cases. Those with a difference between 0-1 minute were assumed "likely underbilled," and the total revenue lost for these cases was estimated using a weighted average of institutional reimbursement per unit of time. A monthly, department-wide educational email was then introduced to inform practitioners about the guidelines around start-time documentation, and the percentage of "likely underbilled" cases and lost revenue estimates trended over a one-year period. Results Baseline data in December 2020 showed that of the 6,877 total surgical cases requiring anesthesia at YNHH, 55.1% (N=3,790) had an anesthesia start to in-room time of 0-1 minute, which were considered "likely underbilled." The average start-to-in-room time for properly recorded cases (44.9%, N=3,087) was 4.42 minutes. The baseline revenue lost in December 2020 for underbilled cases was estimated at $52,302. Over the one-year quality improvement initiative, the proportion of underbilled cases showed a downward trend, decreasing to 29.2% of total cases by November 2021. The estimate of revenue lost due to underbilling also showed a downward trend, decreasing to $29,300 in November 2021. Conclusion This quality improvement study demonstrated that a relatively simple, department-wide educational email sent monthly correlated with an improvement in anesthesia start-time documentation accuracy and a reduction in estimated revenue lost to underbilling over a one-year period.

Patient engagement works: Patient and researcher experiences of patient partnership in primary healthcare research.

Context: Health researchers are increasingly engaging patients and their families as partners in the research process, from inception to knowledge translation. The trend toward 'patient-oriented' research is encouraged by a growing view that studies which integrate the patient perspective will make better use of resources to produce more relevant evidence that can be more easily translated to clinical settings. While there is an emerging literature on best practices, challenges, and learnings related to patient engagement (PE), few studies consider the experiences of patient partners (PP) and researchers in the same project. This presentation will present PP and researcher experiences of PE, highlighting important similarities and differences and proposing recommendations. Objectives: To characterize PE experience from the perspective of researchers and PP working together on the same research program, PriCARE; to identify successes and challenges; to ascertain contributions of PE in health research. Study Design: Qualitative. Setting or Dataset: This study was conducted within the larger 5-province PriCARE study examining a nurse-led case management intervention for primary care patients with complex needs. Population studied: 22 members of the study team (7 PP, 8 coordinators, 2 co-investigators, 5 principal investigators). Methods: Data collection: In-depth interviews using guides co-created by researchers and PP covering topics such as PE-related training and knowledge, and reflections on PE processes and impact. Research assistants external to the PriCARE study conducted interviews, transcribed researcher interviews, and generated a summary of PP interviews. Analysis: Data were analyzed thematically using a coding framework that was co-developed with PP. Outcome Measures: Researcher and patient experiences of PE, PP contributions to health research. Results: All team members need PE training at the beginning of and throughout the research process. Evolving trust and flexibility helped team members to navigate different experiences and priorities. PP make integral contributions to study and instrument design, data analysis, and knowledge translation. Clear expectations about the degree and nature of PE and team members' roles are critical. Conclusions: Meaningful PE requires patient-researcher partnership and clear expectation setting at the outset and throughout the research process, and ongoing flexibility to adapt.