General practitioners' management of mastitis in breastfeeding women: a mixed method study in Australia.

BACKGROUND: Mastitis is a common reason new mothers visit their general practitioner (GP). In Australia, the Therapeutic Guidelines: Antibiotic provides practical advice to GPs managing a range of infections, including mastitis. It is not known if Australian GPs prescribe antibiotics and order investigations as recommended for the management of mastitis. METHODS: A convergent mixed methods design integrated quantitative analysis of a general practice dataset with analysis of interviews with GPs. Using the large-scale primary care dataset, MedicineInsight, (2021-2022), antibiotics prescribed and investigations ordered for mastitis encounters were extracted. Mastitis encounters were identified by searching 'Encounter reason', 'Test reason' and 'Prescription reason' free text field for the term 'mastitis'; 'granulomatous mastitis' was excluded. Clinical encounters for mastitis occurring within 14 days of a previous mastitis encounter were defined as belonging to the same treatment episode. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 14 Australian GPs using Zoom or telephone in 2021-2022, and analysed thematically. The Pillar Integration Process was used to develop a joint display table; qualitative codes and themes were matched with the quantitative items to illustrate similarities/contrasts in findings. RESULTS: During an encounter for mastitis, 3122 (91.7%) women received a prescription for an oral antibiotic; most commonly di/flucloxacillin ([59.4%]) or cefalexin (937 [27.5%]). Investigations recorded ultrasound in 303 (8.9%), blood tests (full blood examination [FBE]: 170 [5.0%]; C-reactive protein [CRP]: 71 [2.1%]; erythrocyte sedimentation rate [ESR]: 34 [1.0%]) and breast milk or nipple swab cultures in approximately 1% of encounters. Analysis using pillar integration showed consistency between quantitative and qualitative data regarding mastitis management. The following themes were identified: - GPs support continued breastfeeding. - Antibiotics are central to GPs' management. - Antibiotics are mostly prescribed according to Therapeutic Guidelines. - Analgesia is a gap in the Therapeutic Guidelines. - Low use of breast milk culture. CONCLUSIONS: Prescribing antibiotics for mastitis remains central to Australian GPs' management of mastitis. Interview data clarified that GPs were aware that antibiotics might not be needed in all cases of mastitis and that delayed prescribing was not uncommon. Overall, GPs followed principles of antibiotic stewardship, however there is a need to train GPs about when to consider ordering investigations.

Psychotropic Medication Prescriptions for Home-Based Palliative Care Oncology Patients.

Objective: To examine the complexities of psychotropic medication prescription in home-based palliative care for oncology patients.Methods: A retrospective analysis of 125 medical records of patients receiving palliative home care for cancer was conducted at a tertiary hospital, with a specific focus on the prescription patterns of psychotropic medications. The data were collected in September 2023.Results: Among 125 cases, the mean age was 64.4 ± 14.9 years, with 50.4% females. Breast cancer (14.4%) and lung cancer (13.6%) were the most common diagnoses. Psychotropic medication was administered to 35.2% of patients. Treatment was initiated by palliative care doctors in 75% of cases, while psychiatrists handled 25%. Medication selection was predominantly symptom driven (63%), with anxiety prompting benzodiazepine prescriptions in 50% of cases, depression resulting in antidepressant use in 22%, and psychosis leading to antipsychotic treatment in 18%. Specific diagnoses were the target in only 36% of prescriptions, with delirium (27%) being the most prevalent, followed by depression and bipolar disorder. Benzodiazepines were the most commonly prescribed class of medications (56.8%), with clonazepam being the most prevalent (40.9%), followed by alprazolam and lorazepam (15.9%). Atypical antipsychotics made up 43.1% of prescriptions, with quetiapine being the most frequently prescribed (34%), along with olanzapine and risperidone (11%). Antidepressants accounted for 31.8% of prescriptions, including selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors at 18% and mirtazapine and amitriptyline at 6% each. Haloperidol, a typical antipsychotic, was prescribed in 13.6% of cases. Polypharmacy was observed in 35.6% of patients.Conclusion: In palliative home care, psychotropic medications are frequently prescribed by palliative doctors primarily for symptom management, with limited psychiatric consultations and challenges in accessing psychological evaluations. Collaborative efforts among regional or institutional medical bodies, including psychiatrists, psychologists, palliative doctors, and social workers, are needed to establish ethical guidelines for appropriate and effective psychotropic prescription.Prim Care Companion CNS Disord 2024;26(2):23m03668. Author affiliations are listed at the end of this article.

