The power of hope.

My patient was in his late 20s and dying of an advanced sarcoma. He came to our institution seeking a miracle-a cure for his incurable cancer. Despite second and third opinions, he never relinquished his hope that science would cure him. In this story, I explore how hope allowed my patient, and others like him, to reclaim their narratives and maintain their personhood in the face of serious illness.

Cardio-oncology care in the era of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic: An International Cardio-Oncology Society (ICOS) statement.

The severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) has given rise to a pandemic of unprecedented proportions in the modern era because of its highly contagious nature and impact on human health and society: coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Patients with cardiovascular (CV) risk factors and established CV disease (CVD) are among those initially identified at the highest risk for serious complications, including death. Subsequent studies have pointed out that patients with cancer are also at high risk for a critical disease course. Therefore, the most vulnerable patients are seemingly those with both cancer and CVD, and a careful, unified approach in the evaluation and management of this patient population is especially needed in times of the COVID-19 pandemic. This review provides an overview of the unique implications of the viral outbreak for the field of cardio-oncology and outlines key modifications in the approach to this ever-increasing patient population. These modifications include a shift toward greater utilization of cardiac biomarkers and a more focused CV imaging approach in the broader context of modifications to typical practice pathways. The goal of this strategic adjustment is to minimize the risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection (or other future viral outbreaks) while not becoming negligent of CVD and its important impact on the overall outcomes of patients who are being treated for cancer.

Catheter Ablation in End-Stage Heart Failure with Atrial Fibrillation.

BACKGROUND: The role of catheter ablation in patients with symptomatic atrial fibrillation and end-stage heart failure is unknown. METHODS: We conducted a single-center, open-label trial in Germany that involved patients with symptomatic atrial fibrillation and end-stage heart failure who were referred for heart transplantation evaluation. Patients were assigned to receive catheter ablation and guideline-directed medical therapy or medical therapy alone. The primary end point was a composite of death from any cause, implantation of a left ventricular assist device, or urgent heart transplantation. RESULTS: A total of 97 patients were assigned to the ablation group and 97 to the medical-therapy group. The trial was stopped for efficacy by the data and safety monitoring board 1 year after randomization was completed. Catheter ablation was performed in 81 of 97 patients (84%) in the ablation group and in 16 of 97 patients (16%) in the medical-therapy group. After a median follow-up of 18.0 months (interquartile range, 14.6 to 22.6), a primary end-point event had occurred in 8 patients (8%) in the ablation group and in 29 patients (30%) in the medical-therapy group (hazard ratio, 0.24; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.11 to 0.52; P<0.001). Death from any cause occurred in 6 patients (6%) in the ablation group and in 19 patients (20%) in the medical-therapy group (hazard ratio, 0.29; 95% CI, 0.12 to 0.72). Procedure-related complications occurred in 3 patients in the ablation group and in 1 patient in the medical-therapy group. CONCLUSIONS: Among patients with atrial fibrillation and end-stage heart failure, the combination of catheter ablation and guideline-directed medical therapy was associated with a lower likelihood of a composite of death from any cause, implantation of a left ventricular assist device, or urgent heart transplantation than medical therapy alone. (Funded by Else Kröner-Fresenius-Stiftung; CASTLE-HTx ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT04649801.).

Tools to facilitate communication during physician-patient consultations in cancer care: An overview of systematic reviews.

Tools have been developed to facilitate communication and support information exchange between people diagnosed with cancer and their physicians. Patient-reported outcome measures, question prompt lists, patient-held records, tape recordings of consultations, decision aids, and survivorship care plans have all been promoted as potential tools, and there is extensive literature exploring their impact on patient outcomes. Eleven systematic reviews of studies evaluating tools to facilitate patient-physician communication were reviewed and summarized in this overview of systematic reviews. Across the systematic reviews, 87 publications reported on 84 primary studies involving 15,381 participants. Routine use of patient-reported outcome measures and feedback of results to clinicians can improve pain management, physician-patient communication, and symptom detection and control; increase utilization of supportive care; and increase patient involvement in care. Question prompt lists can increase the number of questions asked by patients without increasing consultation length and may encourage them to reflect and plan questions before the consultation. There is limited benefit in audio recording consultations or using patient-held records during consultations. Physicians should be supported by adequately resourced health services to respond effectively to the range of clinical and broader patient needs identified through the routine use of tools to facilitate communication.

