How Would You Manage This Patient With Obesity? Grand Rounds Discussion From Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center.

In 2022, 1 in 8 people in the world were living with obesity, and lifestyle interventions that include diet, exercise, and behavioral modification have been the foundation for management of obesity. Recently, pharmacologic therapies have been developed for management of obesity, the newest of these being glucagon-like peptide 1 receptor agonists. With the development of new pharmacologic options, the American Gastroenterological Association developed a guideline in 2022 to provide evidence-based recommendations for the pharmacologic management of obesity in adults and recommended, for adults with obesity or overweight with weight-related complications who have had an inadequate response to lifestyle interventions, adding pharmacologic agents to lifestyle interventions over continuing lifestyle interventions alone. In this article, 2 experts review the available evidence to answer the following questions: How effective are lifestyle interventions for the treatment of obesity? How effective are pharmacologic interventions for the treatment of obesity? Given these options, how do you engage in a shared decision-making discussion to develop a mutually agreed-on treatment plan?

How Would You Treat This Inpatient With Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus? Grand Rounds Discussion From Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center.

Management of hospitalized patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) presents unique challenges. Two recently released guidelines, one from the American Diabetes Association and the other from the Endocrine Society, provide useful recommendations and evidence review to inform the care of medical inpatients with T2DM. These guidelines mostly agree, although there are slight differences in their recommendations. In these rounds, 2 expert diabetologists discuss their approach to inpatient management of T2DM, specifically regarding inpatient glycemic goals on the medical ward, the use of noninsulin antihyperglycemic medications, and patient safety strategies for patients receiving long-acting insulin. They conclude with recommendations for Mr. D, a real patient with T2DM admitted with a recurrent foot infection.

How Would You Prevent Subsequent Strokes in This Patient? Grand Rounds Discussion From Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center.

Stroke is a major cause of morbidity, mortality, and disability. The American Heart Association/American Stroke Association recently published updated guidelines on secondary stroke prevention. In these rounds, 2 vascular neurologists use the case of Mr. S, a 75-year-old man with a history of 2 strokes, to discuss and debate questions in the guideline concerning intensity of atrial fibrillation monitoring in embolic stroke of undetermined source, diagnosis and management of moderate symptomatic carotid stenosis, and therapeutic strategies for recurrent embolic stroke of undetermined source in the setting of guideline-concordant therapy.

Would You Screen This Patient for Cognitive Impairment? : Grand Rounds Discussion From Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center.

Dementia, according to the American Psychiatric Association's Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fifth Edition, is defined by a significant decline in 1 or more cognitive domains that interferes with a person's independence in daily activities. Mild cognitive impairment (MCI) differs from dementia in that the impairment is not sufficient to interfere with independence. For the purposes of this discussion, cognitive impairment (CI) includes both dementia and MCI. Various screening tests are available for CI. These tests ask patients to perform a series of tasks that assess 1 or more domains of cognitive function or ask a caregiver to report on the patient's abilities. A positive result on a screening test does not equate to a diagnosis of CI; rather, it should lead to additional testing to confirm the diagnosis. On review of the evidence, the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) concluded in 2020 that the evidence was insufficient to assess the balance of benefits and harms of screening for CI in older adults ("I statement"). The USPSTF did clarify that although there is insufficient evidence, there may be important reasons to identify CI. In this article, 2 experts review the available evidence to answer the following questions: What screening tools are available, and how effective are they in identifying patients with CI? What interventions are available for patients found to have CI, to what extent do they improve patient outcomes, and what, if any, negative effects occur? And, would they recommend screening for CI, and why or why not?

How Would You Resuscitate This Patient With Septic Shock? : Grand Rounds Discussion From Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center.

Sepsis is a potentially life-threatening systemic dysregulatory response to infection, and septic shock occurs when sepsis leads to systemic vasodilation and subsequent tissue hypoperfusion. The Surviving Sepsis Campaign published updated guidelines in 2021 on the management of sepsis and septic shock. Here, in the context of a patient with septic shock, 2 critical care specialists discuss and debate conditional guideline recommendations on using lactate to guide resuscitation, the use of balanced crystalloids versus normal saline, and the use of corticosteroids.

How Would You Manage This Patient With Clostridioides difficile Infection? : Grand Rounds Discussion From Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center.