Leveraging G-CSF prescribing in the outpatient setting: considerations beyond clinical factors-a questionnaire study.

PURPOSE: This study aims to delineate G-CSF treatment practices, assess decision criteria, and measure their implementation in ambulatory settings for patients with breast (BC), lung (LC), or gastrointestinal cancers (GIC), beyond standard recommendations. METHODS: In this non-interventional, cross-sectional, multicenter study, clinical cases were presented using conversational interfaces (chatbots), simulating a conversation with one or more virtual interlocutors through voice or text exchange. The clinical simulations were configured by four parameters: types of cancer, risk of FN related to chemotherapy and comorbidities, access to care, and therapy setting (adjuvant/neoadjuvant/metastatic). RESULTS: The questionnaire was completed by 102 physicians. Most practitioners (84.5%) reported prescribing G-CSF, regardless of tumor type. G-CSF was prescribed more frequently for adjuvant/neoadjuvant therapy than for metastatic cases. The type of chemotherapy was cited as the first reason for prescribing G-CSF, with access to care being the second. Regarding the type of chemotherapy, physicians do not consider this factor alone, but combined with comorbidities and age (56.7% of cases). Pegfilgrastim long-acting was prescribed in most cases of BC and LC (70.1% and 86%, respectively), while filgrastim short-acting was named in the majority of cases of GIC (61.7%); 76.3% of physicians prescribed G-CSF as primary prophylaxis. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings suggest that recommended practices are broadly followed. In the majority of cases, G-CSF is prescribed as primary prophylaxis. In addition, physicians seem more inclined to prescribe G-CSF to adjuvant/neoadjuvant patients rather than metastatic patients. Finally, the type of chemotherapy tends to be a more significant determining factor than the patient's background.

Clinician-Level Knowledge and Barriers to Hepatocellular Carcinoma Surveillance.

Importance: Surveillance for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) in patients with cirrhosis is underused. Identifying potentially modifiable factors to address barriers in HCC surveillance is critical to improve patient outcomes. Objective: To evaluate clinician-level factors contributing to underuse of HCC surveillance in patients with cirrhosis. Design, Setting, and Participants: This survey study included primary care clinicians (PCCs) and gastroenterology and hepatology clinicians at 5 safety-net health systems in the US. Clinicians were surveyed from March 15 to September 15, 2023, to assess knowledge, attitudes, beliefs, perceived barriers, and COVID-19-related disruptions in HCC surveillance in patients with cirrhosis. Data were analyzed from October to November 2023. Main Outcome and Measures: HCC surveillance knowledge was assessed with 6 questions querying the respondent's ability to correctly identify appropriate use of HCC surveillance. Attitudes, perceived barriers, and beliefs regarding HCC surveillance and perceived impact of the COVID-19 pandemic-related disruptions with HCC surveillance were assessed with a series of statements using a 4-point Likert scale and compared PCCs and gastroenterology and hepatology clinicians. Results: Overall, 347 of 1362 clinicians responded to the survey (25.5% response rate), among whom 142 of 237 (59.9%) were PCCs, 48 of 237 (20.3%) gastroenterology and hepatology, 190 of 236 (80.5%) were doctors of medicine and doctors of osteopathic medicine, and 46 of 236 (19.5%) were advanced practice clinicians. On HCC knowledge assessment, 144 of 270 (53.3%) scored 5 or more of 6 questions correctly, 37 of 48 (77.1%) among gastroenterology and hepatology vs 65 of 142 (45.8%) among PCCs (P < .001). Those with higher HCC knowledge scores were less likely to report barriers to HCC surveillance. PCCs were more likely to report inadequate time to discuss HCC surveillance (37 of 139 [26.6%] vs 2 of 48 [4.2%]; P = .001), difficulty identifying patients with cirrhosis (82 of 141 [58.2%] vs 5 of 48 [10.4%]; P < .001), and were not up-to-date with HCC surveillance guidelines (87 of 139 [62.6%] vs 5 of 48 [10.4%]; P < .001) compared with gastroenterology and hepatology clinicians. While most acknowledged delays during the COVID-19 pandemic, 62 of 136 PCCs (45.6%) and 27 of 45 gastroenterology and hepatology clinicians (60.0%) reported that patients with cirrhosis could currently complete HCC surveillance without delays. Conclusions and Relevance: In this survey study, important gaps in knowledge and perceived barriers to HCC surveillance were identified. Effective delivery of HCC education to PCCs and health system-level interventions must be pursued in parallel to address the complex barriers affecting suboptimal HCC surveillance in patients with cirrhosis.

