Contemporary Management and Outcomes of Veterans Hospitalized With Alcohol Withdrawal: A Multicenter Retrospective Cohort Study.

OBJECTIVES: Few studies describe contemporary alcohol withdrawal management in hospitalized settings or review current practices considering the guidelines by the American Society of Addiction Medicine (ASAM). METHODS: We conducted a retrospective cohort study of patients hospitalized with alcohol withdrawal on medical or surgical wards in 19 Veteran Health Administration (VHA) hospitals between October 1, 2018, and September 30, 2019. Demographic and comorbidity data were obtained from the Veteran Health Administration Corporate Data Warehouse. Inpatient management and hospital outcomes were obtained by chart review. Factors associated with treatment duration and complicated withdrawal were examined. RESULTS: Of the 594 patients included in this study, 51% were managed with symptom-triggered therapy alone, 26% with fixed dose plus symptom-triggered therapy, 10% with front loading regimens plus symptom-triggered therapy, and 3% with fixed dose alone. The most common medication given was lorazepam (87%) followed by chlordiazepoxide (33%), diazepam (14%), and phenobarbital (6%). Symptom-triggered therapy alone (relative risk [RR], 0.68; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.57-0.80) and front loading with symptom-triggered therapy (RR, 0.75; 95% CI, 0.62-0.92) were associated with reduced treatment duration. Lorazepam (RR, 1.20; 95% CI, 1.02-1.41) and phenobarbital (RR, 1.28; 95% CI, 1.06-1.54) were associated with increased treatment duration. Lorazepam (adjusted odds ratio, 4.30; 95% CI, 1.05-17.63) and phenobarbital (adjusted odds ratio, 6.51; 95% CI, 2.08-20.40) were also associated with complicated withdrawal. CONCLUSIONS: Overall, our results support guidelines by the ASAM to manage patients with long-acting benzodiazepines using symptom-triggered therapy. Health care systems that are using shorter acting benzodiazepines and fixed-dose regimens should consider updating alcohol withdrawal management pathways to follow ASAM recommendations.

A Multicenter Observational Study Comparing Virtual with In-Person Morning Reports during the COVID-19 Pandemic.

OBJECTIVES: The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic disrupted how educational conferences were delivered, leaving programs to choose between in-person and virtual morning report formats. The objective of our study was to describe morning reports during the COVID-19 pandemic, including the use of virtual formats, attendance, leadership, and content. METHODS: A prospective observational study of morning reports was conducted at 13 Internal Medicine residency programs between September 1, 2020 and March 30, 2021, including a follow-up survey of current morning report format in January 2023. RESULTS: In total, 257 reports were observed; 74% used virtual formats, including single hospital, multiple hospital, and a hybrid format with both in-person and virtual participants. Compared with in-person reports, virtual reports had more participants, with increased numbers of learners (median 21 vs 7; P < 0.001) and attendings (median 4 vs 2; P < 0.001), and they were more likely to involve medical students (83% vs 40%; P < 0.001), interns (99% vs 53%; P < 0.001), and program directors (68% vs 32%; P < 0.001). Attendings were less likely to lead virtual reports (3% vs 28%, P < 0.001). Virtual reports also were more likely to be case based (88% vs 69%; P < 0.001) and to use digital presentation slides (91% vs 36%; P < 0.001). There was a marked increase in the number of slides (median 20 vs 0; P < 0.001). As of January 2023, all 13 programs had returned to in-person reports, with only 1 program offering an option to participate virtually. CONCLUSIONS: During the COVID-19 pandemic, virtual morning report formats predominated. Compared with traditional in-person reports, virtual report increased attendance, favored resident leadership, and approached a similar range of patient diagnoses with a greater number of case-based presentations and slides. In spite of these characteristics, all programs returned to an in-person format for morning report as pandemic restrictions waned.

What internal medicine attendings talk about at morning report: a multicenter study.