The Infectious Diseases Society of America/Society for Healthcare Epidemiology of America and the American College of Gastroenterology recently released updated guidelines on management of patients with Clostridioides difficile infection. Although these 2 guidelines generally agree, there are a few important differences in their advice to clinicians. In these rounds, 2 experts, an infectious diseases specialist and a gastroenterologist, discuss antibiotic treatment options for nonsevere disease, the role of fecal microbiota transplantation for fulminant disease, and the use of bezlotoxumab to prevent recurrence in the context of Ms. C, a 48-year-old woman with fulminant C difficile infection.

How Would You Treat This Patient With Pulmonary Embolism? : Grand Rounds Discussion From Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center.

Pulmonary embolism can be acutely life-threatening and is associated with long-term consequences such as recurrent venous thromboembolism and chronic thromboembolic pulmonary hypertension. In 2020, the American Society of Hematology published updated guidelines on the management of patients with venous thromboembolism. Here, a hematologist and a cardiology and vascular medicine specialist discuss these guidelines in the context of the care of a patient with pulmonary embolism. They discuss advanced therapies such as catheter-directed thrombolysis in the short-term management of patients with intermediate-risk disease, recurrence risk stratification at presentation, and ideal antithrombotic regimens for patients whose pulmonary embolism was associated with a transient minor risk factor.

How Would You Screen This Patient for Colorectal Cancer? : Grand Rounds Discussion From Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center.

Colorectal cancer (CRC) is the third leading cause of cancer death for men and women in the United States, with an estimated 52 580 people expected to die in 2022. Most frequently, CRC is diagnosed among persons aged 65 to 74 years. However, among persons younger than 50 years, incidence rates have been increasing since the mid-1990s. In 2021, partially because of the rising incidence, the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) recommended CRC screening for adults aged 45 to 49 years (Grade B recommendation). Options for CRC screening include stool-based and direct visualization tests. The USPSTF did not recommend a specific screening test; rather, its guidance was to select a test after a discussion with the patient. Here, a primary care physician and a gastroenterologist discuss the recommendation to begin CRC screening at age 45, review options for CRC screening, and discuss how to choose among the available options.

How Would You Treat This Patient With Acute and Chronic Pain From Sickle Cell Disease? : Grand Rounds Discussion From Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center.

Sickle cell disease is prevalent in large numbers of patients in the United States and has a significant global impact. Its complications span numerous organs and lead to reduced life expectancy. Acute and chronic sickle cell pain is a common cause of patient suffering. The American Society of Hematology published updated guidelines on management of acute and chronic pain from sickle cell disease in 2019. Several of the recommendations are conditional and leave specific decisions to the treating physician. These include conditional recommendations about the use of ketamine for acute pain and the initiation and discontinuation of long-term opioid therapy for chronic pain. Here, 2 hematologists discuss these guidelines and make contrasting recommendations for the management of acute and chronic pain for a patient with sickle cell disease.

"Two Years Later I'm Still Just as Angry": A Focus Group Study of Emergency and Internal Medicine Physicians on Disrespectful Communication.

Phenomenon: Disrespectful behavior between physicians across departments can contribute to burnout, poor learning environments, and adverse patient outcomes. Approach: In this focus group study, we aimed to describe the nature and context of perceived disrespectful communication between emergency and internal medicine physicians (residents and faculty) at patient handoff. We used a constructivist approach and framework method of content analysis to conduct and analyze focus group data from 24 residents and 11 faculty members from May to December 2019 at a large academic medical center. Findings: We organized focus group results into four overarching categories related to disrespectful communication: characteristics and context (including specific phrasing that members from each department interpreted as disrespectful, effects of listener engagement/disengagement, and the tendency for communication that is not in-person to result in misunderstanding and conflict); differences across training levels (with disrespectful communication more likely when participants were at different training levels); the individual correspondent's tendency toward perceived rudeness; and negative/long-term impacts of disrespectful communication on the individual and environment (including avoidance and effects on patient care). Insights: In the context of predominantly positive descriptions of interdepartmental communication, participants described episodes of perceived disrespectful behavior that often had long-lasting, negative impacts on the quality of the learning environment and clinical work. We created a conceptual model illustrating the process and outcomes of these interactions. We make several recommendations to reduce disrespectful communication that can be applied throughout the hospital to potentially improve patient care, interdepartmental collaboration, and trainee and faculty quality of life.