Matching study design to prescribing intention: The prevalent new-user design for studying abuse-deterrent formulations of opioids.

PURPOSE: In drug studies, research designs requiring no prior exposure to certain drug classes may restrict important populations. Since abuse-deterrent formulations (ADF) of opioids are routinely prescribed after other opioids, choice of study design, identification of appropriate comparators, and addressing confounding by "indication" are important considerations in ADF post-marketing studies. METHODS: In a retrospective cohort study using claims data (2006-2018) from a North Carolina private insurer [NC claims] and Merative MarketScan [MarketScan], we identified patients (18-64 years old) initiating ADF or non-ADF extended-release/long-acting (ER/LA) opioids. We compared patient characteristics and described opioid treatment history between treatment groups, classifying patients as traditional (no opioid claims during prior six-month washout period) or prevalent new users. RESULTS: We identified 8415 (NC claims) and 147 978 (MarketScan) ADF, and 10 114 (NC claims) and 232 028 (MarketScan) non-ADF ER/LA opioid initiators. Most had prior opioid exposure (ranging 64%-74%), and key clinical differences included higher prevalence of recent acute or chronic pain and surgery among patients initiating ADFs compared to non-ADF ER/LA initiators. Concurrent immediate-release opioid prescriptions at initiation were more common in prevalent new users than traditional new users. CONCLUSIONS: Careful consideration of the study design, comparator choice, and confounding by "indication" is crucial when examining ADF opioid use-related outcomes.

Incorporating clinician insight and care plans into an audit and feedback initiative for antipsychotic prescribing to Medicaid-enrolled youth in Philadelphia.

BACKGROUND: Audit and feedback (A/F), which include initiatives like report cards, have an inconsistent impact on clinicians' prescribing behavior. This may be attributable to their focus on aggregate prescribing measures, a one-size-fits-all approach, and the fact that A/F initiatives rarely engage with the clinicians they target. METHODS: In this study, we describe the development and delivery of a report card that summarized antipsychotic prescribing to publicly-insured youth in Philadelphia, which was introduced by a Medicaid managed care organization in 2020. In addition to measuring aggregate prescribing behavior, the report card included different elements of care plans, including whether youth were receiving polypharmacy, proper medication management, and the concurrent use of behavioral health outpatient services. The A/F initiative elicited feedback from clinicians, which we refer to as an "audit and feedback loop." We also evaluate the impact of the report card by comparing pre-post differences in prescribing measures for clinicians who received the report card with a group of clinicians who did not receive the report card. RESULTS: Report cards indicated that many youth who were prescribed antipsychotics were not receiving proper medication management or using behavioral health outpatient services alongside the antipsychotic prescription, but that polypharmacy was rare. In their feedback, clinicians who received report cards cited several challenges related to antipsychotic prescribing, such as the logistical difficulties of entering lab orders and family members' hesitancy to change care plans. The impact of the report card was mixed: there was a modest reduction in the share of youth receiving polypharmacy following the receipt of the report card, while other measures did not change. However, we documented a large reduction in the number of youth with one or more antipsychotic prescription fill among clinicians who received a report card. CONCLUSIONS: A/F initiatives are a common approach to improving the quality of care, and often target specific practices such as antipsychotic prescribing. Report cards are a low-cost and feasible intervention but there is room for quality improvement, such as adding measures that track medication management or eliciting feedback from clinicians who receive report cards. To ensure that the benefits of antipsychotic prescribing outweigh its risks, it is important to promote quality and safety of antipsychotic prescribing within a broader care plan.

