Update in Outpatient General Internal Medicine: Practice-Changing Evidence Published in 2022.

It can be difficult for clinicians to stay updated on practice-changing articles.  Synthesis of relevant articles and guideline updates can facilitate staying informed on important new data impacting clinical practice.  The titles and abstracts from the 7 general internal medicine outpatient journals with highest impact factors and relevance were reviewed by 8 internal medicine physicians. Coronavirus disease 2019 research was excluded.  The New England Journal of Medicine (NEJM), The Lancet, the Journal of the American Medical Association, The British Medical Journal (BMJ), the Annals of Internal Medicine, JAMA Internal Medicine, and Public Library of Science Medicine were reviewed. Additionally, article synopsis collections and databases were reviewed: American College of Physicians Journal Club, NEJM Journal Watch, BMJ Evidence-Based Medicine, McMaster/DynaMed Evidence Alerts, and Cochrane Reviews. A modified Delphi method was used to gain consensus based on clinical relevance to outpatient internal medicine, potential impact on practice, and strength of evidence. Article qualities and importance were debated until consensus was reached. Clusters of articles pertinent to the same topic were considered together. In total, 5 practice-changing articles were included, along with a highlight of key guideline updates.

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.

Preoperative Management of Cardiovascular Medications: A Society for Perioperative Assessment and Quality Improvement (SPAQI) Consensus Statement.

Cardiovascular conditions such as hypertension, arrhythmias, and heart failure are common in patients undergoing anesthesia for surgical or other procedures. Numerous guidelines from various specialty societies offer variable recommendations for the perioperative management of these medications. The Society for Perioperative Assessment and Quality Improvement identified a need to provide multidisciplinary evidence-based recommendations for preoperative medication management. The society convened a group of 13 members with expertise in perioperative medicine and training in anesthesiology or internal medicine. The aim of this consensus effort is to provide perioperative clinicians with guidance on the management of cardiovascular medications commonly encountered during the preoperative evaluation. We used a modified Delphi process to establish consensus. Twenty-one classes of medications were identified: α-adrenergic receptor antagonists, angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors, angiotensin II receptor blockers, angiotensin receptor-neprilysin inhibitors, ß-adrenoceptor blockers, calcium-channel blockers, centrally acting sympatholytic medications, direct-acting vasodilators, loop diuretics, thiazide diuretics, potassium-sparing diuretics, endothelin receptor antagonists, cardiac glycosides, nitrodilators, phosphodiesterase-5 inhibitors, class III antiarrhythmic agents, potassium-channel openers, renin inhibitors, class I antiarrhythmic agents, sodium-channel blockers, and sodium glucose cotransportor-2 inhibitors. We provide recommendations for the management of these medications preoperatively.

Preoperative Management of Medications for Rheumatologic and HIV Diseases: Society for Perioperative Assessment and Quality Improvement (SPAQI) Consensus Statement.

Perioperative medical management is challenging because of the rising complexity of patients presenting for surgical procedures. A key part of preoperative optimization is appropriate management of long-term medications, yet guidelines and consensus statements for perioperative medication management are lacking. Available resources use recommendations derived from individual studies and do not include a multidisciplinary focus on formal consensus. The Society for Perioperative Assessment and Quality Improvement identified a lack of authoritative clinical guidance as an opportunity to use its multidisciplinary membership to improve evidence-based perioperative care. The Society for Perioperative Assessment and Quality Improvement seeks to provide guidance on perioperative medication management that synthesizes available literature with expert consensus. The aim of this consensus statement is to provide practical guidance on the preoperative management of immunosuppressive, biologic, antiretroviral, and anti-inflammatory medications. A panel of experts including hospitalists, anesthesiologists, internal medicine physicians, infectious disease specialists, and rheumatologists was appointed to identify the common medications in each of these categories. The authors then used a modified Delphi process to critically review the literature and to generate consensus recommendations.

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.

Update in Outpatient General Internal Medicine: Practice-Changing Evidence Published in 2021.