How Would You Manage This Patient With Nonvariceal Upper Gastrointestinal Bleeding? : Grand Rounds Discussion From Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center.

Nonvariceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding is common, morbid, and potentially fatal. Cornerstones of inpatient management include fluid resuscitation; blood transfusion; endoscopy; and initiation of proton-pump inhibitor therapy, which continues in an individualized manner based on risk factors for recurrent bleeding in the outpatient setting. The International Consensus Group released guidelines on the management of nonvariceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding in 2019. These guidelines provide a helpful, evidence-based roadmap for management of gastrointestinal bleeding but leave certain management details to the discretion of the treating physician. Here, 2 gastroenterologists consider the care of a patient with nonvariceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding from a peptic ulcer, specifically debating approaches to blood transfusion and endoscopy timing in the hospital, as well as the recommended duration of proton-pump inhibitor therapy after discharge.

How Would You Treat This Patient Hospitalized With Community-Acquired Pneumonia? : Grand Rounds Discussion From Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center.

Community-acquired pneumonia is a major cause of morbidity and mortality in the United States, leading to 1.5 million hospitalizations and at least 200 000 deaths annually. The 2019 American Thoracic Society/Infectious Diseases Society of America clinical practice guideline on diagnosis and treatment of adults with community-acquired pneumonia provides an evidence-based overview of this common illness. Here, 2 experts, a general internist who served as the co-primary author of the guidelines and a pulmonary and critical care physician, debate the management of a patient hospitalized with community-acquired pneumonia. They discuss disease severity stratification methods, whether to use adjunctive corticosteroids, and when to prescribe empirical treatment for multidrug-resistant organisms such as methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus and Pseudomonas aeruginosa.

Would You Recommend Aspirin to This Patient for Primary Prevention of Atherosclerotic Cardiovascular Disease? : Grand Rounds Discussion From Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center.

Atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) remains the leading cause of death in the United States. Reducing ASCVD risk through primary prevention strategies has been shown to be effective; however, the role of aspirin in primary prevention remains unclear. The decision to recommend aspirin has been limited by the difficulty clinicians and patients face when trying to balance benefits and harms. In 2016, the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force addressed this issue by determining the risk level at which prophylactic aspirin generally becomes more favorable, recommending aspirin above a risk cut point (>10% estimated ASCVD risk). In 2019, the American College of Cardiology and the American Heart Association issued a guideline on the primary prevention of CVD that recommends low-dose aspirin might be considered for the primary prevention of ASCVD among select adults aged 40 to 70 years who are at higher ASCVD risk but not at increased risk for bleeding. Here, 2 experts discuss how to apply this guideline in general and to a patient in particular while answering the following questions: How do you assess ASCVD risk, and what is the role, if any, of the coronary artery calcium score?; At what risk threshold of benefits and harms would you recommend aspirin or not?; and How do you help a patient come to a decision about starting or stopping aspirin therapy?

Should This Patient Be Screened for Pancreatic Cancer? : Grand Rounds Discussion From Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center.

Because pancreatic cancer is typically advanced at the time of diagnosis, it has a very low 5-year survival rate and may become the second leading cause of cancer death in the United States. A screening program to find early-stage pancreatic cancer is needed but has been challenging to develop because of the lack of an effective screening test. In 2019, the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force performed an evidence review and updated its guidance, confirming its 2004 "D" recommendation against routine screening for average-risk patients. Here, 2 experts review the updated guideline and recent evidence and discuss whether a patient with a family history of pancreatic cancer should undergo screening.

Management Options for an Older Adult With Advanced Chronic Kidney Disease and Dementia: Grand Rounds Discussion From Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center.