Equitably improving outcomes for cancer survivors and supporting caregivers: A blueprint for care delivery, research, education, and policy.

Cancer care delivery is being shaped by growing numbers of cancer survivors coupled with provider shortages, rising costs of primary treatment and follow-up care, significant survivorship health disparities, increased reliance on informal caregivers, and the transition to value-based care. These factors create a compelling need to provide coordinated, comprehensive, personalized care for cancer survivors in ways that meet survivors' and caregivers' unique needs while minimizing the impact of provider shortages and controlling costs for health care systems, survivors, and families. The authors reviewed research identifying and addressing the needs of cancer survivors and caregivers and used this synthesis to create a set of critical priorities for care delivery, research, education, and policy to equitably improve survivor outcomes and support caregivers. Efforts are needed in 3 priority areas: 1) implementing routine assessment of survivors' needs and functioning and caregivers' needs; 2) facilitating personalized, tailored, information and referrals from diagnosis onward for both survivors and caregivers, shifting services from point of care to point of need wherever possible; and 3) disseminating and supporting the implementation of new care methods and interventions.

How I manage inpatient consultations for quantitative neutrophil abnormalities in adults.

Neutrophilia and neutropenia commonly lead to inpatient hematology consultation. Quantitative neutrophil abnormalities have a broad differential and include diagnoses that are important to recognize because they may be associated with increased mortality. Neutrophilia can reflect etiologies such as infection, medications, inflammation, splenectomy, and congenital disorders. Neutropenia can arise from infection, medications, autoimmune destruction, sequestration, nutritional deficiency, malignancy, and congenital neutropenia syndromes. In the evaluation of all abnormalities of neutrophil number, the timing of the change, and the patient's historical neutrophil count are crucial.

Improving patient and caregiver outcomes in oncology: Team-based, timely, and targeted palliative care.

Over the past decade, a large body of evidence has accumulated supporting the integration of palliative care into oncology practice for patients with advanced cancer. The question is no longer whether palliative care should be offered, but what is the optimal model of delivery, when is the ideal time to refer, who is in greatest need of a referral, and how much palliative care should oncologists themselves be providing. These questions are particularly relevant given the scarcity of palliative care resources internationally. In this state-of-the-science review directed at the practicing cancer clinician, the authors first discuss the contemporary literature examining the impact of specialist palliative care on various health outcomes. Then, conceptual models are provided to support team-based, timely, and targeted palliative care. Team-based palliative care allows the interdisciplinary members to address comprehensively the multidimensional care needs of patients and their caregivers. Timely palliative care, at its best, is preventive care to minimize crises at the end of life. Targeted palliative care involves identifying the patients most likely to benefit from specialist palliative care interventions, akin to the concept of targeted cancer therapies. Finally, the strengths and weaknesses of innovative care models, such as outpatient clinics, embedded clinics, nurse-led palliative care, primary palliative care provided by oncology teams, and automatic referral, are summarized. Moving forward, more research is needed to determine how different health systems can best personalize palliative care to provide the right level of intervention, for the right patient, in the right setting, at the right time. CA Cancer J Clin. 2018;680:00-00. 2018 American Cancer Society, Inc.

Black Box Warning: Large Language Models and the Future of Infectious Diseases Consultation.

Large language models (LLMs) are artificial intelligence systems trained by deep learning algorithms to process natural language and generate text responses to user prompts. Some approach physician performance on a range of medical challenges, leading some proponents to advocate for their potential use in clinical consultation and prompting some consternation about the future of cognitive specialties. However, LLMs currently have limitations that preclude safe clinical deployment in performing specialist consultations, including frequent confabulations, lack of contextual awareness crucial for nuanced diagnostic and treatment plans, inscrutable and unexplainable training data and methods, and propensity to recapitulate biases. Nonetheless, considering the rapid improvement in this technology, growing calls for clinical integration, and healthcare systems that chronically undervalue cognitive specialties, it is critical that infectious diseases clinicians engage with LLMs to enable informed advocacy for how they should-and shouldn't-be used to augment specialist care.