It can be challenging to identify new evidence that may shift clinical practice within internal medicine. Synthesis of relevant articles and guideline updates can facilitate staying informed of these changes. The titles and abstracts from the 7 general internal medicine outpatient journals with highest impact factors and relevance were reviewed by 8 internal medicine physicians. Coronavirus disease 2019 research was excluded. The New England Journal of Medicine (NEJM), The Lancet, Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA), The British Medical Journal (BMJ), Annals of Internal Medicine, JAMA Internal Medicine, and Public Library of Science Medicine were reviewed. Additionally, article synopsis collections and databases were reviewed: American College of Physicians Journal Club, NEJM Journal Watch, BMJ Evidence-Based Medicine, McMaster/DynaMed Evidence Alerts, and Cochrane Reviews. A modified Delphi method was used to gain consensus based on clinical relevance to outpatient internal medicine, potential impact on practice, and strength of evidence. Article qualities and importance were debated until consensus was reached. Clusters of articles pertinent to the same topic were considered together. In total, 8 practice-changing articles were included.

Experiences of Gender Inequity Among Women Physicians Across Career Stages: Findings from Participant Focus Groups.

Background and Purpose: Gender inequity in academic medicine persists despite efforts to the contrary. Even with increasing representation of women physicians in academic medicine, leadership positions and promotion to tenure are still not representative. This study describes the experiences of women physicians at various stages of their careers, uncovering current challenges and potential areas for improvement toward gender equity. Methods: Three focus groups were conducted (n = 28) as part of a national professional development conference: Growth, Resilience, Inspiration, and Tenacity (GRIT) for Women in Medicine: GRIT. We thematically analyzed participant responses to assess perspectives on the impact of experiences, barriers to professional growth, opportunities for improvement, and definitions of success. Results: The major issues the participants faced included subthemes of (1) systemic barriers to success, (2) implicit biases, (3) self-advocacy, and (4) burnout and stress. Solutions for issues that were discussed included (1) fostering supportive communities, (2) encouraging personal and professional development, and (3) the need for system-wide policy changes. We found that most women needed or benefited from the fostering of communities and desired opportunities for developing professional skills. Participants felt institutional transparency for grievances determined the level of support and confidence in reporting instances of mistreatment. Participants tended to define success according to (1) personal success and (2) leaving a legacy. Conclusions/Implications: Despite policy advancements and a social evolution away from discrimination against women, women in medicine continue to experience inequities across career stages. Potential solutions include fostering supportive communities, encouraging personal and professional development, and system-wide policy changes.

Preoperative Management of Medications for Neurologic Diseases: Society for Perioperative Assessment and Quality Improvement Consensus Statement.

Neurologic diseases are prevalent in patients undergoing invasive procedures; yet, no societal guidelines exist as to best practice in management of perioperative medications prescribed to treat these disorders. The Society for Perioperative Assessment and Quality Improvement tasked experts in internal medicine, anesthesiology, perioperative medicine, and neurology to provide evidence-based recommendations for preoperative management of these medications. The aim of this review is not only to provide consensus recommendations for preoperative management of patients on medications for neurologic disorders, but also to serve as an educational guide to perioperative clinicians. While, in general, medications for neurologic disorders should be continued preoperatively, an individualized approach may be needed in certain situations (eg, holding anticonvulsants on day of surgery if electroencephalographic mapping is planned during epilepsy surgery). Pertinent interactions with commonly used drugs in anesthesia practice, as well as considerations for targeted laboratory testing or perioperative drug substitutions, are addressed as well.

Preoperative Management of Medications for Psychiatric Diseases: Society for Perioperative Assessment and Quality Improvement Consensus Statement.

There is a lack of guidelines for preoperative management of psychiatric medications leading to variation in care and the potential for perioperative complications and surgical procedure cancellations on the day of surgery. The Society for Perioperative Assessment and Quality Improvement identified preoperative psychiatric medication management as an area in which consensus could improve patient care. The aim of this consensus statement is to provide recommendations to clinicians regarding preoperative psychiatric medication management. Several categories of drugs were identified including antidepressants, mood stabilizers, anxiolytics, antipsychotics, and attention deficit hyperactivity disorder medications. Literature searches and review of primary and secondary data sources were performed for each medication/medication class. We used a modified Delphi process to develop consensus recommendations for preoperative management of individual medications in each of these drug categories. While most medications should be continued perioperatively to avoid risk of relapse of the psychiatric condition, adjustments may need to be made on a case-by-case basis for certain drugs.

Perioperative Cardiac Risk Reduction in Noncardiac Surgery.