We Are Not Speaking the Same Language: Current Procedural Terminology Coding and Provision of Care in Lymphatic Reconstruction.

INTRODUCTION: Current Procedural Terminology (CPT) codes provide a uniform language for medical billing, but specific codes have not been assigned for lymphatic reconstruction techniques. The authors hypothesized that inadequate codes would contribute to heterogeneous coding practices and reimbursement challenges, ultimately limiting surgeons' ability to treat patients. METHODS: A 22-item virtual questionnaire was offered to 959 members of the American Society of Reconstructive Microsurgeons to assess the volume of lymphatic reconstruction procedures performed, CPT codes used for each procedure, and challenges related to coding and providing care. RESULTS: The survey was completed by 66 board-certified/board-eligible plastic surgeons (6.9%), who unanimously agreed that lymphatic surgery is integral to cancer care, with 86.4% indicating that immediate lymphatic reconstruction should be offered after lymphadenectomy. Most performed lymphovenous bypass, immediate lymphatic reconstruction, liposuction, and vascularized lymph node transfer.Respondents reported that available CPT codes failed to reflect procedural scope. A wide variety of CPT codes was used to report each type of procedure. Insurance coverage problems led to 69.7% of respondents forgoing operations and 32% reducing treatment offerings. Insurance coverage and CPT codes were identified as significant barriers to care by 98.5% and 95.5% of respondents, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Respondents unanimously agreed on the importance of lymphatic reconstruction in cancer care, and most identified inadequate CPT codes as causing billing issues, which hindered their ability to offer surgical treatment. Appropriate and specific CPT codes are necessary to ensure accuracy and consistency of reporting and ultimately to improve patient access to care.

Family Medicine Clinician Screening and Barriers to Communication on Food Insecurity: A CERA General Membership Survey.

PURPOSE: Food insecurity (FI) is a hidden epidemic associated with worsening health outcomes affecting 33.8 million people in the US in 2021. Although studies demonstrate the importance of health care clinician assessment of a patient's food insecurity, little is known about whether Family Medicine clinicians (FMC) discuss FI with patients and what barriers influence their ability to communicate about FI. This study evaluated FM clinicians' food insecurity screening practices to evaluate screening disparities and identify barriers that influence the decision to communicate about FI. METHODS: Data were gathered and analyzed as part of the 2022 Council of Academic Family Medicine's Educational Research Alliance survey of Family Medicine general membership. RESULTS: The majority of respondents reported (66.9%) that their practice has a screening system for food insecurity, and most practices used a verbal screen with staff other than the clinician (41%) at specific visits (63.8%). Clinicians reported "rarely or never asking about FI" 40% of the time and only asking "always or frequently" 6.7% of the time. Inadequate time during appointments (44.5%) and other medical issues taking priority (29.4%) were identified as the most common barriers. The lack of resources available in the community was a significant barrier for clinicians who worked in rural areas. CONCLUSIONS: This survey provides insight into food insecurity screening disparities and identifies obstacles to FMC screening, such as time constraints, lack of resources, and knowledge of available resources. Understanding current communication practices could create opportunities for interventions to identify food insecurity and impact "Food as Medicine."

Inappropriate Ordering of Multitarget Stool DNA Tests for Colon Cancer Screening.

BACKGROUND: CRC screening is recommended for adults aged 45-75. Mt-sDNA is indicated for asymptomatic individuals between the ages of 45 and 85, but not for those with rectal bleeding, iron deficiency anemia, adenomatous polyps, previous colonoscopy within 10 years, family history of CRC, positive results from CRC screening tests within the past 6 months, or age less than 45 and greater than 85. We aimed to determine the prevalence of mt-sDNA use when not indicated and factors associated with inappropriate testing. METHODS: 7,345 patients underwent mt-sDNA testing and were randomized using EMERSE. Charts for the first 500 patients were reviewed to determine whether mt-sDNA was ordered appropriately according to the USPSTF criteria. Seven patients were excluded due to having more than one inappropriate ordering for mt-sDNA. RESULTS: Of 500 patients, 22.2% had an inappropriately ordered mt-sDNA test. The most common reason for inappropriate ordering was having a previous colonoscopy done within the past 10 years. Rates of inappropriate testing significantly varied by race and the specialty of the ordering provider, with internal medicine providers ordering the most mt-sDNA tests. Rates of inappropriate testing did not significantly vary by sex or type of insurance. DISCUSSION: Our study suggests that providers may not be familiar with guidelines for the indicated use of mtsDNA, leading to inappropriate referrals and increased costs. Patients at increased CRC risk would benefit from a more sensitive procedure such as a colonoscopy. Future studies could understand the motivation to order testing outside approved indications through provider surveys and interviews.

