ABSTRACT
COVID-19 continues to be a major source of global morbidity and mortality. It abruptly stressed healthcare systems early in 2020 and the pressures continue. Devastating hardships have been endured by individuals, families and communities; the losses will be felt for years to come. As healthcare professionals and organisations stepped up to respond to the overwhelming number of cases, it is understandable that the focus has been primarily on coping with the quantity of the demand. During a pandemic, it is not surprising that few papers have drawn attention to the quality of the care delivered to those afflicted with illness. Despite the challenges, clinicians caring for patients with COVID-19 have risen to the occasion. This manuscript highlights aspirational examples from the published literature of thoughtful and superb care of patients with COVID-19 using an established framework for clinical excellence (formulated by the Miller-Coulson Academy of Clinical Excellence).
Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Health Personnel , Humans , Adaptation, Psychological , COVID-19/therapyABSTRACT
The genealogy of graduate medical education in America begins at the bedside. However, today's graduate medical trainees work in a training environment that is vastly different from medical training a century ago. The goal of the Graduate Medical Education Laboratory (GEL) Study, supported by the American Medical Association's (AMA) "Reimagining Residency" initiative, is to determine the factors in the training environment that most contribute to resident well-being and developing diagnostic skills. We believe that increasing time at the bedside will improve clinical skill, increase professional fulfillment, and reduce workplace burnout. Our graduate medical education laboratory will test these ideas to understand which interventions can be shared among all training programs. Through the GEL Study, we aim to ensure resident readiness for practice as we understand, then optimize, the learning environment for trainees and staff.
Subject(s)
Clinical Reasoning , Burnout, Professional , Clinical Competence , Education, Medical, Graduate , Humans , Internship and Residency , United StatesABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Among health care providers, prescription of HIV pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) has been low. Little is known specifically about primary care physicians (PCPs) with regard to PrEP awareness and adoption (i.e., prescription or referral), and factors associated with adoption. OBJECTIVE: To assess PrEP awareness, PrEP adoption, and factors associated with adoption among PCPs. DESIGN: Cross-sectional online survey conducted in April and May 2015. RESPONDENTS: Members of a national professional organization for academic primary care physicians (n = 266). MAIN MEASURES: PrEP awareness, PrEP adoption (ever prescribed or referred a patient for PrEP [yes/no]), provider and practice characteristics, and self-rated knowledge, attitudes, and beliefs associated with adoption. KEY RESULTS: The survey response rate was 8.6 % (266/2093). Ninety-three percent of respondents reported prior awareness of PrEP. Of these, 34.9 % reported PrEP adoption. In multivariable analysis of provider and practice characteristics, compared with non-adopters, adopters were more likely to provide care to more than 50 HIV-positive patients (vs. 0, aOR = 6.82, 95 % CI 2.06-22.52). Compared with non-adopters, adopters were also more likely to report excellent, very good, or good self-rated PrEP knowledge (15.1 %, 33.7 %, 30.2 % vs. 2.5 %, 18.1 %, 23.8 %, respectively; p < 0.001) and to perceive PrEP as extremely safe (35.1 % vs. 10.7 %; p = 0.002). Compared with non-adopters, adopters were less likely to perceive PrEP as being moderately likely to increase risk behaviors ("risk compensation") (12.8 % vs. 28.8 %, p = 0.02). CONCLUSIONS: While most respondents were aware of PrEP, only one-third of PrEP-aware PCPs reported adoption. Adopters were more likely to have experience providing HIV care and to perceive PrEP as extremely safe, and were less likely to perceive PrEP use as leading to risk compensation. To enhance PCP adoption of PrEP, educational efforts targeting PCPs without HIV care experience should be considered, as well as training those with HIV care experience to be PrEP "clinical champions". Concerns about safety and risk compensation must also be addressed.