Predictors of Mortality of Streptococcal Bacteremia and the Role of Infectious Diseases Consultation: A Retrospective Cohort Study.

BACKGROUND: Streptococcal bacteremia is associated with high mortality. Thia study aims to identify predictors of mortality among patients with streptococcal bacteremia. METHODS: This retrospective study was conducted at the Lausanne University Hospital, Switzerland, and included episodes of streptococcal bacteremia among adult patients from 2015 to 2023. RESULTS: During the study period, 861 episodes of streptococcal bacteremia were included. The majority of episodes were categorized in the Mitis group (348 episodes; 40%), followed by the Pyogenic group (215; 25%). Endocarditis was the most common source of bacteremia (164; 19%). The overall 14-day mortality rate was 8% (65 episodes). The results from the Cox multivariable regression model showed that a Charlson comorbidity index >4 (P .001; hazard ratio [HR], 2.87; confidence interval [CI]: 1.58-5.22), Streptococcus pyogenes (P = .011; HR, 2.54;CI: 1.24-5.21), sepsis (P < .001; HR, 7.48; CI: 3.86-14.47), lower respiratory tract infection (P = .002; HR, 2.62; CI: 1.42-4.81), and absence of source control interventions within 48 hours despite being warranted (P = .002; HR, 2.62; CI: 1.43-4.80) were associated with 14-day mortality. Conversely, interventions performed within 48 hours of bacteremia onset, such as infectious diseases consultation (P < .001; HR, 0.29; CI: .17-.48) and appropriate antimicrobial treatment (P < .001; HR, .28; CI: .14-.57), were associated with improved outcome. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings underscore the pivotal role of infectious diseases consultation in guiding antimicrobial treatment and recommending source control interventions for patients with streptococcal bacteremia.

Three-year survival of breast cancer patients attending a one-stop breast care clinic nested within a primary care health facility in sub-Saharan Africa-Zambia.

In Zambia, women with breast symptoms travel through multiple levels of the healthcare system before obtaining a definitive diagnosis. To eradicate this critical barrier to care, we nested a novel breast specialty service platform inside a large public-sector primary healthcare facility in Lusaka, Zambia to offer clinical breast examination, breast ultrasound, and ultrasound-guided core needle biopsy in a one-stop format, tightly linked to referral for treatment. The objective of the study was to determine the life expectancy and survival outcomes of a prospective cohort of women diagnosed with breast cancer who were attended to and followed up at the clinic. The effect of breast cancer stage on prognosis was determined by estimating stage-specific crude survival using the Kaplan-Meier method. Survival analysis was used to estimate mean lifespan according to age and stage at diagnosis. We enrolled 302 women with histologically confirmed breast cancer. The overall 3-year survival was 73%. An increase in patients presenting with early breast cancer and improvements in their survival were observed. Women with early-stage breast cancer had a lifespan similar to the general population, while loss of life expectancy was significant at more advanced stages of disease. Our findings suggest that implementing efficient breast care services at the primary care level can avert a substantial proportion of breast cancer-related deaths. The mitigating factor appears to be stage of disease at the time of diagnosis, the cause of which is multifactorial, with the most influential being delays in the referral process.

Histological diagnostic discrepancy and its clinical impact in bone and soft tissue tumors referred to a sarcoma center.

Histological diagnosis of sarcomas (malignant bone and soft tissue tumors) is challenging due to their rarity, morphological diversity, and constantly evolving diagnostic criteria. In this study, we aimed to assess the concordance in histological diagnosis of bone and soft tissue tumors between referring hospitals and a tertiary sarcoma center and analyzed the clinical impact of the diagnostic alteration. We analyzed 628 consecutively accessioned specimens from 624 patients who visited a specialized sarcoma center for treatment. The diagnoses at referring hospitals and those at the sarcoma center were compared and classified into four categories: agreed, disagreed, specified, and de-specified. Of the 628 specimens, the diagnoses agreed in 403 (64.2%) specimens, whereas some changes were made in 225 (35.8%) specimens: disagreed in 153 (24.3%), specified in 52 (8.3%), and de-specified in 20 (3.2%) cases. The benign/intermediate/malignant judgment changed for 92 cases (14.6%). The diagnostic change resulted in patient management modification in 91 cases (14.5%), including surgical and medical treatment changes. The main inferred reason for the diagnostic discrepancies was a different interpretation of morphological findings of the tumor, which accounted for 48.9% of the cases. This was followed by the unavailability of specialized immunohistochemical antibodies and the unavailability of genetic analysis. In summary, our study clarified the actual clinical impact of diagnostic discrepancy in bone and soft tissue tumors. This may underscore the value of pathology consultation, facilitating access to specialized diagnostic tools, and continued education. These measures are expected to improve diagnostic precision and ultimately benefit patients.

