The challenge of implementing Less is More medicine: A European perspective.

The concept of Less is More medicine emerged in North America in 2010. It aims to serve as an invitation to recognize the potential risks of overuse of medical care that may result in harm rather than in better health, tackling the erroneous assumption that more care is always better. In response, several medical societies across the world launched quality-driven campaigns ("Choosing Wisely") and published "top-five lists" of low-value medical interventions that should be used to help make wise decisions in each clinical domain, by engaging patients in conversations about unnecessary tests, treatments and procedures. However, barriers and challenges for the implementation of Less is More medicine have been identified in several European countries, where overuse is rooted in the culture and demanded by a society that requests certainty at almost any cost. Patients' high expectations, physician's behavior, lack of monitoring and pernicious financial incentives have all indirect negative consequences for medical overuse. Multiple interventions and quality-measurement efforts are necessary to widely implement Less is More recommendations. These also consist of a top-five list of actions: (1) a novel cultural approach starting from medical graduation courses, up to (2) patient and society education, (3) physician behavior change with data feedback, (4) communication training and (5) policy maker interventions. In contrast with the prevailing maximization of care, the optimization of care promoted by Less is More medicine can be an intellectual challenge but also a real opportunity to promote sustainable medicine. This project will constitute part of the future agenda of the European Federation of Internal Medicine.

What is the role of general internists in the tertiary or academic setting?

The changing demography of European populations mandates a vital role for internists in caring for patients in each level of healthcare. Internists in the tertiary or academic setting are highly ranked in terms of their responsibilities: they are clinicians, educators, researchers, role models, mentors and administrators. Contrary to the highly focused approach of sub-specialties, general internists working in academic settings can ensure that coordinated care is delivered in the most cost-conscious and efficient way. Moreover, internal medicine is one of the most appropriate specialties in which to teach clinical reasoning skills, decision-making and analytical thinking, as well as evidence based, patient oriented medicine. Internists deal with challenging patients of the new millennium with a high burden of chronic diseases and polypharmacy; practice personalised medicine with a wide scientific background and so they are the perfect fit to establish and implement new tools for scientific research. In conclusion, internal medicine is developing a new identity as a specialty in its own right. The European Federation of Internal Medicine supports the concept of academic internists and calls upon the member countries to construct academic (general) internal medicine departments in their respective countries. As 'internal medicine is the cornerstone of every national healthcare system', academic (general) internal medicine should strive to be the cornerstone of every integrated, patient-centred, modern medical care and training system.

European School of Internal Medicine (ESIM) in Brighton: experiences and reflections.

The European School of Internal Medicine (ESIM) is a meeting aimed at young physicians training in internal medicine throughout Europe. Since 1998 the school has been held annually, and in this report we reflect on our experiences during the recent school in Brighton in July 2010. The school combined a broad mix of lectures, workshops and case presentations covering a variety of rare diseases, and both faculty and residents participated with noticeable enthusiasm, making this a special experience for all of us. The school also provided an opportunity to compare and discuss topical professional issues in internal medicine in Europe and was a memorable social gathering for physicians who share a strong interest in internal medicine.

Recurrences and infections during continuous immunosuppressive therapy after beginning dialysis in ANCA-associated vasculitis.

BACKGROUND: Approximately 20% of patients with antineutrophil cytoplasm antibody-associated systemic vasculitis (AASV) develop end-stage renal failure (ESRF). It is not clear whether continuation of immunosuppression, with its associated risks, is beneficial because relapse rates after the development of ESRF are reported to be low. STUDY DESIGN: Case series. SETTING & PARTICIPANTS: Single tertiary-care referral center. 46 patients with AASV who developed ESRF from 1971 to 2004. OUTCOMES & MEASUREMENTS: Treatment, relapse rates before and after dialysis therapy, patient outcome after dialysis therapy, and infection (defined as admission to hospital or intravenous antibiotics) were recorded. RESULTS: Patients with AASV on dialysis therapy had 1- and 5-year survival rates of 82% and 55%, equivalent to current 1- and 5-year survival rates of dialysis patients reported by the UK renal registry, respectively. Infection rates in patients with ESRF were high in those with AASV on dialysis therapy; 106 events in 35 patients (dialysis patients with AASV, 0.89 infections/patient-year; confidence interval [CI], 0.74 to 1.08). Eight of 9 patients who died of infection were receiving immunosuppressive therapy. No patient died of active disease. Relapse rates after dialysis commencement were less than those predialysis (6 relapses in 4 patients; 0.05 relapses/patient-year postdialysis; CI, 0.02 to 0.1 compared with 18 relapses in 11 patients; 0.13 relapses/patient-year predialysis; CI, 0.07 to 0.19). LIMITATIONS: This is a retrospective study spread over 3 decades with no control group. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with AASV and ESRF are less likely to experience relapse than before dialysis therapy. Patients with AASV on dialysis therapy have a high rate of infection. These results may not be applicable to patients with pulmonary involvement.