Menopause hormone therapy prescribing in ambulatory care visits among midlife and older U.S. women from 2018 to 2019.

The rates of prescription for menopause hormone therapy have been low in the U.S. since the 2002 Women's Health Initiative study, but no recent studies have assessed the prescribing of hormone therapy in the U.S. Using the National Ambulatory Medical Care Survey data from 2018 to 2019, we found that hormone therapy was prescribed in 3.8 % of U.S. visits by midlife and older women, with 60 % of these visits including estradiol-only prescriptions. Older age and Hispanic/Latina ethnicity were associated with decreased odds of prescribing, while White race and depression were associated with increased odds, indicating possible disparities in menopause care.

Stereotactic arrhythmia radioablation and its implications for modern cardiac electrophysiology: results of an EHRA survey.

Stereotactic arrhythmia radioablation (STAR) is a treatment option for recurrent ventricular tachycardia/fibrillation (VT/VF) in patients with structural heart disease (SHD). The current and future role of STAR as viewed by cardiologists is unknown. The study aimed to assess the current role, barriers to application, and expected future role of STAR. An online survey consisting of 20 questions on baseline demographics, awareness/access, current use, and the future role of STAR was conducted. A total of 129 international participants completed the survey [mean age 43 ± 11 years, 25 (16.4%) female]. Ninety-one (59.9%) participants were electrophysiologists. Nine participants (7%) were unaware of STAR as a therapeutic option. Sixty-four (49.6%) had access to STAR, while 62 (48.1%) had treated/referred a patient for treatment. Common primary indications for STAR were recurrent VT/VF in SHD (45%), recurrent VT/VF without SHD (7.8%), or premature ventricular contraction (3.9%). Reported main advantages of STAR were efficacy in the treatment of arrhythmias not amenable to conventional treatment (49%) and non-invasive treatment approach with overall low expected acute and short-term procedural risk (23%). Most respondents have foreseen a future clinical role of STAR in the treatment of VT/VF with or without underlying SHD (72% and 75%, respectively), although only a minority expected a first-line indication for it (7% and 5%, respectively). Stereotactic arrhythmia radioablation as a novel treatment option of recurrent VT appears to gain acceptance within the cardiology community. Further trials are critical to further define efficacy, patient populations, as well as the appropriate clinical use for the treatment of VT.

Care fragmentation in hepatopancreatic surgery and postoperative outcomes.

