Help Me Help You: How to Request a Letter of Recommendation.

Letters of recommendation (LORs) are an essential component of a career in medicine. The process for obtaining certain letters, particularly those associated with scheduled periods of professional transition, often is governed by established institutional or specialty norms. The process of requesting LORs in more common scenarios-local or national awards, committee assignments, and leadership positions-many times is less clearly defined, however. Despite the important role that LORs play in professional development, the published literature on how to solicit a recommendation is limited, creating challenges for both those requesting LORs ("applicants") and the letter writers. This perspective piece offers insight on how to best identify and communicate with a potential writer. These suggestions are derived from the limited relevant literature and from the authors' experience both with requesting letters themselves and writing letters as leaders in undergraduate and graduate medical education. The goal is to reduce ambiguity for applicants and ensure that writers receive the information necessary to provide an informed and effective recommendation.

Proceedings from the 2021 SAEM Consensus Conference: Research Priorities for Interventions to Address Social Risks and Needs Identified in Emergency Department Patients.

INTRODUCTION: Emergency departments (ED) function as a health and social safety net, regularly taking care of patients with high social risk and need. Few studies have examined ED-based interventions for social risk and need. METHODS: Focusing on ED-based interventions, we identified initial research gaps and priorities in the ED using a literature review, topic expert feedback, and consensus-building. Research gaps and priorities were further refined based on moderated, scripted discussions and survey feedback during the 2021 SAEM Consensus Conference. Using these methods, we derived six priorities based on three identified gaps in ED-based social risks and needs interventions: 1) assessment of ED-based interventions; 2) intervention implementation in the ED environment; and 3) intercommunication between patients, EDs, and medical and social systems. RESULTS: Using these methods, we derived six priorities based on three identified gaps in ED-based social risks and needs interventions: 1) assessment of ED-based interventions, 2) intervention implementation in the ED environment, and 3) intercommunication between patients, EDs, and medical and social systems. Assessing intervention effectiveness through patient-centered outcome and risk reduction measures should be high priorities in the future. Also noted was the need to study methods of integrating interventions into the ED environment and to increase collaboration between EDs and their larger health systems, community partners, social services, and local government. CONCLUSION: The identified research gaps and priorities offer guidance for future work to establish effective interventions and build relationships with community health and social systems to address social risks and needs, thereby improving the health of our patients.

Knowledgeable Neighbors: a mobile clinic model for disease prevention and screening in underserved communities.

The Family Van mobile health clinic uses a "Knowledgeable Neighbor" model to deliver cost-effective screening and prevention activities in underserved neighborhoods in Boston, MA. We have described the Knowledgeable Neighbor model and used operational data collected from 2006 to 2009 to evaluate the service. The Family Van successfully reached mainly minority low-income men and women. Of the clients screened, 60% had previously undetected elevated blood pressure, 14% had previously undetected elevated blood glucose, and 38% had previously undetected elevated total cholesterol. This represents an important model for reaching underserved communities to deliver proven cost-effective prevention activities, both to help control health care costs and to reduce health disparities.

A Quality Improvement Initiative Featuring Peer-Comparison Prescribing Feedback Reduces Emergency Department Opioid Prescribing.

BACKGROUND: Opioid prescribing in the United States nearly tripled from 1999 to 2015, and opioid overdose deaths doubled in the same time frame. Emergency departments (EDs) may play a pivotal role in the opioid epidemic as a source of first-time opioid exposure; however, many prescribers are generally unaware of their prescribing behaviors relative to their peers. METHODS: All 117 ED prescribers at an urban academic medical center were provided with regular feedback on individual rates of opioid prescribing relative to their de-identified peers. To evaluate the effect of this intervention on the departmental rate of opioid prescribing, a statistical process control (SPC) chart was created to identify special cause variation, and an interrupted time series analysis was conducted to evaluate the immediate effect of the intervention and any change in the postintervention trend due to the intervention. RESULTS: The aggregate opioid prescribing rate in the preintervention period was 8.6% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 8.3%-8.9%), while the aggregate postintervention prescribing rate was 5.8% (95% CI: 5.5%-6.1%). The SPC chart revealed special cause variation in both the pre- and postintervention periods, with an overall downtrend of opioid prescribing rates across the evaluation period and flattening of rates in the final four blocks. Interrupted time series analysis demonstrated a significant immediate downward effect of the intervention and a nonsignificant additional decrease in postintervention trend. CONCLUSION: Implementation of peer-comparison opioid prescribing feedback was associated with a significant immediate reduction in the rate of ED discharge opioid prescribing.