Provider motivations and barriers to cancer clinical trial screening, referral, and operations: Findings from a survey.

BACKGROUND: Provider and institutional practices have been shown to have a large impact on cancer clinical trial enrollment. Understanding provider perspectives on screening for trial eligibility is necessary to improve enrollment. METHODS: A questionnaire about incentives, barriers, process tools, and infrastructure related to opening trials and referring patients to onsite and offsite trials was administered to diverse stakeholders, including professional societies, advocacy organizations, and industry networks. Descriptive statistics were used to summarize findings. RESULTS: Overall, 693 responses were received, primarily from physicians (42.7%) and nurses (35.6%) employed at hospital health systems (43.7%) and academic centers (36.5%). Approximately half (49.2%) screened all patients for onsite clinical trials with screening typically done by manual chart review (81.9%). The greatest incentive reported for offering trials was providing the best treatment options for patients (67.7%). Contracting and paperwork (48.5%) were the greatest barriers to opening more onsite trials. Offsite referrals were rare. CONCLUSIONS: Screening for trial eligibility is a largely manual and ad hoc process, with screening and referral to offsite trials occurring infrequently. Administrative and infrastructure barriers commonly prevent sites from opening more onsite trials. These findings suggest that automated trial screening tools built into workflows that screen in a site-agnostic manner could result in more frequent trial eligibility screening, especially for offsite trials. With recent momentum, in part in response to the COVID-19 pandemic, to improve clinical trial efficiencies and broaden access and participant diversity, implementing tools to improve screening and referral processes is timely and essential. PLAIN LANGUAGE SUMMARY: There are many factors that contribute to low adult enrollment in cancer clinical trials, but previous research has indicated that provider and institutional barriers are the largest contributors to low cancer clinical trial enrollment. In this survey, we sought to gain insight into cancer clinical trial enrollment practices from the perspective of health care providers such as physicians and nurses. We found that only approximately half of respondents indicated their institution systematically screens their patients for clinical trials and this process is manual and time consuming. Furthermore, we found that providers infrequently search for and refer patients to clinical trials at other sites. Creating better screening methods could improve enrollment in clinical trials.

Risk of cancer and serious disease in Danish patients with urgent referral for serious non-specific symptoms and signs of cancer in Funen 2014-2021.

BACKGROUND: In 2011, as the first European country, Denmark introduced the non-organ-specific cancer patient pathway (CPP) for patients presenting with non-specific symptoms and signs of cancer (NSSC). The proportion of patients with cancer over time is unknown. METHODS: A retrospective cohort study of all patients with a NSSC-CPP investigational course in the province of Funen to the Diagnostic Centre in Svendborg from 2014 to 2021 was performed to evaluate the proportion of patients with cancer and serious disease over time. RESULTS: A total of 6698 patients were referred to the NSSC-CPP of which 20.2% had cancer. While the crude referral rate increased from 114 per 100,000 people in 2014 and stabilised to around 214 in 2017-2021, the cancer detection rate of the total yearly new cancers in Funen diagnosed through the NSSC-CPP in DC Svendborg increased from 3 to 6%. CONCLUSIONS: With now high and stable conversion and crude referral rates, the NSSC-CPP is one of the largest CPPs in Denmark as measured by the number of new cancer cases found. Similar urgent referral programmes in other countries might fill an unmet medical need for patients presenting with serious non-specific symptoms and signs of cancer in general practice.

Routes to diagnosis for hepatocellular carcinoma patients: predictors and associations with treatment and mortality.

