Barriers Preventing Medical Trainees from Active Participation in Research Activities.

Background: Research has increasingly become important to career progression and a compulsory component in most medical programs. While medical trainees are consistently urged to undertake research endeavors, they frequently encounter obstacles at both personal and organizational levels that impede the pursuit of high-quality research. This study aims to identify the barriers and recommend successful interventions to increase research productivity amongst medical trainees. Methods: A descriptive cross-sectional survey was carried out among interns, residents, and fellows within a single hospital located in the emirate of Abu Dhabi, UAE. The survey included inquiries regarding perceived obstacles hindering engagement in research activities, factors driving motivation for research involvement, and the assessment of how research participation relates to their job in terms of relevance. Results: Fifty-seven medical trainees participated in the survey, reflecting a response rate of 53%. The survey highlighted common obstacles, notably including time constraints, insufficient statistical and methodology training, the weight of other educational commitments, as well as inadequate incentives and rewards. While a majority of participants expressed interest in engaging in research activities, the consensus was that more incentives and increased funding opportunities would significantly encourage their involvement. Conclusion: Implementing successful interventions such as allocating dedicated time for research, facilitating access to research mentors, and organizing training sessions have the potential to be effective strategies in fostering a thriving research culture and subsequently elevating research productivity of medical trainees.

Use of Gabapentin for Alcohol Withdrawal Syndrome in the Hospital Setting: A Randomized Open-Label Controlled Trial.

Background/objectives: Patients hospitalized with alcohol withdrawal syndrome (AWS) are typically treated with CIWA-directed benzodiazepines to prevent complications, such as seizures and delirium tremens. Gabapentin is an evidence-based alternative to benzodiazepines in the outpatient setting, but there is limited data for hospitalized patients with AWS. This study compared fixed-dose gabapentin to CIWA-directed benzodiazepines for AWS in the hospital setting. Methods: This open-label, randomized controlled trial enrolled 88 adults from February 1, 2017 to August 16, 2020 with a risk of complicated alcohol withdrawal as defined by the Prediction of Alcohol Withdrawal Severity Scale (PAWSS) ≥4. Patients were randomized within 16 h of admission to either fixed-dose gabapentin taper or continued CIWA-directed benzodiazepine administration. The primary outcome was the length of stay (LOS). Secondary outcomes included seizure, delirium tremens, ICU transfer, and patient-reported symptoms (alcohol cravings, anxiety, sleepiness). Results: LOS was shorter, but not statistically different in the gabapentin group compared to the benzodiazepine group. Because benzodiazepines were received in both gabapentin and benzodiazepine groups before randomization, the mean amount of benzodiazepines received in each group was also not statistically different, although the amount received by the gabapentin group was less than half of that received by the benzodiazepine group (4.3 vs. 10.6 mg, p = 0.146 by per protocol analysis). There were no statistical differences in secondary measures. Conclusions: Fixed-dose gabapentin taper showed similar outcomes compared to CIWA-directed benzodiazepines for the treatment of hospitalized patients with mild/moderate AWS, but the interpretation of the results is limited due to under-enrollment and the use of benzodiazepines in both groups pre-enrollment.Clinical trial registration: NCT03012815.

Practice Changing Updates in Perioperative Medicine Literature 2022. A Systematic Review.

Perioperative medicine is a rapidly growing multidisciplinary field with significant advances published each year. In this review, we highlight important perioperative publications in 2022. A multi-database literature search from January to December of 2022 was undertaken. Original research articles, systematic reviews, meta-analyses, and guidelines were included. Abstracts, case reports, letters, protocols, pediatric and obstetric articles, and cardiac surgery literature were excluded. Two authors reviewed each reference using the Distiller SR systematic review software (Evidence Partners Inc., Ottawa, Ont, Canada). A modified Delphi technique was used to identify 8 practice-changing articles. We identified another 10 articles for tabular summaries. We highlight why these articles have the potential to change clinical perioperative practice and areas where more information is needed.

Practice-Changing Updates in Perioperative Medicine Literature 2020-2021: A Systematic Review.