About 15% of adults in the United States-37 million persons-have chronic kidney disease (CKD). Chronic kidney disease is divided into 5 groups, ranging from stage 1 to stage 5 CKD, whereas end-stage kidney disease (ESKD) is defined as permanent kidney failure. The treatment options for ESKD are kidney replacement therapy (KRT) and conservative management. The options for KRT include hemodialysis (either in-center or at home), peritoneal dialysis, and kidney transplant. Conservative management, a multidisciplinary model of care for patients with stage 5 CKD who want to avoid dialysis, is guided by patient values, preferences, and goals, with a focus on quality of life and symptom management. In 2015, the Kidney Disease Outcomes Quality Initiative recommended that patients with an estimated glomerular filtration rate below 30 mL/min/1.73 m2 be educated about options for both KRT and conservative management. In 2018, the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence recommended that assessment for KRT or conservative management start at least 1 year before the need for therapy. It also recommended that in choosing a management approach, predicted quality of life, predicted life expectancy, patient preferences, and other patient factors be considered, because little difference in outcomes has been found among options. Here, 2 experts-a nephrologist and a general internist-palliative care physician-reflect on the care of a patient with advanced CKD and mild to moderate dementia. They discuss the management options for patients with advanced CKD, the pros and cons of each method, and how to help a patient choose among the options.

Should You Treat This Acutely Ill Medical Inpatient With Venous Thromboembolism Chemoprophylaxis?: Grand Rounds Discussion From Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center.

Venous thromboembolism (VTE), which includes both deep venous thrombosis and pulmonary embolism, is a common and potentially fatal condition. Medical inpatients are at high risk for VTE because of immobility as well as acute and chronic illness. Several randomized trials demonstrated that chemoprophylaxis, or low-dose anticoagulation, prevents VTE in selected medical inpatients. The 2018 American Society of Hematology clinical practice guideline on prophylaxis for hospitalized and nonhospitalized medical patients conditionally recommends chemoprophylaxis for non-critically ill medical inpatients, leaving much to the discretion of the treating physician. Here, 2 experts, a hematologist and a hospitalist, reflect on the care of a woman hospitalized with a rheumatologic disorder. They consider the risks and benefits of chemoprophylaxis, discuss VTE risk stratification, and recommend which patients should receive chemoprophylaxis and with which agents.

A Community Health Worker Intervention to Increase Childhood Disease Treatment Coverage in Rural Liberia: A Controlled Before-and-After Evaluation.

OBJECTIVES: To assess a community health worker (CHW) program's impact on childhood illness treatment in rural Liberia. METHODS: We deployed CHWs in half of Rivercess County in August 2015 with the other half constituting a comparison group until July 2016. All CHWs were provided cash incentives, supply chain support, and monthly clinical supervision. We conducted stratified cluster-sample population-based surveys at baseline (March-April 2015) and follow-up (April-June 2016) and performed a difference-in-differences analysis, adjusted by inverse probability of treatment weighting, to assess changes in treatment of fever, diarrhea, and acute respiratory infection by a qualified provider. RESULTS: We estimated a childhood treatment difference-in-differences of 56.4 percentage points (95% confidence interval [CI] = 36.4, 76.3). At follow-up, CHWs provided 57.6% (95% CI = 42.8, 71.2) of treatment in the intervention group. The difference-in-differences diarrhea oral rehydration therapy was 22.4 percentage points (95% CI = -0.7, 45.5). CONCLUSIONS: Implementation of a CHW program in Rivercess County, Liberia, was associated with large, statistically significant improvements treatment by a qualified provider; however, improvements in correct diarrhea treatment were lower than improvements in coverage. Findings from this study offer support for expansion of Liberia's new National Community Health Assistant Program.

Accuracy of a Generative Artificial Intelligence Model in a Complex Diagnostic Challenge.

This study assesses the diagnostic accuracy of the Generative Pre-trained Transformer 4 (GPT-4) artificial intelligence (AI) model in a series of challenging cases.

Facility-Based Delivery during the Ebola Virus Disease Epidemic in Rural Liberia: Analysis from a Cross-Sectional, Population-Based Household Survey.

