Should We Treat for Subclinical Hypothyroidism?: Grand Rounds Discussion From Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center.

In May 2015, the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force issued a guideline on screening for thyroid disease that included a systematic evidence review and an update of its 2004 recommendations. The review assessed the effect of treating screen-detected subclinical thyroid dysfunction on health outcomes. It found adequate evidence that treating subclinical hypothyroidism does not provide clinically meaningful improvements in blood pressure, body mass index, bone mineral density, lipid levels, or quality-of-life measures. The review also concluded that evidence was inadequate to determine whether screening for thyroid dysfunction reduced cardiovascular disease or related morbidity and mortality. In separate guidelines, the American Association of Clinical Endocrinologists and American Thyroid Association advocated aggressive case-finding and recommended screening persons with certain clinical conditions or characteristics rather than the general population. These societies argue that subclinical hypothyroidism adversely affects cardiovascular outcomes and thus merits case-finding. Here, 2 experts discuss their perspectives on whether treating subclinical hypothyroidism reduces morbidity and mortality, whether there are harms of treatment, and how they would balance the benefits and harms of treatment both in general and for a specific patient.

Leaders' Perspectives on Resources for Academic Success: Defining Clinical Effort, Academic Time, and Faculty Support.

INTRODUCTION: For academic promotion, clinical faculty are expected to excel in clinical care, teaching, and scholarship. Ensuring adequate protected time and resources to engage in scholarly work in the face of competing clinical responsibilities is critical. The authors examined academic leaders' perspectives across affiliate hospitals of a large medical school regarding the definition of clinical full-time effort and academic time, best practices to enable academic success, and barriers to faculty advancement. METHODS: Open-ended, semistructured, individual interviews were conducted with a purposive sample of clinical department and division heads. Interview data were examined to illuminate the range and commonalities in practices and to identify successful approaches. RESULTS: Interviews were conducted with 17 academic leaders across 6 affiliate hospitals. There was considerable variability in clinical full-time effort definition. "Academic time," more accurately characterized as "nonclinical time," was typically 1 day a week for nonshift specialties and mostly used for administrative work or completing clinical documentation. Certain departments were more explicit in designating and protecting time for academic pursuits; some had invested resources in intensive programs for academic advancement with built-in expectations for accountability. The impact of documentation burden was considerable in certain departments. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION: Marked variability exists in time allocations for clinical and academic work, as well as in resources for academic success. This supports the potential value of establishing standards for defining and protecting academic time, motivating clinical faculty to engage in academic work, and building accountability expectations. Sharing best practices and setting standards may enhance academic advancement. Strategies to reduce documentation burden may enhance wellness.

Succeeding as a Clinician Educator: useful tips and resources.

Clinician Educators (CEs) play an essential role in the education and patient care missions of academic medical centers. Despite their crucial role, academic advancement is slower for CEs than for other faculty. Increased clinical productivity demands and financial stressors at academic medical centers add to the existing challenges faced by CEs. This perspective seeks to provide a framework for junior CEs to consider with the goal of maximizing their chance of academic success. We discuss six action areas that we consider central to flourishing at academic medical centers: 1. Clarify what success means and define goals; 2. Seek mentorship and be a responsible mentee; 3. Develop a niche and engage in relevant professional development; 4. Network; 5. Transform educational activities into scholarship; and 6. Seek funding and other resources.

The challenging pelvic examination.

While there is a large body of evidence on the effectiveness of Pap smears for cervical cancer screening and on screening for cervical gonorrhea and Chlamydia, there is sparse evidence to support other portions of the pelvic examination and little guidance on examination logistics. Maximizing comfort should be the goal; lubrication use and careful speculum selection and insertion can ease this intrusive procedure. This is particularly important in adolescent and menopausal women, sexual minorities, obese women, women with disabilities, and women with a history of trauma or prior instrumentation affecting the genitalia. We review the evidence and provide guidance to minimize physical and psychological discomfort with pelvic examination.

Ambulatory-based education in internal medicine: current organization and implications for transformation. Results of a national survey of resident continuity clinic directors.