BACKGROUND: Practice fragmentation in surgery may be associated with poor quality of care. We sought to define the association between fragmented practice and outcomes in hepatopancreatic surgery relative to surgeon volume and sex. METHODS: Medicare beneficiaries who underwent hepatopancreatic surgery between 2016 and 2021 were identified. Multivariable analysis was performed to determine provider sex-based differences in the rate of fragmented practice relative to the achievement of a textbook outcome and health care expenditures after adjusting for procedure-specific case volume. RESULTS: Among 37,416 patients, almost one-half were female (n = 18,333, 49.0%) with the majority treated by male surgeons (n = 33,697, 90.8%). Female surgeons were more likely to have a greater rate of fragmented practice (females: n = 242, 84.9% vs males: n = 1,487, 78.4%, P = .003; odds ratio 2.66, 95% confidence interval 2.33-3.03, P < .001). Patients treated by high rate of fragmented practice surgeons had increased odds of postoperative complications (odds ratio 1.40, 95% confidence interval 1.28-1.54), extended length-of-stay (odds ratio 1.52, 95% confidence interval 1.38-1.68), 90-day-mortality (odds ratio 1.49, 95% confidence interval 1.28-1.72), and lower odds of achieving a textbook outcome (odds ratio 0.76, 95% confidence interval 0.71-0.83). This association persisted independent of surgeon-specific volume (textbook outcome, high vs low rate of fragmented practice: high-volume surgeon, odds ratio 0.53, 95% confidence interval 0.31-0.91, P = .021 vs. low-volume surgeon, odds ratio 0.76, 95% confidence interval 0.69-0.82, P < .001). Among patients treated by male surgeons, a high rate of fragmented practice was associated with reduced odds of achieving a textbook outcome (male surgeons: odds ratio 0.76, 95% confidence interval 0.70-0.82, P < .001; female surgeons: odds ratio 0.81, 95% confidence interval 0.63-1.05, P = .110). Treatment by surgeons with higher fragmented practice was associated with higher expenditures (index expenditure: percentage difference 9.87, 95% confidence interval, 7.42-12.36; P < .05). CONCLUSION: A high rate of fragmented practice adversely affected postoperative outcomes and healthcare expenditures even among high-volume surgeons with the impact varying based on surgeon sex.

Practice variation in surgical treatment for lumbar degenerative disc disease: exploring regional and hospital factors influencing surgical rates.

The presence of significant, unwarranted variation in treatment suggests that clinical decision making also depends on where patients live instead of what they need and prefer. Historically, high practice variation in surgical treatment for lumbar degenerative disc disease (LDDD) has been documented. This study aimed to investigate current regional variation in surgical treatment for sciatica resulting from LDDD. We conducted a retrospective, cross-sectional analysis of all Dutch adults (>18 years) between 2016 and 2019. Demographic data from Statistics Netherlands were merged with a nationwide claims database, covering over 99% of the population. Inclusion criteria comprised LDDD diagnosis codes and relevant surgical codes. Practice variation was assessed at the level of postal code areas and hospital service areas (HSAs). Multivariable logistic regression analysis was employed to identify variables associated with surgical treatment. Among the 119,148 hospital visitors with LDDD, 14,840 underwent surgical treatment. Practice variation for laminectomies and discectomies showed less than two-fold variation in both postal code and HSAs. However, instrumented fusion surgery demonstrated a five-fold variation in postal code areas and three-fold variation in HSAs. Predictors of receiving surgical treatment included opioid prescription and patient referral status. Gender differences were observed, with males more likely to undergo laminectomy or discectomy, and females more likely to receive instrumented fusion surgery. Our study revealed low variation rates for discectomies and laminectomies, while indicating a high variation rate for instrumented fusion surgery in LDDD patients. High-quality research is needed on the extent of guideline implementation and its influence on practice variation.

Orthopedic surgeons' transition into full-time practice over the last 20 years: an analysis using Ministry of Health billing data.

BACKGROUND: Underemployment is a reality for many new graduates, who accept locum or part-time work as an alternative to unemployment because of lack of opportunities. We sought to analyze orthopedic surgeons' Ontario Health Insurance Program (OHIP) billing data over a 20-year period as a proxy of practice patterns and hypothesized that billing in the first 6 years of practice would be affected by underemployment and locum. METHODS: We analyzed the annual average billing totals of orthopedic surgeons, broken down by year of graduation, year of billings, and number of surgeons billing in that year. We analyzed public census data of the Ontario population size as a proxy of orthopedic demand. RESULTS: A 2019 cross-sectional analysis showed that around 15 surgeons per graduating year were billing in Ontario from the 1995 to 2016 cohorts, while 2017 and 2018 saw an increase to 30 and 36 actively billing surgeons, respectively. The number returned to more historical numbers in 2019, with 20 actively billing surgeons. For those surgeons billing in Ontario, billing trends have been roughly stable, with average billings increasing each year for the first 6 years in practice (p < 0.001). Year of graduation did not have an effect on the first 6 years of billings (p > 0.5). Billings were stable after 6 years in practice (p > 0.09). CONCLUSION: The Ontario health care system has not expanded to support more orthopedic surgeons despite the aging and growing population; despite our growing population, the number of surgeons being trained and retained has not matched this growth. Further research needs to be done to guide optimal health human resource decision-making.