Major adverse cardiovascular events are a significant source of morbidity and mortality in the perioperative setting, estimated to occur in approximately 5% of patients undergoing nonemergent noncardiac surgery. To minimize the incidence and impact of these events, careful attention must be paid to preoperative cardiovascular assessment to identify patients at high risk of cardiovascular complications. Once identified, cardiovascular risk reduction is achieved through optimization of medical conditions, appropriate management of medication, and careful monitoring to allow for early identification of-and intervention for-any new conditions that would increase the risk of adverse cardiovascular outcomes. The major cardiovascular and anesthesiology societies in the United States, Europe, and Canada have published guidelines for perioperative management of patients undergoing noncardiac surgery. However, since publication of these guidelines, there has been a practice-changing evolution in the medical literature. In this review, we attempt to reconcile the recommendations made in these 3 comprehensive guidelines, while updating recommendations, based on new evidence, when available.

Update in Outpatient General Internal Medicine: Practice-Changing Evidence Published in 2020.

In a time of rapidly shifting evidence-based medicine, it is challenging to stay informed of research that modifies clinical practice. To enhance knowledge of practice-changing literature, a group of 7 internists reviewed titles and abstracts in 7 internal medicine journals with the highest impact factors and relevance to outpatient general internal medicine. Coronavirus disease-19 research was purposely excluded to highlight practice changes beyond the pandemic. New England Journal of Medicine (NEJM), The Lancet, Annals of Internal Medicine, Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA), JAMA Internal Medicine, British Medical Journal (BMJ), and Public Library of Science (PLoS) Medicine were reviewed. The following collections of article synopses and databases were also reviewed: American College of Physicians Journal Club, NEJM Journal Watch, BMJ Evidence-Based Medicine, McMaster/DynaMed Evidence Alerts, and Cochrane Reviews. A modified Delphi method was used to gain consensus based on relevance to outpatient internal medicine, impact on practice, and strength of evidence. Clusters of articles pertaining to the same topic were considered together. In total, 7 practice-changing articles were included.

Preoperative Management of Surgical Patients Using Dietary Supplements: Society for Perioperative Assessment and Quality Improvement (SPAQI) Consensus Statement.

The widespread use of complementary products poses a challenge to clinicians in the perioperative period and may increase perioperative risk. Because dietary supplements are regulated differently from traditional pharmaceuticals and guidance is often lacking, the Society for Perioperative Assessment and Quality Improvement convened a group of experts to review available literature and create a set of consensus recommendations for the perioperative management of these supplements. Using a modified Delphi method, the authors developed recommendations for perioperative management of 83 dietary supplements. We have made our recommendations to discontinue or continue a dietary supplement based on the principle that without a demonstrated benefit, or with a demonstrated lack of harm, there is little downside in temporarily discontinuing an herbal supplement before surgery. Discussion with patients in the preoperative visit is a crucial time to educate patients as well as gather vital information. Patients should be specifically asked about use of dietary supplements and cannabinoids, as many will not volunteer this information. The preoperative clinic visit provides the best opportunity to educate patients about the perioperative management of various supplements as this visit is typically scheduled at least 2 weeks before the planned procedure.

Perioperative Venous Thromboembolism Prophylaxis.

Venous thromboembolism (VTE) is a preventable cause of postoperative morbidity and mortality; however, audits suggest that the use of thromboprophylaxis is underused. In this review, we describe our approach to prevention of postoperative VTE and provide guidance on how to formulate an optimal VTE prophylaxis plan. We recommend that all patients undergo thrombosis- and bleeding-risk assessment as part of their preoperative evaluation. The risk of thrombosis can be estimated based on patient- and procedure-specific factors, using validated risk-assessment models such as the Caprini score. There are no validated models to predict perioperative bleeding; however, several risk factors have been proposed. Patients should ambulate early and frequently after surgery. We recommend no additional prophylaxis in patients at very low risk of VTE (Caprini score 0). Patients at low risk of VTE (Caprini 1 to 2) are recommended to receive either mechanical or pharmacological prophylaxis. Patients at moderate (Caprini 3 to 4) to high risk of VTE (Caprini ≥5) are recommended pharmacological prophylaxis either alone or combined with mechanical prophylaxis. Patients at high risk of bleeding should receive mechanical prophylaxis until their risk of bleeding is reduced and pharmacological prophylaxis can be reconsidered. Populations for which the Caprini score has not been validated (such as orthopedic surgery) are recommended prophylaxis based on individual and procedure-specific risk factors. Prophylaxis is typically continued until the patient is ambulatory or until hospital dismissal; however, longer durations can be considered in certain circumstances (high-risk patients undergoing malignant abdominopelvic operations, bariatric operations, and certain orthopedic operations).