BACKGROUND: Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) incidence has increased rapidly, and prognosis remains poor. We aimed to explore predictors of routes to diagnosis (RtD), and outcomes, in HCC cases. METHODS: HCC cases diagnosed 2006-2017 were identified from the National Cancer Registration Dataset and linked to Hospital Episode Statistics and the RtD metric. Multivariable logistic regression was used to explore associations between RtD, diagnosis year, 365-day mortality and receipt of potentially curative treatment. RESULTS: 23,555 HCC cases were identified; 36.1% via emergency presentation (EP), 30.2% GP referral (GP), 17.1% outpatient referral, 11.0% two-week wait and 4.6% other/unknown routes. Odds of 365-day mortality was >70% lower via GP or OP routes than EP, and odds of curative treatment 3-4 times higher. Further adjustment for cancer/cirrhosis stage attenuated the associations with curative treatment. People who were older, female, had alcohol-related liver disease, or were more deprived, were at increased risk of an EP. Over time, diagnoses via EP decreased, and via GP increased. CONCLUSIONS: HCC RtD is an important predictor of outcomes. Continuing to reduce EP and increase GP and OP presentations, for example by identifying and regularly monitoring patients at higher risk of HCC, may improve stage at diagnosis and survival.

The Inborn Errors of Immunity-Virtual Consultation System Platform in Service for the Italian Primary Immunodeficiency Network: Results from the Validation Phase.

PURPOSE: Inborn errors of immunity (IEI) represent a heterogeneous group of rare genetically determined diseases. In some cases, patients present with complex or atypical phenotypes, not fulfilling the accepted diagnostic criteria for IEI and, thus, at high risk of misdiagnosis or diagnostic delay. This study aimed to validate a platform that, through the opinion of immunologist experts, improves the diagnostic process and the level of care of patients with atypical/complex IEI. METHODS: Here, we describe the functioning of the IEI-Virtual Consultation System (VCS), an innovative platform created by the Italian Immunodeficiency Network (IPINet). RESULTS: In the validation phase, from January 2020 to June 2021, 68 cases were entered on the IEI-VCS platform. A final diagnosis was achieved in 35/68 cases (51%, 95% CI 38.7 to 64.2). In 22 out of 35 solved cases, the diagnosis was confirmed by genetic analysis. In 3/35 cases, a diagnosis of secondary immunodeficiency was made. In the remaining 10 cases, an unequivocal clinical and immunological diagnosis was obtained, even though not substantiated by genetic analysis. CONCLUSION: From our preliminary study, the VCS represents an innovative and useful system to improve the diagnostic process of patients with complex unsolved IEI disorders, with benefits both in terms of reduction of time of diagnosis and access to the required therapies. These results may help the functioning of other international platforms for the management of complex cases.

2 days versus 5 days of postoperative antibiotics for complex appendicitis: a pragmatic, open-label, multicentre, non-inferiority randomised trial.

BACKGROUND: The appropriate duration of postoperative antibiotics for complex appendicitis is unclear. The increasing global threat of antimicrobial resistance warrants restrictive antibiotic use, which could also reduce side-effects, length of hospital stay, and costs. METHODS: In this pragmatic, open-label, non-inferiority trial in 15 hospitals in the Netherlands, patients with complex appendicitis (aged ≥8 years) were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive 2 days or 5 days of intravenous antibiotics after appendicectomy. Randomisation was stratified by centre, and treating physicians and patients were not masked to treatment allocation. The primary endpoint was a composite endpoint of infectious complications and mortality within 90 days. The main outcome was the absolute risk difference (95% CI) in the primary endpoint, adjusted for age and severity of appendicitis, with a non-inferiority margin of 7·5%. Outcome assessment was based on electronic patient records and a telephone consultation 90 days after appendicectomy. Efficacy was analysed in the intention-to-treat and per-protocol populations. Safety outcomes were analysed in the intention-to-treat population. This trial was registered with the Netherlands Trial Register, NL5946. FINDINGS: Between April 12, 2017, and June 3, 2021, 13 267 patients were screened and 1066 were randomly assigned, 533 to each group. 31 were excluded from intention-to-treat analysis of the 2-day group and 30 from the 5-day group owing to errors in recruitment or consent. Appendicectomy was done laparoscopically in 955 (95%) of 1005 patients. The telephone follow-up was completed in 664 (66%) of 1005 patients. The primary endpoint occurred in 51 (10%) of 502 patients analysed in the 2-day group and 41 (8%) of 503 patients analysed in the 5-day group (adjusted absolute risk difference 2·0%, 95% CI -1·6 to 5·6). Rates of complications and re-interventions were similar between trial groups. Fewer patients had adverse effects of antibiotics in the 2-day group (45 [9%] of 502 patients) than in the 5-day group (112 [22%] of 503 patients; odds ratio [OR] 0·344, 95% CI 0·237 to 0·498). Re-admission to hospital was more frequent in the 2-day group (58 [12%] of 502 patients) than in the 5-day group (29 [6%] of 503 patients; OR 2·135, 1·342 to 3·396). There were no treatment-related deaths. INTERPRETATION: 2 days of postoperative intravenous antibiotics for complex appendicitis is non-inferior to 5 days in terms of infectious complications and mortality within 90 days, based on a non-inferiority margin of 7·5%. These findings apply to laparoscopic appendicectomy conducted in a well resourced health-care setting. Adopting this strategy will reduce adverse effects of antibiotics and length of hospital stay. FUNDING: The Netherlands Organization for Health Research and Development.