BACKGROUND: The Ebola virus disease (EVD) epidemic has threatened access to basic health services through facility closures, resource diversion, and decreased demand due to community fear and distrust. While modeling studies have attempted to estimate the impact of these disruptions, no studies have yet utilized population-based survey data. METHODS AND FINDINGS: We conducted a two-stage, cluster-sample household survey in Rivercess County, Liberia, in March-April 2015, which included a maternal and reproductive health module. We constructed a retrospective cohort of births beginning 4 y before the first day of survey administration (beginning March 24, 2011). We then fit logistic regression models to estimate associations between our primary outcome, facility-based delivery (FBD), and time period, defined as the pre-EVD period (March 24, 2011-June 14, 2014) or EVD period (June 15, 2014-April 13, 2015). We fit both univariable and multivariable models, adjusted for known predictors of facility delivery, accounting for clustering using linearized standard errors. To strengthen causal inference, we also conducted stratified analyses to assess changes in FBD by whether respondents believed that health facility attendance was an EVD risk factor. A total of 1,298 women from 941 households completed the survey. Median age at the time of survey was 29 y, and over 80% had a primary education or less. There were 686 births reported in the pre-EVD period and 212 in the EVD period. The unadjusted odds ratio of facility-based delivery in the EVD period was 0.66 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.48-0.90, p-value = 0.010). Adjustment for potential confounders did not change the observed association, either in the principal model (adjusted odds ratio [AOR] = 0.70, 95%CI 0.50-0.98, p = 0.037) or a fully adjusted model (AOR = 0.69, 95%CI 0.50-0.97, p = 0.033). The association was robust in sensitivity analyses. The reduction in FBD during the EVD period was observed among those reporting a belief that health facilities are or may be a source of Ebola transmission (AOR = 0.59, 95%CI 0.36-0.97, p = 0.038), but not those without such a belief (AOR = 0.90, 95%CI 0.59-1.37, p = 0.612). Limitations include the possibility of FBD secular trends coincident with the EVD period, recall errors, and social desirability bias. CONCLUSIONS: We detected a 30% decreased odds of FBD after the start of EVD in a rural Liberian county with relatively few cases. Because health facilities never closed in Rivercess County, this estimate may under-approximate the effect seen in the most heavily affected areas. These are the first population-based survey data to show collateral disruptions to facility-based delivery caused by the West African EVD epidemic, and they reinforce the need to consider the full spectrum of implications caused by public health emergencies.

Large Language Model Influence on Diagnostic Reasoning: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: Large language models (LLMs) have shown promise in their performance on both multiple-choice and open-ended medical reasoning examinations, but it remains unknown whether the use of such tools improves physician diagnostic reasoning. Objective: To assess the effect of an LLM on physicians' diagnostic reasoning compared with conventional resources. Design, Setting, and Participants: A single-blind randomized clinical trial was conducted from November 29 to December 29, 2023. Using remote video conferencing and in-person participation across multiple academic medical institutions, physicians with training in family medicine, internal medicine, or emergency medicine were recruited. Intervention: Participants were randomized to either access the LLM in addition to conventional diagnostic resources or conventional resources only, stratified by career stage. Participants were allocated 60 minutes to review up to 6 clinical vignettes. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was performance on a standardized rubric of diagnostic performance based on differential diagnosis accuracy, appropriateness of supporting and opposing factors, and next diagnostic evaluation steps, validated and graded via blinded expert consensus. Secondary outcomes included time spent per case (in seconds) and final diagnosis accuracy. All analyses followed the intention-to-treat principle. A secondary exploratory analysis evaluated the standalone performance of the LLM by comparing the primary outcomes between the LLM alone group and the conventional resource group. Results: Fifty physicians (26 attendings, 24 residents; median years in practice, 3 [IQR, 2-8]) participated virtually as well as at 1 in-person site. The median diagnostic reasoning score per case was 76% (IQR, 66%-87%) for the LLM group and 74% (IQR, 63%-84%) for the conventional resources-only group, with an adjusted difference of 2 percentage points (95% CI, -4 to 8 percentage points; P = .60). The median time spent per case for the LLM group was 519 (IQR, 371-668) seconds, compared with 565 (IQR, 456-788) seconds for the conventional resources group, with a time difference of -82 (95% CI, -195 to 31; P = .20) seconds. The LLM alone scored 16 percentage points (95% CI, 2-30 percentage points; P = .03) higher than the conventional resources group. Conclusions and Relevance: In this trial, the availability of an LLM to physicians as a diagnostic aid did not significantly improve clinical reasoning compared with conventional resources. The LLM alone demonstrated higher performance than both physician groups, indicating the need for technology and workforce development to realize the potential of physician-artificial intelligence collaboration in clinical practice. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT06157944.