Wound care practices following in-office cutaneous surgery among family physicians in Canada.

OBJECTIVE: Family physicians (FPs) in Canada routinely perform in-office cutaneous surgery. There is strong evidence to support a moist wound healing environment, resulting in faster healing times and improved cosmesis. However, the wound care practices of FPs have not been previously studied. We aimed to examine the postoperative wound care practices of FPs after in-office cutaneous surgery. METHOD: An online survey was distributed to Canadian FPs to determine post-surgical wound care practices. The survey examined moist versus dry wound healing and the reasons for these recommendations were explored. Additional wound care practices were also studied. Appropriate statistical analyses were undertaken. RESULTS: A total of 573 (91.5%) FPs completed the survey. Just under half (49.2%) of FPs recommended moist wound healing to their patients, while the remaining respondents (50.8%) recommended dry wound healing. The most endorsed reason for both moist and dry wound care recommendations was prior training (63.1% and 65.3%, respectively). Most physicians (57.2%) recommended the use of a cream or ointment postoperatively. While there appeared to be consensus on recommending sun avoidance after cutaneous surgery (77.7%), additional wound care practices varied, including: the use of dressings; cleansing practices; smoking cessation; reduction in physical activity; photoprotection; water exposure; and scar treatment/cosmetic use. CONCLUSION: Almost half of FPs in Canada responding to the survey did not recommend moist wound healing despite strong evidence to support this practice. We also noted a diverse range of postoperative wound care practices after in-office cutaneous surgery. Therefore, these results highlight a critical need for consistent wound care recommendations following cutaneous surgery for FPs in Canada.

Biological treatment approach to inflammatory bowel disease is similar in academic and nonacademic centres - prime time for decentralisation of inflammatory bowel disease care?

BACKGROUND: With the increasing number of inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) patients, it is difficult to manage them within specialised IBD teams in academic medical centres: many are therefore treated in nonacademic IBD centres. It is unclear whether the time to introducing biologics is the same in both settings. AIM: We aimed to compare treatment approach with biologics in academic vs. nonacademic centres. METHODS: We analysed Slovenian national IBD registry data (UR-CARE Registry, supported by the European Crohn's and Colitis Organisation), which included 2 academic (2319 patients) and 4 nonacademic IBD (429 patients) centres. RESULTS: The disease phenotype was similar in both settings. In total, 1687 patients received 2782 treatment episodes with biologics. We observed no differences in treatment episodes with TNF-alpha inhibitors (60% vs. 61%), vedolizumab (24% vs. 23%), or ustekinumab (17% vs. 16%) in academic compared to nonacademic centres ( P  = 0.949). However, TNF inhibitors were less often the first biologic in academic centres (TNF inhibitors: 67.5% vs. 74.0%, vedolizumab: 20.3% vs. 17.9%, ustekinumab: 12.1% vs. 8.1%; P = 0.0096). Consequently, more patients received ustekinumab (29.8% vs. 18.3%) and vedolizumab (17.4% vs. 13.5%) and fewer TNF inhibitors (52.7% vs. 68.2%) for Crohn's disease in academic compared to nonacademic centres, with no such differences for ulcerative colitis. The time to initiation of the first biologic from diagnosis was short and similar in both settings (11.3 vs. 10.4 months, P  = 0.2). CONCLUSION: In this nationwide registry analysis, we observed that biological treatment choice was similar in academic and nonacademic settings. These findings support the decentralisation of IBD care.

Hepatitis B Delta: assessment of the knowledge and practices of hepato-gastroenterologists practicing in non-academic settings in France.

