Implementation and Evaluation of Educational Workshops to Increase Primary Care Provider and Medical Student Comfort in Psychiatric Care.

OBJECTIVE: Mental health treatment is often initiated in primary care settings, but many primary care providers (PCPs), residents, and medical students report discomfort in managing psychiatric conditions. This study evaluated the effect of an educational workshop that featured an evidence-based psychopharmacology clinical decision support tool (CDST) on trainee confidence and willingness to treat psychiatric conditions. METHODS: Participants completed pre- and post-workshop surveys. Nine months after the workshop, a subset of trainees participated in a focus group. RESULTS: Of the participants, 62.5% of the obstetrics-gynecology (OB-GYN) resident physicians (10/16) and 100% of the medical students (18/18) completed both pre- and post-surveys. Following the workshop, OB-GYN resident physicians reported significantly improved confidence in treating psychiatric disorders (p < 0.001), sense of having psychiatric support tools (p < 0.001), and knowledge of treating psychiatric disorders (p = 0.021). Medical students reported significantly improved confidence in treating psychiatric disorders (p < 0.001), willingness to devise treatment plans for psychiatric disorders (p = 0.024), sense of having psychiatric support tools (p < 0.001), knowledge of treating psychiatric disorders (p < 0.001), and comfort in presenting a psychiatric treatment plan to an attending (p = 0.003). Most focus group participants (93.75%; 15/16) reported that they continued to use the CDST, and it increased their confidence in formulating psychiatric treatment plans. CONCLUSIONS: These findings suggest that educational workshops that introduce high-quality psychopharmacology CDSTs may be an effective method for improving provider comfort in treating psychiatric disorders.

Beyond prevention: Unveiling the benefits of triple vaccination on COVID-19 severity and resource utilization in solid organ transplant recipients.

OBJECTIVE: Despite the widespread reduction in COVID-19-related morbidity and mortality attributed to vaccination in the general population, vaccine efficacy in solid organ transplant recipients (SOTR) remains under-characterized. This study aimed to investigate clinically relevant outcomes on double and triple-vaccinated versus unvaccinated SOTR with COVID-19. STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING: A retrospective propensity score-matched cohort study was performed utilizing data from the US Collaborative Network Database within TriNetX (n = 117,905,631). We recruited vaccinated and unvaccinated (matched controls) SOTR with COVID-19 over two time periods to control for vaccine availability: December 2020 to October 2022 (bi-dose, double-dose vaccine effectiveness) and December 2020 to April 2023 (tri-dose, triple-dose vaccine effectiveness). A total of 42 factors associated with COVID-19 disease severity were controlled for including age, obesity, diabetes, and hypertension. We monitored 30-day outcomes including acute respiratory failure, intubation, and death following a diagnosis of COVID-19. RESULTS: Subjects were categorized into two cohorts based on the two time periods: bi-dose cohort (vaccinated, n = 462; unvaccinated, n = 20,998); tri-dose cohort (vaccinated, n = 517; unvaccinated, n = 23,061).Compared to unvaccinated SOTR, 30-day mortality was significantly lower for vaccinated subjects in both cohorts: tri-dose (2.0% vs 7.5%, HR = 0.22 [95% CI: 0.11, 0.46]); bi-dose (3.7% vs 8.2%, HR = 0.43 [95% CI: 0.24, 0.76]). Hospital admission rates were similar between bi-dose vaccinated and unvaccinated subjects (33.1% vs 28.6%, HR = 1.2 [95% CI: 0.95, 1.52]). In contrast, tri-dose vaccinated subjects had a significantly lower likelihood of hospital admission (29.4% vs 36.6%, HR = 0.74 [95% CI: 0.6, 0.91]). Intubation rates were significantly lower for triple-vaccinated- (2.3% vs 5.2%, p < 0.05), but not double-vaccinated subjects (3.0% vs 5.2%, p > 0.05). CONCLUSION: In solid organ transplant recipients with COVID-19, triple vaccination, but not double vaccination, against SARS-CoV-2 was associated with significantly less hospital resource utilization, decreased disease severity, and fewer short-term complications. These real-world data from extensively matched controls support the protective effects of COVID-19 vaccination with boosters in this vulnerable population.