The System Is Broken: A Qualitative Assessment of Opioid Prescribing Practices After Spine Surgery.

OBJECTIVE: To elucidate factors that influence opioid prescribing behaviors of key stakeholders after major spine surgery, with a focus on barriers to optimized prescribing. METHODS: In-person semi-structured interviews were performed with 20 surgical and medical professionals (January 23, 2019 to June 11, 2019) at a large academic medical center, including resident physicians, midlevel providers, attending physicians, and clinical pharmacists. Interviews centered on perceptions of postoperative prescribing practices were coded and analyzed using a qualitative inductive approach. RESULTS: Several unique themes emerged. First, wide interprovider variation exists in the perceived role of opioid prescribing guidelines. Second, there are important relationships between clinical experience, time constraints, and postoperative opioid prescribing. Third, opioid tapering is a major area of inconsistency. Fourth, there are serious challenges in managing analgesic expectations, particularly in those with chronic pain. Finally, there is currently no process to facilitate the hand-off or transition of opioid prescribing responsibility between surgical and primary care teams, which represents a major area for practice optimization efforts. CONCLUSION: Despite increased focus on postoperative opioid prescribing, there remain numerous areas for improvement. The development of tools and processes to address critical gaps in postoperative prescribing will be essential for our efforts to reduce long-term opioid use after major spine surgery and improve patient care.

Update in Outpatient General Internal Medicine: Practice-Changing Evidence Published in 2019.

Clinicians are challenged to stay informed of new and changing medical literature. To facilitate knowledge updates and synthesis of practice-changing information, a group of 6 internists reviewed the titles and abstracts in the 7 outpatient general internal medicine journals with the highest impact factors and relevance to outpatient internal medicine physicians: New England Journal of Medicine (NEJM), Lancet, Annals of Internal Medicine, Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA), JAMA Internal Medicine, British Medical Journal (BMJ), and Public Library of Science (PLoS) Medicine. The following collections of article synopses and databases were also reviewed: American College of Physicians Journal Club, NEJM Journal Watch, BMJ Evidence-Based Medicine, McMaster/DynaMed Evidence Alerts, and Cochrane Reviews. A modified Delphi method was used to gain consensus based on clinical relevance to outpatient internal medicine, potential impact on practice, and strength of evidence. Article qualities and importance were debated until consensus was reached. Clusters of articles pertaining to the same topic were considered together. In total, 7 practice-changing articles were included.

Preoperative Dobutamine Stress Echocardiography and Clinical Factors for Assessment of Cardiac Risk after Noncardiac Surgery.

BACKGROUND: The role of dobutamine stress echocardiography (DSE) in the risk stratification of patients undergoing noncardiac surgery in the current era is unclear. The aim of this study was to evaluate the yield of DSE and the additive role of DSE to clinical criteria for preoperative risk stratification of patients undergoing noncardiac surgery. METHODS: The study included 4,494 patients undergoing DSE ≤90 days before noncardiac surgery. The primary outcome was a composite of postoperative myocardial infarction, cardiac arrest, and all-cause mortality ≤30 days after noncardiac surgery. RESULTS: The overall 30-day postoperative cardiac event rate was 2.3%. The mortality rate was 0.9% overall and 0.7% and 1.3% after normal and abnormal results on DSE, respectively. Among clinical variables, the modified Revised Cardiac Risk Index score demonstrated the strongest association with postoperative risk (P < .001). Patients with Revised Cardiac Risk Index scores of ≥3 had an event rate of 7.5%. The event rates for patients with wall motion score index ≥1.7 at baseline, left ventricular ejection fractions <40% at peak stress, or ischemic thresholds <70% of age-predicted maximal heart rate were 7.1%, 8.6%, and 7.9%, respectively. After adjusting for clinical variables, the overall result of DSE (P < .001), baseline and peak-stress wall motion score index (P < .001 and P = .014, respectively), peak-stress left ventricular ejection fraction (P < .001), and the number of ischemic segments (P = .027) were all associated with postoperative cardiac events. Incremental multivariate analysis demonstrated that an overall abnormal result on DSE, added to clinical variables, was associated with an increased risk for postoperative cardiac events (odds ratio, 2.07; 95% CI, 1.35-3.17; P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: Baseline and peak-stress findings on preoperative DSE add to the prognostic utility of clinical variables for stratifying cardiac risk after noncardiac surgery.