Resident worklife and wellness through the late phase of the pandemic: a mixed methods national survey study.

BACKGROUND: System contributors to resident burnout and well-being have been under-studied. We sought to determine factors associated with resident burnout and identify at risk groups. METHODS: We performed a US national survey between July 15 2022 and April 21, 2023 of residents in 36 specialties in 14 institutions, using the validated Mini ReZ survey with three 5 item subscales: 1) supportive workplace, 2) work pace/electronic medical record (EMR) stress, and 3) residency-specific factors (sleep, peer support, recognition by program, interruptions and staff relationships). Multilevel regressions and thematic analysis of 497 comments determined factors related to burnout. RESULTS: Of 1118 respondents (approximate median response rate 32%), 48% were female, 57% White, 21% Asian, 6% LatinX and 4% Black, with 25% PGY 1 s, 25% PGY 2 s, and 22% PGY 3 s. Programs included internal medicine (15.1%) and family medicine (11.3%) among 36 specialties. Burnout (found in 42%) was higher in females (51% vs 30% in males, p = 0.001) and PGY 2's (48% vs 35% in PGY-1 s, p = 0.029). Challenges included chaotic environments (41%) and sleep impairment (32%); favorable aspects included teamwork (94%), peer support (93%), staff support (87%) and program recognition (68%). Worklife subscales were consistently lower in females while PGY-2's reported the least supportive work environments. Worklife challenges relating to burnout included sleep impairment (adjusted Odds Ratio (aOR) 2.82 (95% CIs 1.94, 4.19), absolute risk difference (ARD) in burnout 15.9%), poor work control (aOR 2.25 (1.42, 3.58), ARD 12.2%) and chaos (aOR 1.73 (1.22, 2.47), ARD 7.9%); program recognition was related to lower burnout (aOR 0.520 (0.356, 0.760), ARD 9.3%). These variables explained 55% of burnout variance. Qualitative data confirmed sleep impairment, lack of schedule control, excess EMR and patient volume as stressors. CONCLUSIONS: These data provide a nomenclature and systematic method for addressing well-being during residency. Work conditions for females and PGY 2's may merit attention first.

Classification of type 1 diabetes: A pathogenic and treatment-based classification.

AIM: To improve the diagnosis and classification of patients who fail to satisfy current type 1 diabetes diagnostic criteria. METHODS: Review of the literature and current diagnostic guidelines. DISCUSSION: We propose a novel, clinically useful classification based on islet autoantibody status and non-fasting C-peptide levels. Notably, we discuss the subgroup of latent autoimmune diabetes in the young and propose a new subgroup classification of autoantibody negative type 1 diabetes in remission. CONCLUSION: A novel classification system is proposed. Further work is needed to accurately diagnose and manage minority type 1 diabetes subgroups.

Autoantibody-Negative Type 1 Diabetes: A Neglected Subtype.

Up to 15% of individuals with a clinical phenotype of type 1 diabetes (T1D) do not have evidence of seropositivity for pancreatic islet autoantibodies. On this basis, they are classified as nonimmune or idiopathic, and remain an understudied population, as they are excluded from T1D immunomodulatory trials. Our limited understanding of the disease aetiopathogenesis in autoantibody-negative T1D hinders our ability to improve diagnostic pathways and discover novel therapeutic agents; particularly as we progress towards an era of precision medicine. This review summarises the current understanding and challenges in studying autoantibody-negative T1D. We review the literature regarding T1D classification, and the role of autoimmunity and defects in the immunogenic pathway that may distinguish autoantibody-positive and -negative T1D.

A novel combination of bioresorbable polymeric film and expanded polytetrafluoroethylene provides a protective barrier and reduces adhesions.