Determinants of lipid clinic referral and attendance in a multi-ethnic adult population in south London: a cross-sectional study.

BACKGROUND: Primary dyslipidaemias, including familial hypercholesterolaemia, are underdiagnosed genetic disorders that substantially increase risk for premature coronary artery disease in adults. Early identification of primary dyslipidaemias via lipid clinic referral optimises patient management and enables cascade screening of relatives. Improving the identification of primary dyslipidaemias, and understanding disparities in ascertainment and management, is an NHS priority. We aimed to assess determinants of lipid clinic referral or attendance (LCR) in ethnically diverse adults. METHODS: We did a retrospective cross-sectional study using the Lambeth DataNet containing anonymised data from 41 general practitioner (GP) practices in south London. We looked at referral data for adult patients aged 18 years and older from Jan 1, 1995, until May 14, 2018. LCR was the main outcome. We used sequential multilevel logistic regression models adjusted for practice effects to estimate the odds of LCR assessed across six ethnic groups (reference group White) and patient-level factors (demographic, socioeconomic, lifestyle, comorbidities, total cholesterol [TC] >7·5mmol/L, statin prescription, and practice factors). The study was approved by NHS South East London Clinical Commissioning Group (CCG) and NHS Lambeth CCG. FINDINGS: 780 (0·23%) of 332 357 adult patients were coded as referred (n=538) or seen (n=252) in a lipid clinic. 164 487 (46·49%) were women (appendix). The fully adjusted model for odds of LCR showed the following significant associations for age (odds ratio [OR] 0·96, 95% CI 0·96-0·97, p<0·001); Black, African, Caribbean, or Black-British ethnicity (0·67, 0·53-0·84, p=0·001); ex-smoker status (1·29, 1·05-1·57, p=0·014); TC higher than 7·5 mmol/L (12·18, 9·60-15·45, p<0·001); statin prescription (14·01, 10·85-18·10, p<0·001); diabetes (0·72, 0·58-0·91, p=0·005); high-frequency GP attendance at seven or more GP consultations in the past year (1·49, 1·21-1·84, p<0·001); high GP-density (0·5-0·99 full-time equivalent GPs per 1000 patients; 2·70, 1·23-5·92, p=0·013). Sensitivity analyses for LCR restricted to familial hypercholesterolaemia-coded patients (n=581) found associations with TC higher than 7·5 mmol/L (4·26, 1·89-9·62, p<0·001), statin prescription (16·96, 2·19-131·36, p=0·007), and high GP-density (5·73, 1·27-25·93, p=0·023), with no significant associations with ethnicity. The relative contribution of GP practices to LCR was 6·32% of the total variance. There were no significant interactions between ethnicity and deprivation, age, or obesity. INTERPRETATION: While interpretation is limited by the accuracy and completeness of coded records, the study showed factors associated with a higher likelihood of LCR included individuals recorded as having TC higher than 7·5 mmol/L, statin prescription, ex-smoker status, high-frequency GP attendance, and registration at a GP practice with 0·5-0·99 GP density. Patients with increasing age; Black, African, Caribbean, or Black-British ethnicity patients; and patients with diabetes had lower odds of LCR. Finally, the difference in odds of LCR between Black and White patients highlights potential health inequalities. FUNDING: NHS Race & Health Observatory.