Recent literature published in a variety of multidisciplinary journals has significantly influenced perioperative patient care. Distilling and synthesizing the clinically important literature can be challenging. This review summarizes practice-changing articles in perioperative medicine from the years 2020 and 2021. Embase, Ovid, and EBM reviews databases were queried from January 2020 to December 2021. Inclusion criteria were original research, systematic review, meta-analysis, and important guidelines. Exclusion criteria were conference abstracts, case reports, letters, protocols, pediatric and obstetric articles, and cardiac surgery literature. Two authors reviewed each reference using the Distiller SR systematic review software (Evidence Partners Inc., Ottawa, Ont., Canada). A modified Delphi technique was used to identify 9 practice-changing articles. We identified another 13 articles for tabular summaries, as they were relevant to an internist's perioperative evaluation of a patient. Articles were selected to highlight the clinical implications of new evidence in each field. We have also pointed out limitations of each study and clinical populations where they are not applicable.

Validation and Recalibration of Modified Mayo Delirium Prediction Tool in a Hospitalized Cohort.

BACKGROUND: Delirium prediction can augment and optimize care of older adults. Mayo Delirium Prediction (MDP) tool is a robust tool, developed from a large retrospective data set. The MDP tool predicts delirium risk for hospitalized older adults, within 24 hours of hospital admission, based on risk factor information available from electronic health record. OBJECTIVE: We intend to validate the prediction performance of this tool and optimize the tool for clinical use. METHODS: This is an observational cohort study conducted at Mayo Clinic Hospitals, Rochester, MN. All hospitalized older adults (age >50 years) from December 2019 to June 2020 were included. Patients with an admitting diagnosis of substance use disorder were excluded. The original MDP tool was modified to adjust for the fall risk variable as a binary variable that will facilitate broader applicability across different fall risk tools. The modified MDP tool was validated in the retrospective derivation and validation data set which yielded similar prediction capability (area under the receiver operating curve = 0.85 and 0.83, respectively). Diagnosis of delirium was captured by flowsheet diagnosis of delirium documented by nursing staff in the medical record. Predictive variable data were collected daily. RESULTS: A total of 8055 patients were included in the study (median age 71 y). Delirium prediction of the modified MDP tool compared to delirium occurrence was 4% in the low-risk group, 17.8% in the medium-risk group, and 45.3% in the high-risk group (area under receiver operating curve of 0.80). Recalibration of the tool was attempted to further optimize the tool which resulted in both simplification and increased performance (area under receiver operating curve 0.82). The simplified tool was able to predict delirium in hospitalized patients admitted to both medical and surgical services. CONCLUSIONS: Validation of the modified MDP tool revealed good prediction capabilities. Recalibration resulted in simplification with increased performance of the tool in both medical and surgical hospitalized patients.

The Effect of Bedside Rounds on Learning Outcomes in Medical Education: A Systematic Review.

PURPOSE: To determine if bedside rounds, compared with other forms of hospital ward rounds, improve learning outcomes in medical education. METHOD: For this systematic review, the authors searched Ovid MEDLINE, Embase, and Scopus from inception through February 20, 2020. Experimental studies were included if they (1) compared bedside rounds to any other form of rounds in a hospital-based setting, and (2) reported a quantitative comparison of a learning outcome (e.g., learner reaction, knowledge, skills, behavior, health care delivery) among physicians-in-training (medical students, residents, fellows). Extraction elements were summarized using descriptive statistics and a narrative synthesis of design, implementation, and outcomes. RESULTS: Twenty studies met inclusion criteria, including 7 randomized trials. All studies involved resident physicians, and 11 also involved medical students. The design and implementation of bedside rounds varied widely, with most studies (n = 13) involving cointerventions (e.g., staff education, real-time order entry).Of the 15 studies that reported learner satisfaction, 7 favored bedside rounds, 4 favored the control, and 4 were equivocal. Of the 4 studies reporting an outcome of learners' knowledge and skills, 2 favored bedside rounds and 2 were equivocal. Of the 8 studies that reported on learner behavior (e.g., bedside communication with patients), 5 favored bedside rounds, 1 favored the control, and 2 were equivocal. Finally, of the 14 studies that reported a health care delivery outcome (e.g., teamwork, rounding time), 8 favored bedside rounds and 6 were equivocal. Due to the high risk of bias and unexplained heterogeneity across studies, the overall strength of evidence was low. CONCLUSIONS: In hospital-based settings, learners' satisfaction with bedside rounds is mixed. However, bedside rounds appear to have a positive effect on learner behavior and health care delivery. Given their potential value, additional research is needed to identify barriers to and facilitators of educationally successful bedside rounds.

