Virtual Tumor Board Increases Provider Attendance and Case Presentations.

PURPOSE: Many cancer centers engage in multidisciplinary tumor board meetings to determine the optimal approach to complex cancer care. With the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic, many institutions changed the format of these meetings from in-person to virtual. The aim of this study was to determine if the change to a virtual meeting format had an impact on attendance and cases presented. METHODS: Tumor board records were analyzed to obtain attendance and case presentation information at a National Cancer Institute-designated Comprehensive Cancer Center. Twelve-month in-person tumor board data were compared with 12-month virtual tumor board data to assess for difference in attendance and case presentation patterns. RESULTS: Seven separate weekly tumor board meetings at the beginning of the study (breast, GI, gynecology, liver, lung, melanoma, and urology) were expanded to nine meetings on the virtual platform (+endocrine and pancreas). Overall attendance increased by 46% on the virtual platform compared with in-person meetings (4,030 virtual attendances v 2,753 in-person, P < .001). Increased attendance was present across all specialties on the virtual platform. In addition, the number of patient cases discussed increased from 2,127 in in-person meeting to 2,656 on the virtual platform (a 20% increase, P < .001). CONCLUSION: A significant increase was observed in overall tumor board attendance and in case presentations per meeting, requiring the expansion of additional weekly meetings. Furthermore, in a major cancer center with multiple community affiliates, virtual tumor boards may encourage increased participation from remote sites with the benefit of obtaining expert specialist advice as compared with geographically challenging in-person meetings.

Endoscopic and non-endoscopic approaches for the management of radiation-induced rectal bleeding.

Pelvic radiation is a commonly utilized treatment for malignancy of the genitourinary and lower gastrointestinal tract. Radiation proctitis and the resultant clinical picture varies from asymptomatic to potentially life threatening. Similarly, treatment options also vary greatly, from medical therapy to surgical intervention. Commonly utilized medical therapy includes sucralfate enemas, antibiotics, 5-aminosalicylic acid derivatives, probiotics, antioxidants, short-chain fatty acids, formalin instillation and fractionated hyperbaric oxygen. More invasive treatments include endoscopic-based, focally ablative interventions such as dilation, heater and bipolar cautery, neodymium/yttrium aluminum garnet argon laser, radiofrequency ablation or argon plasma coagulation. Despite its relatively common frequency, there is a dearth of existing literature reporting head-to-head comparisons of the various treatment options via a randomized controlled approach. The purpose of our review was to present the reader a consolidation of the existing evidence-based literature with the goal of highlighting the comparative effectiveness and risks of the various treatment approaches. Finally, we outline a pragmatic approach to the treatment of radiation proctitis. In light of the lack of randomized data, our goal is to pursue as least invasive an approach as possible, with escalation of care tailored to the severity of the patient's symptoms. For those cases that are clinically asymptomatic or only mildly symptomatic, observation or medical management can be considered. Once a patient fails such management or symptoms become more severe, invasive procedures such as endoscopically based focal ablation or surgical intervention can be considered. Although not all recommendations are supported by level I evidence, reported case series and single-institutional studies in the literature suggest that successful treatment with cessation of symptoms can be obtained in the majority of cases.

Physician staffing for the practice of psychosomatic medicine in general hospitals: a pilot study.

BACKGROUND: The treatment of psychiatric illnesses, prevalent in the general hospital, requires broadly trained providers with expertise at the interface of psychiatry and medicine. Since each hospital operates under different economic constraints, it is difficult to establish an appropriate ratio of such providers to patients. OBJECTIVE: The authors sought to determine the current staffing patterns and ratios of Psychosomatic Medicine practitioners in general hospitals, to better align manpower with clinical service and educational requirements on consultation-liaison psychiatry services. METHOD: Program directors of seven academic Psychosomatic Medicine (PM) programs in the Northeast were surveyed to establish current staffing patterns and patient volumes. Survey data were reviewed and analyzed along with data from the literature and The Academy of Psychosomatic Medicine (APM) fellowship directory. RESULTS: Staffing patterns varied widely, both in terms of the number and disciplines of staff providing care for medical and surgical inpatients. The ratio of initial consultations performed per hospital bed varied from 1.6 to 4.6. CONCLUSION: Although staffing patterns vary, below a minimum staffing level, there is likely to be significant human and financial cost. Efficient sizing of a PM staff must be accomplished in the context of a given institution's patient population, the experience of providers, the presence/absence and needs of trainees, and the financial constraints of the department and institution. National survey data are needed to provide benchmarks for both academic and nonacademic PM services.

Psychiatrists for medically complex patients: bringing value at the physical health and mental health/substance-use disorder interface.

BACKGROUND: In their current configuration, traditional reactive consultation-liaison services see a small percentage of the general-hospital patients who could benefit from their care. These services are poorly reimbursed and bring limited value in terms of clinical improvement and reduction in health-service use. METHOD: The authors examine models of cross-disciplinary, integrated health services that have been shown to promote health and lower cost in medically-complex patients, those with complicated admixtures of physical, mental, social, and health-system difficulties. CONCLUSION: Psychiatrists who specialize in the treatment of medically-complex patients must now consider a transition from traditional consultation to proactive, value-added programs and bill for services from medical, rather than behavioral, insurance dollars, since the majority of health-enhancement and cost-savings from these programs occur in the medical sector. The authors provide the clinical and financial arguments for such program-creation and the steps that can be taken as psychiatrists for medically-complex patients move to the next generation of interdisciplinary service.