Novel Symptom Subgroups in Individuals With Irritable Bowel Syndrome Predict Disease Impact and Burden.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Current classification systems based on bowel habit fail to capture the multidimensional nature of irritable bowel syndrome (IBS). We previously derived and validated a classification system, using latent class analysis, incorporating factors beyond bowel habit. We applied this in another cohort of people with IBS to assess its ability to capture the impact of IBS on the individual, the health care system, and society. METHODS: We collected demographic, symptom, and psychological health data from adults in the community self-identifying as having IBS, and meeting Rome IV criteria. We applied our latent class analysis model to identify the 7 subgroups (clusters) described previously, based on overall gastrointestinal symptom severity and psychological burden. We assessed quality of life, health care costs (£1 = $1.20), employment status, annual income, work productivity, and ability to perform work duties in each cluster. RESULTS: Of 1278 responders, 752 (58.8%) met Rome IV criteria. The 7-cluster model fit the data well. The patients in the 4 clusters with the highest psychological burden, and particularly those in cluster 6 with high overall gastrointestinal symptom severity and high psychological burden, showed lower educational levels, higher gastrointestinal symptom-specific anxiety, were more likely to have consulted a gastroenterologist, and used more drugs for IBS. IBS-related and generic quality of life were impaired significantly in these 4 clusters and significantly fewer individuals reported earning ≥£30,000 per year. Productivity and the ability to work, manage at home, engage in social and private leisure activities, and maintain close relationships all were impacted significantly, and IBS-related health care costs over the previous 12 months were highest in these 4 clusters. In those in cluster 6, costs were more than £1000 per person per year. CONCLUSIONS: Our clusters identify groups of individuals with significant impairments in quality of life, earning potential, and ability to work and function socially, who are high utilizers of health care.

Comparing the clinical practice and prescribing safety of locum and permanent doctors: observational study of primary care consultations in England.

BACKGROUND: Temporary doctors, known as locums, are a key component of the medical workforce in the NHS but evidence on differences in quality and safety between locum and permanent doctors is limited. We aimed to examine differences in the clinical practice, and prescribing safety for locum and permanent doctors working in primary care in England. METHODS: We accessed electronic health care records (EHRs) for 3.5 million patients from the CPRD GOLD database with linkage to Hospital Episode Statistics from 1st April 2010 to 31st March 2022. We used multi-level mixed effects logistic regression to compare consultations with locum and permanent GPs for several patient outcomes including general practice revisits; prescribing of antibiotics; strong opioids; hypnotics; A&E visits; emergency hospital admissions; admissions for ambulatory care sensitive conditions; test ordering; referrals; and prescribing safety indicators while controlling for patient and practice characteristics. RESULTS: Consultations with locum GPs were 22% more likely to involve a prescription for an antibiotic (OR = 1.22 (1.21 to 1.22)), 8% more likely to involve a prescription for a strong opioid (OR = 1.08 (1.06 to 1.09)), 4% more likely to be followed by an A&E visit on the same day (OR = 1.04 (1.01 to 1.08)) and 5% more likely to be followed by an A&E visit within 1 to 7 days (OR = 1.05 (1.02 to 1.08)). Consultations with a locum were 12% less likely to lead to a practice revisit within 7 days (OR = 0.88 (0.87 to 0.88)), 4% less likely to involve a prescription for a hypnotic (OR = 0.96 (0.94 to 0.98)), 15% less likely to involve a referral (OR = 0.85 (0.84 to 0.86)) and 19% less likely to involve a test (OR = 0.81 (0.80 to 0.82)). We found no evidence that emergency admissions, ACSC admissions and eight out of the eleven prescribing safety indicators were different if patients were seen by a locum or a permanent GP. CONCLUSIONS: Despite existing concerns, the clinical practice and performance of locum GPs did not appear to be systematically different from that of permanent GPs. The practice and performance of both locum and permanent GPs is likely shaped by the organisational setting and systems within which they work.