OBJECTIVE: A bioresorbable polymeric film reduces the extent and severity of postoperative adhesions in infants undergoing repeat sternotomy. Resorption of the bioresorbable polymeric film, however, leaves no barrier between the sternum and the epicardium. A sheet of expanded polytetrafluoroethylene is used by many surgeons to create a physical barrier between the sternum and the cardiac structures. We hypothesized that placing bioresorbable polymeric film beneath an expanded polytetrafluoroethylene pericardial membrane would both decrease pericardial adhesions and provide a physical barrier. METHODS: A novel combination of bioresorbable polymeric film underneath an expanded polytetrafluoroethylene membrane was tested in an established rabbit model of pericardial adhesion formation. After sternotomy, a portion of pericardium was resected and the epicardium was abraded. Rabbits (n = 36) were randomly assigned to 4 treatment groups: control group, no bioresorbable polymeric film or expanded polytetrafluoroethylene; bioresorbable polymeric film group; expanded polytetrafluoroethylene group; and bioresorbable polymeric film + expanded polytetrafluoroethylene group. At 4 weeks post-sternotomy, pericardial adhesions were scored grossly for area and density of adhesions using an established 4-point (0-3) grading system. RESULTS: The bioresorbable polymeric film group had a significant reduction in mean adhesion score compared with the control group (control = 2.86 ± 0.37 vs bioresorbable polymeric film = 0.57 ± 0.53, P < .0001) and expanded polytetrafluoroethylene group (expanded polytetrafluoroethylene = 2.75 ± 0.46 vs bioresorbable polymeric film = 0.57 ± 0.53, P < .0001). The bioresorbable polymeric film + expanded polytetrafluoroethylene group had a low adhesion profile similar to the bioresorbable polymeric film group (bioresorbable polymeric film + expanded polytetrafluoroethylene = 1.0 ± 0, vs bioresorbable polymeric film = 0.57 ± 0.53), but a considerably lower mean adhesion score than the expanded polytetrafluoroethylene group (expanded polytetrafluoroethylene = 2.75 ± 0.46, vs bioresorbable polymeric film + expanded polytetrafluoroethylene = 1.0 ± 0, P < .0001). CONCLUSIONS: Placement of bioresorbable polymeric film resulted in minimal pericardial adhesions compared with controls. The placement of bioresorbable polymeric film underneath expanded polytetrafluoroethylene at the time of sternal closure provides a novel combination to reduce the extent and severity of pericardial adhesions while providing a physical barrier between the sternum and the cardiac structures.

Coarctation of the aorta: midterm outcomes of resection with extended end-to-end anastomosis.

BACKGROUND: We began using the technique of resection with extended end-to-end anastomosis for infants and children with coarctation of the aorta in 1991. The purpose of this review is to evaluate the midterm outcomes of this technique, specifically determining the incidence of and risk factors for transcatheter or surgical reintervention. METHODS: A retrospective analysis of the cardiac surgery database was performed to identify all patients who had a diagnosis of coarctation of the aorta with or without ventricular septal defect and had resection with extended end-to-end anastomosis from 1991 to 2007. Perioperative course and follow-up with physical examination, echocardiogram, and cardiology evaluation were obtained. RESULTS: From 1991 through 2007, 201 patients had repair of coarctation of the aorta with resection with extended end-to-end anastomosis. The median age was 23 days, and the median weight was 4.0 kg. Surgical approach was by left thoracotomy in 157 patients (78%) with a mean cross-clamp time of 18 +/- 4 minutes. Median sternotomy approach was used in 44 patients (22%) to repair a hypoplastic transverse aortic arch (n = 16) or because of associated ventricular septal defect (n = 28) with a mean circulatory arrest time of 14 +/- 9 minutes. Early mortality occurred in 4 patients (2.0%). Three patients (1.5%) required early arch revision: 2 intraoperatively and 1 on postoperative day 1. Follow-up data were available for 182 patients (91%) with a mean follow-up of 5.0 +/- 4.3 years (908 patient-years). Reinterventions (n = 8; 4.0%) included three balloon angioplasties and five reoperations; 75% of the reinterventions occurred in the first postoperative year. Hypoplastic transverse aortic arch was not a risk factor for reintervention (p = 0.36), but was a risk factor for mortality (p = 0.039). Aberrant right subclavian artery was the only risk factor for recoarctation (p = 0.007). CONCLUSIONS: Repair of coarctation of the aorta with resection with extended end-to-end anastomosis has a low early mortality, effectively addresses transverse arch hypoplasia, and at midterm follow-up has a low rate of reintervention for recurrent coarctation.