The Ideal Hospital Discharge Summary: A Survey of U.S. Physicians.

BACKGROUND: Hospital discharge summaries enable communication between inpatient and outpatient physicians. Despite existing guidelines for discharge summaries, they are frequently suboptimal. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to assess physicians' perspectives about discharge summaries and the differences between summaries' authors (hospitalists) and readers (primary care physicians [PCPs]). METHODS: A national survey of 1600 U.S. physicians was undertaken. Primary measures included physicians' preferences in discharge summary standardization, content, format, and audience. RESULTS: A total of 815 physicians responded (response rate = 51%). Eighty-nine percent agreed that discharge summaries "should have a standardized format." Most agreed that summaries should "document everything that was done, found, and recommended in the hospital" (64%) yet "only include details that are highly pertinent to the hospitalization" (66%). Although 74% perceived patients as an important audience of discharge summaries, only 43% agreed that summaries "should be written in language that patients…can easily understand," and 68% agreed that it "should be written solely for provider-to-provider communication." Compared with hospitalists, PCPs preferred comprehensive summaries (68% versus 59%, P = 0.002). More PCPs agreed that separate summaries should be created for patients and for provider-to-provider communication than hospitalists (60% versus 47%, P < 0.001). Compared with PCPs, more hospitalists believe that "hospitalists are too busy to prepare a high-quality discharge summary" (44% versus 23%, P < 0.001) and "PCPs have insufficient time to read an entire discharge summary" (60% versus 38%, P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Physicians believe that discharge summaries should have a standardized format but do not agree on how comprehensive or in what format they should be. Efforts are necessary to build consensus toward the ideal discharge summary.

Perioperative care of geriatric patients.

The older population is expected to nearly double across the globe by 2050, and the baby boom cohort is expected to represent at least 20% of the US population by 2030. Geriatric patients will increasingly utilize the health-care system, and therefore surgical and perioperative care must be tailored to this sensitive group given the increased risk for perioperative complications. The literature was reviewed to highlight fundamental components of the preoperative evaluation as well as cardiac, pulmonary, and renal complications. Frailty is a multidimensional process that can lead to the physiologic effects of aging and estimates the risk of perioperative morbidity and mortality better than chronologic age alone. Health-care providers should assess a geriatric patient's cognitive status, decision-making capacity, frailty, advance care planning, medications, and anesthetic approach in a multidisciplinary fashion to ensure optimal care. The risks of postoperative cardiac, pulmonary, and renal complications should be evaluated and optimized preoperatively to reduce the potential for adverse outcomes.

Information Transfer at Hospital Discharge: A Systematic Review.

BACKGROUND: Prompt, complete, and accurate information transfer at the time of discharge between hospital-based and primary care providers (PCPs) is needed for the provision of safe and effective care. PURPOSE OF THE STUDY: To evaluate timeliness, quality, and interventions to improve timeliness and quality of hospital discharge summaries. DATA SOURCES: PubMed, MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, Web of Science, and Scopus database published in English between January 2007 and February 2014 were searched. We also hand-searched bibliographies of relevant articles. STUDY SELECTION: Observational studies investigating transfer of information at hospital discharge (n = 7) and controlled studies evaluating interventions to improve timeliness and quality of discharge information (n = 12) were included. DATA EXTRACTION: We extracted data on availability, timeliness, and content of hospital discharge summaries and on the effectiveness of interventions targeting discharge summaries. Results of studies are presented narratively and using descriptive statistics. DATA SYNTHESIS: Across the studies, discharge summaries were completed within 48 hours in a median of 67% and were available to PCPs within 48 hours only 55% of the time. Most of the time, discharge summaries included demographics, primary diagnosis, hospital course, and discharge instructions. However, information was limited to pending test results (25%), diagnostic tests performed (60%), and postdischarge medications (78%). In 6 interventional studies, implementation of electronic discharge summaries was associated with improvement in timeliness but not quality. CONCLUSIONS: Delayed or insufficient transfer of discharge information between hospital-based providers and PCPs remains common. Creation of electronic discharge summaries seems to improve timeliness and availability but does not consistently improve quality.