Subject(s)
Anti-HIV Agents/therapeutic use , HIV Infections/prevention & control , Health Knowledge, Attitudes, Practice , Practice Patterns, Physicians'/statistics & numerical data , Pre-Exposure Prophylaxis/statistics & numerical data , Adult , Cross-Sectional Studies , Female , Health Personnel/education , Health Risk Behaviors , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Multivariate Analysis , Odds Ratio , Primary Health Care/statistics & numerical data , Surveys and QuestionnairesABSTRACT
Elite controllers or suppressors (ES) control viral replication without antiretroviral therapy. While many ES are infected with replication-competent virus, others have evidence of infection with attenuated isolates. Here we report a case of an ES infected with an HIV-1 isolate that contained a 38-base pair deletion in nef that led to a reading frame shift and a premature stop codon. Interestingly, clones amplified from plasma or cultured from CD4(+) T cells between 2006 and 2008 contained one of two separate compensatory deletions that restored the reading frame. A new insertion generated by duplication of adjacent sequences was found in isolates obtained in 2010 and this evolution was accompanied by the development of low level viremia. This article provides evidence of the evolution of an attenuated HIV-1 isolate toward greater virulence in an elite suppressor.
Subject(s)
Evolution, Molecular , HIV Infections/virology , HIV Long-Term Survivors , HIV-1/genetics , HIV-1/physiology , RNA, Viral/genetics , Codon, Nonsense , Female , Frameshift Mutation , HIV Infections/immunology , HIV-1/immunology , HIV-1/isolation & purification , Humans , Middle Aged , Molecular Sequence Data , Mutagenesis, Insertional , Sequence Analysis, DNA , Sequence Deletion , Suppression, GeneticABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Adoption of CDC recommendations for routine, voluntary HIV screening of all Americans age 1364 years has been slow. One method to increase adherence to clinical practice guidelines is through medical school and residency training. OBJECTIVE: To explore the attitudes, barriers, and behaviors of clinician educators (CEs) regarding advocating routine HIV testing to their trainees. DESIGN/PARTICIPANTS: We analyzed CE responses to a 2009 survey of Society of General Internal Medicine members from community, VA, and university-affiliated clinics regarding HIV testing practices. MAIN MEASURES: Clinician educators were asked about their outpatient practices, knowledge and attitudes regarding the revised CDC recommendations and whether they encouraged trainees to perform routine HIV testing. Associations between HIV testing knowledge and attitudes and encouraging trainees to perform routine HIV testing were estimated using bivariate and multivariable logistic regression. RESULTS: Of 515 respondents, 367 (71.3%) indicated they supervised trainees in an outpatient general internal medicine clinic. These CEs demonstrated suboptimal knowledge of CDC guidelines and over a third reported continued risk-based testing. Among CEs, 196 (53.4%) reported that they encourage trainees to perform routine HIV testing. Higher knowledge scores (aOR 5.10 (2.16, 12.0)) and more positive attitudes toward testing (aOR 8.83 (4.21, 18.5)) were independently associated with encouraging trainees to screen for HIV. Reasons for not encouraging trainees to screen included perceived low local prevalence (37.2%), competing teaching priorities (34.6%), and a busy clinic environment (34.0%). CONCLUSIONS: Clinician educators have a special role in the dissemination of the CDC recommendations as they impact the knowledge and attitudes of newly practicing physicians. Despite awareness of CDC recommendations, many CEs do not recommend universal HIV testing to trainees. Interventions that improve faculty knowledge of HIV testing recommendations and address barriers in resident clinics may enhance adoption of routine HIV testing.