BACKGROUND: Morning report is a core educational activity in internal medicine resident education. Attending physicians regularly participate in morning report and influence the learning environment, though no previous study has described the contribution of attending physicians to this conference. This study aims to describe attending comments at internal medicine morning reports. METHODS: We conducted a prospective, observational study of morning reports conducted at 13 internal medicine residency programs between September 1, 2020, and March 30, 2021. Each attending comment was described including its duration, whether the comment was teaching or non-teaching, teaching topic, and field of practice of the commenter. We also recorded morning report-related variables including number of learners, report format, program director participation, and whether report was scripted (facilitator has advance knowledge of the case). A regression model was developed to describe variables associated with the number of attending comments per report. RESULTS: There were 2,344 attending comments during 250 conferences. The median number of attendings present was 3 (IQR, 2-5). The number of comments per report ranged across different sites from 3.9 to 16.8 with a mean of 9.4 comments/report (SD, 7.4). 66% of comments were shorter than one minute in duration and 73% were categorized as teaching by observers. The most common subjects of teaching comments were differential diagnosis, management, and testing. Report duration, number of general internists, unscripted reports, and in-person format were associated with significantly increased number of attending comments. CONCLUSIONS: Attending comments in morning report were generally brief, focused on clinical teaching, and covered a wide range of topics. There were substantial differences between programs in terms of the number of comments and their duration which likely affects the local learning environment. Morning report stakeholders that are interested in increasing attending involvement in morning report should consider employing in-person and unscripted reports. Additional studies are needed to explore best practice models of attending participation in morning report.

An Academic Hospitalist-Run Outpatient Paracentesis Clinic.

Background: Patients needing large-volume paracenteses (LVPs) can occupy inpatient hospital beds and unnecessarily use inpatient resources. Methods: We describe an outpatient paracentesis clinic that was part of a quality assurance initiative at the Veterans Affairs Pittsburgh Healthcare System in Pennsylvania. A retrospective review was conducted that included patient age, sex, etiology of ascites, amount of ascites removed, time of the procedure, complications, and results of ascites cell count and cultures abstracted from the electronic health record. Results: Over 74 months, 506 paracenteses were performed on 82 patients. The mean volume removed was 7.9 L, and the mean time of the procedure was 33.3 minutes. There were 5 episodes of postprocedure hypotension that required admission for 3 patients. One episode of abdominal wall hematoma occurred that required admission. Two patients developed incarceration of an umbilical hernia after the paracentesis; both required surgical repair. Without the clinic, almost all the 506 outpatient LVPs we performed would have resulted in a hospital admission. Conclusion: An outpatient paracentesis clinic run by academic hospitalists can safely and quickly remove large volumes of ascites and minimize hospitalizations.

Revealing tacit knowledge used by experienced health professionals for interprofessional collaboration.

With the current interest in interprofessional collaboration in health care as a response to ever-increasing complexity of health issues and scarcity of resources, many higher education institutions are developing interprofessional education (IPE) programs. However, there has been little empirical work on what. With the current interest for interprofessional collaboration in health care ever-increasing knowledge and skills are required to work collaboratively between health professions. We have undertaken to describe interprofessional collaboration as a practice largely underpinned by tacit knowledge acquired by experienced clinicians. Clinicians from all health professions in a large francophone university in Eastern Canada were invited to participate in explicitation interviews. Explicitation interviews require participants to freely recall an interprofessional collaboration event (e.g., team meeting or joint care delivery) and describe specific actions they personally enacted. An experienced health professional encounters many interprofessional situations over time; the actions they describe reflect their personal theories about the practice. Hence, it is highly probable that they use them frequently when working with colleagues in clinical settings. Unveiled tacit knowledge was divided into four themes: the importance of a sense of belonging to a team, the imperative to meet face-to-face, the practice of soliciting the working hypotheses of colleagues, and the art of summarizing meeting discussions.

BiVADs: a bridge to the future for patients and their families: the art and science of nursing combined in the face of technology.

Approximately 500,000 Canadians live with heart failure (Ross et al., 2006). These numbers continue to rise due to advancing technology and successes in treating cardiac conditions and potentially fatal events such as myocardial infarctions. According to Carrier (2005), individuals with damaged hearts are living longer, and lives are being successfully saved with the surge of cardiovascular assist devices developed in recent years, which are increasingly used as a bridge to transplant. Despite the lifesaving capabilities of ventricular-assist devices, these innovations pose risks and complications that can be debilitating for patients and their families (Carrier, 2005). As this complex trajectory is navigated, nurses provide care and support to the patient and family while playing a unique role in the assessment and monitoring of these devices. A family-centred nursing model provides a framework for practice when nursing patients and families are in crisis. The foundations of the McGill Model of Nursing are focused on a strengths-based approach, revolving around collaboration between patients, family resources, and tailored interventions (Gottlieb & Feeley, 2005). As students placed in a critical care setting, we began to realize the complexity of care required to nurse these patients and their families. In this paper, a case study is used to describe and share our learning experiences of caring for a patient with a biventricular assist device, as well as the principles that guided our interventions.