BACKGROUND: Many have called for ambulatory training redesign in internal medicine (IM) residencies to increase primary care career outcomes. Many believe dysfunctional, clinic environments are a key barrier to meaningful ambulatory education, but little is actually known about the educational milieu of continuity clinics nationwide. OBJECTIVE: We wished to describe the infrastructure and educational milieu at resident continuity clinics and assess clinic readiness to meet new IM-RRC requirements. DESIGN: National survey of ACGME accredited IM training programs. PARTICIPANTS: Directors of academic and community-based continuity clinics. RESULTS: Two hundred and twenty-one out of 365 (62%) of clinic directors representing 49% of training programs responded. Wide variation amongst continuity clinics in size, structure and educational organization exist. Clinics below the 25th percentile of total clinic sessions would not meet RRC-IM requirements for total number of clinic sessions. Only two thirds of clinics provided a longitudinal mentor. Forty-three percent of directors reported their trainees felt stressed in the clinic environment and 25% of clinic directors felt overwhelmed. LIMITATIONS: The survey used self reported data and was not anonymous. A slight predominance of larger clinics and university based clinics responded. Data may not reflect changes to programs made since 2008. CONCLUSIONS: This national survey demonstrates that the continuity clinic experience varies widely across IM programs, with many sites not yet meeting new ACGME requirements. The combination of disadvantaged and ill patients with inadequately resourced clinics, stressed residents, and clinic directors suggests that many sites need substantial reorganization and institutional commitment.New paradigms, encouraged by ACGME requirement changes such as increased separation of inpatient and outpatient duties are needed to improve the continuity clinic experience.

The revolving door of resident continuity practice: identifying gaps in transitions of care.

BACKGROUND: It is well documented that transitions of care pose a risk to patient safety. Every year, graduating residents transfer their patient panels to incoming interns, yet in our practice we consistently find that approximately 50% of patients do not return for follow-up care within a year of their resident leaving. OBJECTIVE: To examine the implications of this lapse of care with respect to chronic disease management, follow-up of abnormal test results, and adherence with routine health care maintenance. DESIGN: Retrospective chart review SUBJECTS: We studied a subset of patients cared for by 46 senior internal medicine residents who graduated in the spring of 2008. 300 patients had been identified as high priority requiring follow-up within a year. We examined the records of the 130 of these patients who did not return for care. MAIN MEASURES: We tabulated unaddressed abnormal test results, missed health care screening opportunities and unmonitored chronic medical conditions. We also attempted to call these patients to identify barriers to follow-up. KEY RESULTS: These patients had a total of 185 chronic medical conditions. They missed a total of 106 screening opportunities including mammogram (24), Pap smear (60) and colon cancer screening (22). Thirty-two abnormal pathology, imaging and laboratory test results were not followed-up as the graduating senior intended. Among a small sample of patients who were reached by phone, barriers to follow-up included a lack of knowledge about the need to see a physician, distance between home and our office, difficulties with insurance, and transportation. CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrates the high-risk nature of patient handoffs in the ambulatory setting when residents graduate. We discuss changes that might improve the panel transfer process.

It Is Time for Zero Tolerance for Sexual Harassment in Academic Medicine.

While more women are in leadership positions in academic medicine now than ever before in U.S. history, evidence from recent surveys of women and graduating medical students demonstrates that sexual harassment continues in academic health centers. Academic medicine's ability to change its culture is hampered by victims' fear of reporting episodes of harassment, which is largely due to fear of retaliation. In this Perspective, the authors describe efforts in scientific societies to address the issue of sexual harassment and to begin to establish safe environments at national meetings. The authors contend that each institution must work to make it safe for individuals to come forward, to provide training for victims and for bystanders, and to abolish "locker room" talk that is demeaning to women.

Addressing Gender Inequality in Our Disciplines: Report from the Association of Pulmonary, Critical Care, and Sleep Division Chiefs.

Despite the increasing proportion of women in U.S. medical schools, there are relatively few women in leadership positions, and a number of recent publications have highlighted many factors that could contribute to gender inequity and inequality in medicine. The Association of Pulmonary, Critical Care, and Sleep Division Directors, an organization of Division Directors from across the United States, convened a workshop to review data and obtain input from leaders on the state of gender equity in our field. The workshop identified a number of factors that could contribute to gender inequality and inequity: gender climate (including implicit and perceived biases); disproportionate family responsibilities; lack of women in leadership positions; poor retention of women; and lack of gender equality in compensation. The panel members developed a roadmap of concrete recommendations for societies, leaders, and individuals that should promote gender equity to achieve gender equality and improve retention of women in the field of pulmonary, critical care, and sleep medicine.