Association Between In-Training Exam Scores and Clinical Exposure During the COVID-19 Pandemic.

BACKGROUND: We sought to evaluate changes in In-Training Examination (ITE) scores and associations with clinical work during the COVID-19 pandemic. We hypothesized that residents saw a decrease in clinical encounters during the pandemic and that this would be associated with smaller gains in ITE scores. METHODS: We compared ITE score changes with data on patient notes for three classes of pediatric residents at four residency programs: one not exposed to the pandemic during their intern year who entered residency in 2018, one partially exposed to COVID-19 in March of their intern year (2019-2020), and one that was fully exposed to the pandemic, starting residency in June of 2020. RESULTS: ITE scores on average improved from the PGY1 to PGY2 year in the "no covid" and "partial COVID" cohorts. The "full COVID" cohort had little to no improvement, on average. The total number of patient encounters was not associated with a change in ITE scores from PGY1 to PGY2. There was a small but statistically significant association between change in ITE score and number of inpatient H+P notes. CONCLUSIONS: A drop in ITE scores occurred in pediatric residents who entered residency during the COVID-19 pandemic. This change was largely unrelated to clinical encounter number changes.

Innovations in Cancer Treatment of Children.

Pediatric cancer outcomes have significantly improved, and yet this success is not spread equally across cancer types or patients. Disparities data in pediatric oncology highlight needed improvements in access to care, including clinical trials and advanced testing for all patients. For cancers such as brain tumors and sarcomas, continued advancement in understanding the biology of tumor heterogeneity is an essential step toward finding new therapeutic combinations to improve outcomes. Pediatric cancer survivors need access to emerging technologies aimed at reducing or better managing toxicities from therapy. With advances in treatment and survival, pediatric oncology patients continue to need longitudinal, multidisciplinary subspecialty care. Refining the communication between pediatric oncologists, primary pediatricians, survivorship clinics, and adult primary care is key in ensuring the best lifelong care of pediatric cancer survivors. In this State-of-The-Art review, we discuss 5 major domains in pediatric oncology: reducing toxicity, cancer biology, novel therapies, detection and monitoring, and access to care, to highlight recent advances and areas for continued improvement.

SAFEST: Use of a Rubric to Teach Safety Reporting to Pediatric House Officers.

BACKGROUND: Among the many modalities of error detection in academic pediatric hospitals, patient safety reporting is an important component, particularly for unexpected events. Residents recognize the importance of reporting but cite some barriers to doing so. A rubric was developed to guide resident reporting and streamline information gathering in patient safety reports. The rubric used the acronym SAFEST as a reminder to include 6 key elements:1. Staff involved in the incident.2. Actual event description.3. Follow-up initiated.4. Effect on patient.5. Standard of care described.6. To-do/suggestions for improvement. OBJECTIVES: This study was designed to determine if the addition of this educational rubric into a standard quality improvement curriculum improves the consistency of information documented in patient safety reports as a subset of a larger quality improvement project aimed at improving safety reporting. METHODS: A team of faculty members analyzed individual resident error reports for adherence to the 6 tenets of the SAFEST mnemonic. RESULTS: From April to October of 2014, 2015, and 2016, a convenience sample of 131, 110, and 132 reports, respectively, were extracted and analyzed. For the rates of reporting "staff involved" and "standard of care," the differences over time were significant, both with P values < 0.001. After training, residents were 2.2 times more likely to report on the "staff involved" in the error and 1.8 times more likely to report the "standard of care." DISCUSSION: These results describe successful education on a rubric designed to improve the content of patient safety reports.