Internal Medicine Residents' Experience Performing Routine Assessment of What Matters Most to Patients Upon Hospital Admission.

PROBLEM: Failure to elicit patients' values, goals, and priorities can result in missed opportunities to provide patient-centered care. Little is known about resident physicians' direct experience of eliciting patients' values, goals, and priorities and integrating them into routine hospital care. INTERVENTION: In 2017, we asked resident physicians on general internal medicine wards rotations to elicit and document a "Personal History" from patients upon hospital admission, in addition to a traditional social history. We defined a Personal History as documenting "what matters most to the patient and why." The purpose of the Personal History was to understand and consider patients' values, goals, and priorities. We then conducted qualitative interviews of the resident physicians to understand their experiences eliciting and integrating patients' values, goals, and priorities in routine hospital care. CONTEXT: We performed this exploratory intervention at a large high-volume urban hospital. Two teams from general medicine wards participated in the Personal History intervention. We conducted voluntary interviews of eligible residents (n = 14/15; 93%) about their experience after they completed their general wards rotations. Using the coproduction model, our aim was to explore how patients' self-expertise can be combined with physicians' medical expertise to achieve patient-centered care. IMPACT: Four major themes were identified: 1) Taking a Personal History had value, and eliciting patients' self-expertise had the potential to change medical decision making, 2) Situational and relational factors created barriers to obtaining a Personal History, 3) Variability in buy-in with the proposed intervention affected effort, and 4) Meaningful Personal History taking could be an adaptive and longitudinal process. Perceived benefits included improved rapport with patients, helpful for patients with complex medical history, and improved physician-patient communication. Barriers included patient distress, lack of rapport, and responses from patients which did not add new insights. Accountability from attending physicians affected resident effort. Suggested future applications were for patients with serious illness, integration into electronic health records, and skills taught in medical education. LESSONS LEARNED: Resident physicians had generally positive views of eliciting a Personal History from patients upon admission to the hospital. Overall, many residents conveyed the perceived ability to elicit and consider patient's values, goals, and priorities in certain situations (e.g., patient not in distress, adequate rapport, lack of competing priorities such as medical emergencies or overwhelming workloads). External factors, such as electronic health record design and accountability from attending physicians, may further promote residents' efforts to routinely incorporate patients' values, goals, and priorities in clinical care. Increasing familiarity among both resident physicians and patients in routinely discussing patients' values, goals, and priorities may facilitate patient-centered practice.

The effect of anticoagulation on clinical outcomes in novel Coronavirus (COVID-19) pneumonia in a U.S. cohort.

BACKGROUND: COVID-19 infection is associated with D-dimer elevations, high rates of thrombus formation, and poor clinical outcomes. We sought to determine if empiric therapeutic anticoagulation (AC) affected survival in COVID-19 patients compared to standard prophylactic AC. METHODS: Retrospective analysis of 402 COVID-19 patients hospitalized between March 15 and May 31, 2020 was performed. Clinical outcomes were compared between 152 patients treated with therapeutic AC to 250 patients on prophylactic AC. An elastic net logistic regression was designed to first identify the important variables affecting mortality. These variables were then included as covariates to AC in standard multivariate logistic regression models studying the effect of AC on death. Nonparametric survival analysis was conducted, and Kaplan Meier curves were constructed. RESULTS: Increased mortality was associated with therapeutic AC [OR 3.42 (2.06, 5.67)]. The log-rank test was statistically significant at p = 0.001 showing higher mortality for patients treated with therapeutic AC compared to prophylactic AC. Subset analysis of critically ill and intubated patients had similar survival curves regardless of AC dose. The log-rank test was not significant even with Prentice modification. For non-ICU patients, the log rank test favoring prophylactic AC disappeared when the analysis was stratified by D-dimer level less or greater than 3 µg/mL. Approximately 9% of patients receiving therapeutic AC experienced clinically significant bleeding or thrombocytopenia, versus 3% in those receiving prophylactic AC. CONCLUSIONS: In our cohort, therapeutic anticoagulation provided no mortality benefit over thromboprophylaxis, independent of co-morbidities or disease severity. More adverse events were observed with therapeutic AC.

The association between biomarkers and clinical outcomes in novel coronavirus pneumonia in a US cohort.

Aim: To describe the association between D-dimer, CRP, IL-6, ferritin, LDH and the clinical outcomes in a cohort of 299 COVID-19 patients treated on the inpatient medical service at a university hospital in the District of Columbia (DC, USA). Methodology & results: In this retrospective study, we included all laboratory confirmed COVID-19 adults admitted to the inpatient medicine service at the George Washington University Hospital between 12 March 2020 and 9 May 2020. We analyzed the association of biomarkers on intensive care unit transfer, intubation and mortality. Threshold values for all biomarkers were found to be statistically significant and independently associated with higher odds of clinical deterioration and death. Conclusion: Laboratory markers of inflammation and coagulopathy can help clinicians identify patients who are at high risk for clinical deterioration in COVID-19.

Green and black teas inhibit atherosclerosis by lipid, antioxidant, and fibrinolytic mechanisms.

Tea is the most widely consumed beverage in the world, second only to water. Most laypersons and scientists believe that green tea is healthier than black tea due to the low incidence of heart disease and cancer in the Orient. Here, we report the first dose-response comparison of a green and black tea on normal hamsters after long-term supplementation and on a hamster model of atherosclerosis. Both teas were equally effective in inhibiting atherosclerosis with the lower dose decreasing it 26-46% and the high dose decreasing it 48-63%. Atherosclerosis was inhibited by three mechanisms: hypolipemic, antioxidant, and antifibrinolytic. There was a significant correlation between atherosclerosis and the three mechanisms. In the normal animals, teas also caused some improvement in plasma low density lipoprotein (LDL), LDL/high density lipoprotein ratio, triglycerides, lipid peroxides, lower density lipoprotein lipid peroxides, and fibrinogen. Isolated lower density lipoprotein oxidizability was also reduced in all groups. Green and black teas were equally effective at human equivalent doses, thus confirming human intervention and epidemiology studies and providing mechanisms for teas' benefit.