Subject(s)
Attitude of Health Personnel , Education, Medical, Graduate/standards , HIV Infections/diagnosis , Internal Medicine/education , Internship and Residency/standards , AIDS Serodiagnosis/standards , Adolescent , Adult , Ambulatory Care Facilities/standards , Clinical Competence , Cross-Sectional Studies , Female , Guideline Adherence/statistics & numerical data , HIV Infections/epidemiology , Humans , Internal Medicine/standards , Male , Mass Screening/psychology , Mass Screening/standards , Middle Aged , Practice Guidelines as Topic , Prevalence , United States/epidemiology , Young AdultABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Rapid HIV testing could increase routine HIV testing. Most previous studies of rapid testing were conducted in acute care settings, and few described the primary care providers' perspective. OBJECTIVE: To identify characteristics of general internal medicine physicians with access to rapid HIV testing, and to determine whether such access is associated with differences in HIV-testing practices or perceived HIV-testing barriers. DESIGN: Web-based cross-sectional survey conducted in 2009. PARTICIPANTS: A total of 406 physician members of the Society of General Internal Medicine who supervise residents or provide care in outpatient settings. MAIN MEASURES: Surveys assessed provider and practice characteristics, HIV-testing types, HIV-testing behavior, and potential barriers to HIV testing. RESULTS: Among respondents, 15% had access to rapid HIV testing. In multivariable analysis, physicians were more likely to report access to rapid testing if they were non-white (OR 0.45, 95% CI 0.22, 0.91), had more years since completing training (OR 1.06, 95% CI 1.02, 1.10), practiced in the northeastern US (OR 2.35; 95% CI 1.28, 4.32), or their practice included a higher percentage of uninsured patients (OR 1.03; 95% CI 1.01, 1.04). Internists with access to rapid testing reported fewer barriers to HIV testing. More respondents with rapid than standard testing reported at least 25% of their patients received HIV testing (51% versus 35%, p = 0.02). However, access to rapid HIV testing was not significantly associated with the estimated proportion of patients receiving HIV testing within the previous 30 days (7.24% vs. 4.58%, p = 0.06). CONCLUSION: Relatively few internists have access to rapid HIV testing in outpatient settings, with greater availability of rapid testing in community-based clinics and in the northeastern US. Future research may determine whether access to rapid testing in primary care settings will impact routinizing HIV testing.
Subject(s)
HIV Infections/diagnosis , Internal Medicine/statistics & numerical data , Practice Patterns, Physicians'/statistics & numerical data , Primary Health Care/statistics & numerical data , Confidence Intervals , Cross-Sectional Studies , HIV Infections/prevention & control , Health Care Surveys , Health Services Accessibility , Health Services Needs and Demand , Humans , Odds Ratio , Pilot Projects , Time Factors , United StatesABSTRACT
The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) recommends routine HIV screening in primary care but little is known about general internists' views of this practice. We conducted a national, cross-sectional, Internet-based survey of 446 general internists in 2009 regarding their HIV screening behaviors, beliefs, and perceived barriers to routine HIV screening in outpatient internal medicine practices. Internists' awareness of revised CDC guidelines was high (88%), but only 52% had increased HIV testing, 61% offered HIV screening regardless of risk, and a median 2% (range 0-67%) of their patients were tested in the past month. Internists practicing in perceived higher risk communities reported greater HIV screening. Consent requirements were a barrier to screening, particularly for VA providers and those practicing in states with HIV consent statutes inconsistent with CDC guidelines. Interventions that promote HIV screening regardless of risk and streamlined consent requirements will likely increase adoption of routine HIV screening in general medicine practices.
Subject(s)
Attitude of Health Personnel , General Practitioners/psychology , Guideline Adherence/statistics & numerical data , HIV Infections/diagnosis , Practice Patterns, Physicians'/statistics & numerical data , Adult , Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, U.S. , Cross-Sectional Studies , Health Services Accessibility , Humans , Internet , Logistic Models , Male , Middle Aged , Practice Guidelines as Topic , Primary Health Care , Societies, Medical , United StatesABSTRACT
Recent technologic advances in the field of radiology have resulted in the availability of several new tests with potential applications for disease screening. Presently, these tests are being marketed directly to patients as noninvasive means to provide peace of mind that they are disease free. Such assurance is appealing to many individuals, and some are willing to spend up to 1500 dollars to choose from a menu of available diagnostic options. Given that a physician's referral is unnecessary, many healthcare providers are unaware that such testing has taken place until their patients present to them with abnormal test results. In this review, we examine the evidence supporting the use of electron beam computed tomography for coronary artery disease screening, spiral computed tomography of the chest for lung cancer screening, computed tomographic colonography for colon cancer screening, and total-body computed tomography for general screening. Although some of these modalities show promise for the future, there is insufficient evidence to support the use of any of these testing methods for secondary prevention. The potential for harm associated with false-positive test results, false-negative test results, undue anxiety, and radiation exposure exists but requires further study to quantify actual risk.