Implementing bedside rounds to improve patient-centred outcomes: a systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Bedside rounds (BR) have been proposed as an ideal method to promote patient-centred hospital care, but there is substantial variation in their implementation and effects. Our objectives were to describe the implementation of BR in hospital settings and determine their effect on patient-centred outcomes. METHODS: Data sources included Ovid MEDLINE, Ovid Embase, Scopus and Ovid Cochrane Central Registry of Clinical Trials from database inception through 28 July 2017. We included experimental studies comparing BR to another form of rounds in a hospital-based setting (ie, medical/surgical unit, intensive care unit (ICU)) and reporting a quantitative patient-reported or objectively measured clinical outcome. We used random effects models to calculate pooled Cohen's d effect size estimates for the patient knowledge and patient experience outcome domains. RESULTS: Twenty-nine studies met inclusion criteria, including 20 from adult care (17 non-ICU, 3 ICU), and nine from paediatrics (5 non-ICU, 4 ICU), the majority of which (n=23) were conducted in the USA. Thirteen studies implemented BR with cointerventions as part of a 'bundle'. Studies most commonly reported outcomes in the domains of patient experience (n=24) and patient knowledge (n=10). We found a small, statistically significant improvement in patient experience with BR (summary Cohen's d=0.09, 95% CI 0.04 to 0.14, p<0.001, I2=56%), but no significant association between BR and patient knowledge (Cohen's d=0.21, 95% CI -0.004 to -0.43, p=0.054, I2=92%). Risk of bias was moderate to high, with methodological limitations most often relating to selective reporting, low adherence rates and missing data. CONCLUSIONS: BR have been implemented in a variety of hospital settings, often 'bundled' with cointerventions. However, BR have demonstrated limited effect on patient-centred outcomes.

Characterizing Potentially Preventable Admissions: A Mixed Methods Study of Rates, Associated Factors, Outcomes, and Physician Decision-Making.

BACKGROUND: Potentially preventable admissions are a target for healthcare cost containment. OBJECTIVE: To identify rates of, characterize associations with, and explore physician decision-making around potentially preventable admissions. DESIGN: A comparative cohort study was used to determine rates of potentially preventable admissions and to identify associated factors and patient outcomes. A qualitative case study was used to explore physicians' clinical decision-making. PARTICIPANTS: Patients admitted from the emergency department (ED) to the general medicine (GM) service over a total of 4 weeks were included as cases (N = 401). Physicians from both emergency medicine (EM) and GM that were involved in the cases were included (N = 82). APPROACH: Physicians categorized admissions as potentially preventable. We examined differences in patient characteristics, admission characteristics, and patient outcomes between potentially preventable and control admissions. Interviews with participating physicians were conducted and transcribed. Transcriptions were systematically analyzed for key concepts regarding potentially preventable admissions. KEY RESULTS: EM and GM physicians categorized 22.2% (90/401) of admissions as potentially preventable. There were no significant differences between potentially preventable and control admissions in patient or admission characteristics. Potentially preventable admissions had shorter length of stay (2.1 vs. 3.6 days, p < 0.001). There was no difference in other patient outcomes. Physicians discussed several provider, system, and patient factors that affected clinical decision-making around potentially preventable admissions, particularly in the "gray zone," including risk of deterioration at home, the risk of hospitalization, the cost to the patient, and the presence of outpatient resources. Differences in provider training, risk assessment, and provider understanding of outpatient access accounted for differences in decisions between EM and GM physicians. CONCLUSIONS: Collaboration between EM and GM physicians around patients in the gray zone, focusing on patient risk, cost, and outpatient resources, may provide an avenues for reducing potentially preventable admissions and lowering healthcare spending.

Information Transfer and the Hospital Discharge Summary: National Primary Care Provider Perspectives of Challenges and Opportunities.

