Poor Baseline Health of IBD Patients at Presentation to a Surgeon: Results From a Patient-Reported Outcomes Database.

Background: Many patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) are referred to surgeons when medical treatments are ineffective, signifying poor disease control. We aimed to assess the association of IBD diagnosis with physical and mental health upon presentation to a colorectal surgeon. Methods: We included all new patients presenting to colorectal surgery clinic over 1.5 years. During registration, patients completed the PROMIS Global-10, a validated outcome measure assessing physical and mental health. We grouped patients by diagnosis: IBD, anorectal, benign colorectal, and malignancy. Details on IBD patients were obtained via chart review. We evaluated the interaction between PROMIS scores and diagnosis through ANOVA analysis and post hoc Tukey-Kramer pairwise comparison. We estimated the strength of association of age, sex, and visit diagnosis with poor physical and mental health (PROMIS: -1 SD) through logistic regression. Results: Eight hundred ninety-seven patients were included. The cohort was as follows: IBD (99) (Crohn = 73; ulcerative colitis = 26), anorectal (378), benign colorectal (224), and malignancy (196). The mean age of patients was 56 (±17) years. Fifty-seven percent were female. The IBD group was youngest (P < 0.001). IBD had significantly lower PROMIS scores on pairwise comparison; anorectal had the highest scores. Controlling for age and sex, the IBD group had 4.1× odds of poor physical health (95% confidence interval 2.46-6.76) and 2.9× odds of poor mental health (95% confidence interval 1.66-5.00). Conclusions: Patients with IBD, specifically Crohn disease, have worse physical and mental health on presentation to a colorectal surgeon compared to patients presenting with other colorectal diagnoses. These patients considering surgery might benefit from added support during the perioperative period.

Comparing Training Techniques in Personal Protective Equipment Use.

INTRODUCTION: Physicians' management of hazardous material (HAZMAT) incidents requires personal protective equipment (PPE) utilization to ensure the safety of victims, facilities, and providers; therefore, providing effective and accessible training in its use is crucial. While an emphasis has been placed on the importance of PPE, there is debate about the most effective training methods. Circumstances may not allow for a traditional in-person demonstration; an accessible video training may provide a useful alternative. HYPOTHESIS: Video training of Emergency Medicine (EM) residents in the donning and doffing of Level C PPE is more effective than in-person training. NULL HYPOTHESIS: Video training of EM residents in the donning and doffing of Level C PPE is equally effective compared with in-person training. METHODS: A randomized, controlled pilot trial was performed with 20 EM residents as part of their annual Emergency Preparedness training. Residents were divided into four groups, with Group 1 and Group 2 viewing a demonstration video developed by the Emergency Preparedness Team (EPT) and Group 3 and Group 4 receiving the standard in-person demonstration training by an EPT member. The groups then separately performed a donning and doffing simulation while blinded evaluators assessed critical tasks utilizing a prepared evaluation tool. At the drill's conclusion, all participants also completed a self-evaluation survey about their subjective interpretations of their respective trainings. RESULTS: Both video and in-person training modalities showed significant overall improvement in participants' confidence in doffing and donning PPE equipment (P <.05). However, no statistically significant difference was found in the number of failed critical tasks in donning or doffing between the training modalities (P >.05). Based on these results, the null hypothesis cannot be rejected. However, these results were limited by the small sample size and the study was not sufficiently powered to show a difference between training modalities. CONCLUSION: In this pilot study, video and in-person training were equally effective in training for donning and doffing Level C PPE, with similar error rates in both modalities. Further research into this subject with an appropriately powered study is warranted to determine whether this equivalence persists using a larger sample size.

The Challenges of a Vertical Evacuation Drill.

INTRODUCTION: Recent natural and infrastructural disasters, such as Hurricanes Sandy (2012) and Katrina (2005) and the Northeastern power outage of 2003, have emphasized the need for hospital staff to be trained in disaster management and response. Even an internal hospital disaster may require the safe and efficient evacuation and transfer of patients with varying medical conditions and complications. A notably susceptible population is renal transplant patients, including those with post-transplant complications. HYPOTHESIS: This descriptive study evaluated staff performance of a vertical evacuation drill of renal transplant patients at State University of New York (SUNY) Downstate Medical Center - University Hospital Brooklyn (UHB; Brooklyn, New York USA). METHODS: Thirteen standardized patients, 12 of whom received a renal transplant, with varying medical histories, ambulatory ability, and mental status were vertically evacuated by the transplant staff from the eighth floor to the ambulance entrance on the ground floor. Non-ambulatory patients were transported on portable evacuation sleds. RESULTS: All patients were evacuated successfully within 3.5 hours. On a post-drill evaluation form, drill participants self-reported largely positive results concerning their own role in the drill and the evacuation drill itself. Drill evaluators observed very different results, including staff reticence, poor training retention, and lack of leadership. CONCLUSION: Despite encouraging post-drill evaluation results from the participants, the evacuation drill highlighted several immediate deficiencies. It also demonstrated a significant discrepancy in performance perception between the drill participants and the drill evaluators.SalwayRJ, AdlerZ, WilliamsT, NwokeF, RoblinP, ArquillaB. The challenges of a vertical evacuation drill. Prehosp Disaster Med. 2019;34(1):25-29.