BACKGROUND: Data on the management of Hepatitis B-Delta (HB-D) by hepatogastroenterologists (HGs) practicing in nonacademic hospitals or private practices are unknown in France. OBJECTIVE: We aimed to evaluate the knowledge and practices of HGs practicing in nonacademic settings regarding HB-D. METHODS: A Google form document was sent to those HGs from May to September 2021. RESULTS: A total of 130 HGs (mean age, 45 years) have participated in this survey. Among HBsAg-positive patients, Delta infection was sought in only 89% of cases. Liver fibrosis was assessed using FibroScan in 77% of the cases and by liver biopsy in 81% of the cases. A treatment was proposed for patients with >F2 liver fibrosis in 49% of the cases regardless of transaminase levels and for all the patients by 39% of HGs. Responding HGs proposed a treatment using pegylated interferon in 50% of cases, bulevirtide in 45% of cases and a combination of pegylated interferon and bulevirtide in 40.5% of cases. Among the criteria to evaluate the treatment efficacy, a decrease or a normalization of transaminases was retained by 89% of responding HGs, a reduction of liver fibrosis score for 70% of them, an undetectable delta RNA and HBsAg for 55% of them and a 2 log 10 decline in delta viremia for 62% of the cases. CONCLUSION: Hepatitis Delta screening was not systematically performed in HBsAg-positive patients despite the probable awareness and knowledge of the few responders who were able to prescribe treatments of hepatitis delta.

Surgeon Factors and Trends Associated With the Use of Subacromial Decompression at the Time of Rotator Cuff Repair.

PURPOSE: Subacromial decompression (SAD) has historically been described as an essential part of the surgical treatment of rotator cuff disorders. However, investigations throughout the 21st century have increasingly questioned the need for routine SAD during rotator cuff repair (RCR). Our purpose was to assess for changes in the incidence of SAD performed during RCR over a 12-year period. In addition, we aimed to characterize surgeon and practice factors associated with SAD use. METHODS: Records from two large tertiary referral systems in the United States from 2010 to 2021 were reviewed. All cases of RCR with and without SAD were identified. The outcome of interest was the proportion of SAD performed during RCR across years and by surgeon. Surgeon-specific characteristics included institution, fellowship training, surgical volume, academic practice, and years in practice. Yearly trends were assessed using binomial logistic regression modeling, with a random effect accounting for surgeon-specific variability. RESULTS: During the study period, 37,165 RCR surgeries were performed by 104 surgeons. Of these cases, 71% underwent SAD during RCR. SAD use decreased by 11%. The multivariable model found that surgeons in academic practice, those with lower surgical volume, and those with increasing years in practice were significantly associated with increased odds of performing SAD. Surgeons with fellowship training were significantly more likely to use SAD over time, with the greatest odds of SAD noted for sports medicine surgeons (odds ratio = 3.04). CONCLUSIONS: Although SAD use during RCR appears to be decreasing, multiple surgeon and practice factors (years in practice, fellowship training, volume, and academic practice) are associated with a change in SAD use. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: These data suggest that early-career surgeons entering practice are likely driving the trend of declining SAD. Despite evidence suggesting limited clinical benefits, SAD remains commonly performed; future studies should endeavor to determine factors associated with practice changes among surgeons.

Do treatment patterns differ in those with early-onset colorectal cancer?

BACKGROUND: The incidence of early-onset colorectal cancer (EOCRC) is increasing. International guidelines state that treatment should not differ from that of older patients. Several studies have shown that patients under 50 years are receiving more aggressive treatment, without any survival benefit. We aim to determine if treatment for stages 2 and 3 EOCRC differs from those of late-onset colorectal cancer (LOCRC) patients. METHODS: This was a retrospective, population-based, cohort study of the treatment patterns of patients diagnosed with colorectal cancer in Canterbury, New Zealand, from 2010 to 2021 age <50 years, compared to those aged 60-74 years. RESULTS: A total of 3263 patients were diagnosed with CRC between 2010 and 2021. Following exclusions, we identified 130 EOCRC and 668 LOCRC patients. Stage 2 EOCRC patients are more likely to be offered adjuvant chemotherapy (p = <0.001). Furthermore, EOCRC patients with either stage 2 or 3 disease are more likely to receive multi-agent therapy (p = <0.01), without any associated increase in survival. CONCLUSION: EOCRC patients are given more adjuvant chemotherapy, without a corresponding improvement in outcomes, highlighting a potential for increased treatment-related harms, particularly in stage 2 disease. Clinicians should be mindful of these biases when treating young cancer patients and need to carefully consider treatment-related harms.