PURPOSE: The hospital discharge summary (HDS) serves as a critical method of patient information transfer between hospitalist and primary care provider (PCP). This study was designed to increase our understanding of PCP preferences for, and perceived deficiencies in, the discharge summary. METHODS: We designed a mail survey that was sent to a random sample of 800 American Academy of Family Physicians members nationally. The survey response rate was 59%. We analyzed the availability of summaries at hospital followup, whether all desired information was contained in the summary and whether certain specific items were completed. Provider subgroup analysis was performed. RESULTS: The strongest predictor of discharge summary availability at posthospital followup is direct access to inpatient data. Respondents (27.5%) had a summary available 0% to 40% of the time, 41.4% noted availability 41% to 80% of the time and 31.1% >80% of the time; if a provider had access to inpatient data they tended to have a discharge summary available to them (P < .0001). Providers also described significant content deficits: 26.5% of providers noted the summary contained all information needed 0% to 40% of the time, 48.5% of providers noted this 41% to 80% of the time and only 25% >80% of the time. Specific summary items considered "very important" by providers included medication list (94% of respondents), diagnosis list (89%), and treatment provided (87%). CONCLUSIONS: Opportunities remain in timely delivery of a complete HDS to the PCP. Further multifaceted practice redesign should be directed at optimizing this critical information transfer tool, potentially encompassing electronic medical record utilization and specific training for clinicians preparing summaries. Initial efforts should focus on ensuring availability of a complete summary (containing items deemed important by PCPs including medication list, diagnosis list, and treatment provided) at the posthospital follow-up visit.

Characteristics and Outcomes of Fasting Orders Among Medical Inpatients.

While many hospitalized patients have orders to fast in preparation for interventions, the extent to which these orders are necessary or adhere to evidence-based durations is unknown. In this study, we analyzed the length, indication, and associated outcomes of nil per os (NPO) orders for general medicine patients at an academic institution in the United States, and compared them to the best available evidence for recommended length of NPO. Of 924 NPO orders assessed, the indicated intervention was not performed for 183 (19.8%) orders, largely due to a change in plan (75/183, 41.0%) or scheduling barriers (43/183, 23.5%). When analyzed by indication, the median duration of NPO orders ranged from 8.3 hours for kidney ultrasound to 13.9 hours for upper endoscopy. For some indications, the literature suggested NPO orders may be unnecessary. Furthermore, in indications for which NPO was deemed necessary in the literature, the duration of most NPO orders was much longer than minimally required. These results suggest the need for establishing more robust practice guidelines or institutional protocols for NPO orders. Journal of Hospital Medicine 2017;12:36-39.

Risk Factors for Readmission in Patients With Cancer Comanaged by Hospitalists.

Little is known about which variables put patients with cancer at risk for 30-day hospital readmission. Comanagement of this often complex patient population by specialists and hospitalists has become increasingly common. This retrospective study examined inpatients with cancer comanaged by hospitalists, hematologists, and oncologists to determine the rate of readmission and factors associated with readmission. Patients in this cohort had a readmission rate of 23%. Patients who were discharged to a skilled nursing facility (odds ratio [OR] = 0.34) or hospice (OR = 0.11) were less likely to have 30-day readmissions, whereas patients who had surgery (OR = 3.16) during their index admission were more likely. Other factors, including patient demographics, cancer types, and hospitalization interventions and events, did not differ between patients who were readmitted and those who were not. These findings contribute to a growing body of literature identifying risk factors for readmission in medical oncology and hematology patients.

All CLEAR? Preparing for IT Downtime.

Health care information technology (IT) outages pose a threat to patient safety and patient care continuity. Organizations' downtime plans must be updated regularly and staff at the work area level should have experience with implementing IT outage operations through downtime drills. This article describes the study institution's IT Outage Toolkit, based on the acronym CLEAR, which guides the development of a downtime plan as well as design, execution, and assessment of work area downtime drills. Self-report and external audits of downtime drills help identify performance gaps and gaps in downtime plans.

Reflective Practice: A Tool for Readmission Reduction.

Factors intrinsic to local practice, but not captured by the medical record, contribute to readmissions. Frontline providers familiar with their practice systems can identify these. The objective was to decrease 30-day hospital readmissions. The intervention involved retrospective review by hospitalists of their own patients' readmissions, using reflective practice guided by a chart review tool. Subjects were patients discharged by hospitalists and readmitted to a tertiary care academic medical center. Hospitalists reviewed 193 readmissions of 170 patients. Factors contributing to readmission were grouped under patient characteristics, operational factors, and care transition. After reflection, physicians scheduled earlier follow-up appointments while nurse practitioners and physician assistants improved discharge instructions. Readmissions decreased during the review period, and the decrease sustained for one year after the review period. Hospitalists reflected on and identified local practice factors that contributed to their own patients' 30-day readmissions. Reflective practice may be an effective strategy to decrease hospital readmissions.