Rise in VKDB cases prompts call for a tracking system

Article Type
Changed
Wed, 05/07/2014 - 07:00
Display Headline
Rise in VKDB cases prompts call for a tracking system

Smiling baby

Credit: Petr Kratochvil

Physicians at a Tennessee hospital have seen a rise in late-onset vitamin K deficiency bleeding (VKDB) in young infants, due to parents declining a vitamin K shot at birth.

Over a period of 8 months, 7 infants were diagnosed with vitamin K deficiency, and 5 of them had VKDB.

Four of the infants experienced intracranial hemorrhaging, and 2 required urgent neurosurgical intervention.

These cases were diagnosed at Monroe Carell Jr. Children’s Hospital at Vanderbilt in Nashville.

And they were described in Pediatric Neurology.

Now, the authors are calling for a state and national tracking system to help them determine how many infants are not receiving a vitamin K shot at birth.

“There is no national tracking of this in the US, unfortunately, and cases are rarely reported,” said Robert Sidonio Jr, MD, of Vanderbilt University School of Medicine.

“We are probably just seeing the tip of the iceberg, and I worry that people are missing these cases often and not considering this diagnosis when presented with a sick infant.”

He and his colleagues are also calling for better education on this issue for healthcare providers and families. The group believes misinformation—that the shot causes leukemia, is a toxin, or is unnecessary in uncomplicated births—may be leading some families to decline the shot.

The American Academy of Pediatrics has recommended the single-dose shot of vitamin K at birth since 1961. Most cases of VKDB seen today occur in infants in the first 6 months of life who did not get the shot and are exclusively breastfed or who have an undiagnosed liver disorder.

Following a recent rise in cases in Tennessee, the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention discovered that 28% (61/218) of parents of children born at private birthing centers in the state declined the shot.

Mark and Melissa Knotowicz declined the shot for their twins, Silas and Abel, following their birth last July at a Nashville hospital.

“From the information we had, we heard the main side effect was a preservative in the shot that could lead to childhood leukemia,” said Mark Knotowicz. “We thought, ‘We don’t want our kids to have childhood leukemia,’ so we declined it without really hearing any of the benefits.”

At about 6 weeks old, Silas was noticeably fussy. He vomited overnight, woke up extremely pale, and wouldn’t nurse.

The twins had a checkup scheduled that day. The pediatrician suspected sepsis and told the Knotowiczes to take Silas to the Emergency Department at Monroe Carell Jr. Children’s Hospital.

Because of a rash of VKBD cases, the staff there had received additional education. After Silas’s parents confirmed that he had not received the vitamin K shot, CT scans and blood work revealed he had suffered multiple brain bleeds.

Silas received a double dose of vitamin K to get the bleeding under control. His twin, Abel, was diagnosed with asymptomatic vitamin K deficiency and received the shot.

Silas spent a week in the hospital. Today, he undergoes physical therapy for neuromuscular development issues. Any effects on cognitive development aren’t yet known.

“The twins’ cases highlight our inability to determine which infants will go on to develop vitamin K deficiency bleeding, as they both had prolonged bleeding times at presentation,” Dr Sidonio said.

Mark Knotowicz wishes medical staff at the birthing hospital had more clearly defined the risks of declining the shot.

“Why didn’t they say, ‘There have been 4 other cases in Nashville, and we’re trying to prevent a lethal brain hemorrhage in your child?’”

 

 

Anna Morad, MD, of the Vanderbilt University School of Medicine, has worked to raise awareness about the vitamin K shot and the risk of VKDB, with some success.

“After our educational outreach, we have seen a decrease in our refusal rates [with about 3.4% of parents declining vitamin K],” she said. “Our goal is to fully educate parents on the risk of declining so they can make an informed choice for their baby.”

Publications
Topics

Smiling baby

Credit: Petr Kratochvil

Physicians at a Tennessee hospital have seen a rise in late-onset vitamin K deficiency bleeding (VKDB) in young infants, due to parents declining a vitamin K shot at birth.

Over a period of 8 months, 7 infants were diagnosed with vitamin K deficiency, and 5 of them had VKDB.

Four of the infants experienced intracranial hemorrhaging, and 2 required urgent neurosurgical intervention.

These cases were diagnosed at Monroe Carell Jr. Children’s Hospital at Vanderbilt in Nashville.

And they were described in Pediatric Neurology.

Now, the authors are calling for a state and national tracking system to help them determine how many infants are not receiving a vitamin K shot at birth.

“There is no national tracking of this in the US, unfortunately, and cases are rarely reported,” said Robert Sidonio Jr, MD, of Vanderbilt University School of Medicine.

“We are probably just seeing the tip of the iceberg, and I worry that people are missing these cases often and not considering this diagnosis when presented with a sick infant.”

He and his colleagues are also calling for better education on this issue for healthcare providers and families. The group believes misinformation—that the shot causes leukemia, is a toxin, or is unnecessary in uncomplicated births—may be leading some families to decline the shot.

The American Academy of Pediatrics has recommended the single-dose shot of vitamin K at birth since 1961. Most cases of VKDB seen today occur in infants in the first 6 months of life who did not get the shot and are exclusively breastfed or who have an undiagnosed liver disorder.

Following a recent rise in cases in Tennessee, the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention discovered that 28% (61/218) of parents of children born at private birthing centers in the state declined the shot.

Mark and Melissa Knotowicz declined the shot for their twins, Silas and Abel, following their birth last July at a Nashville hospital.

“From the information we had, we heard the main side effect was a preservative in the shot that could lead to childhood leukemia,” said Mark Knotowicz. “We thought, ‘We don’t want our kids to have childhood leukemia,’ so we declined it without really hearing any of the benefits.”

At about 6 weeks old, Silas was noticeably fussy. He vomited overnight, woke up extremely pale, and wouldn’t nurse.

The twins had a checkup scheduled that day. The pediatrician suspected sepsis and told the Knotowiczes to take Silas to the Emergency Department at Monroe Carell Jr. Children’s Hospital.

Because of a rash of VKBD cases, the staff there had received additional education. After Silas’s parents confirmed that he had not received the vitamin K shot, CT scans and blood work revealed he had suffered multiple brain bleeds.

Silas received a double dose of vitamin K to get the bleeding under control. His twin, Abel, was diagnosed with asymptomatic vitamin K deficiency and received the shot.

Silas spent a week in the hospital. Today, he undergoes physical therapy for neuromuscular development issues. Any effects on cognitive development aren’t yet known.

“The twins’ cases highlight our inability to determine which infants will go on to develop vitamin K deficiency bleeding, as they both had prolonged bleeding times at presentation,” Dr Sidonio said.

Mark Knotowicz wishes medical staff at the birthing hospital had more clearly defined the risks of declining the shot.

“Why didn’t they say, ‘There have been 4 other cases in Nashville, and we’re trying to prevent a lethal brain hemorrhage in your child?’”

 

 

Anna Morad, MD, of the Vanderbilt University School of Medicine, has worked to raise awareness about the vitamin K shot and the risk of VKDB, with some success.

“After our educational outreach, we have seen a decrease in our refusal rates [with about 3.4% of parents declining vitamin K],” she said. “Our goal is to fully educate parents on the risk of declining so they can make an informed choice for their baby.”

Smiling baby

Credit: Petr Kratochvil

Physicians at a Tennessee hospital have seen a rise in late-onset vitamin K deficiency bleeding (VKDB) in young infants, due to parents declining a vitamin K shot at birth.

Over a period of 8 months, 7 infants were diagnosed with vitamin K deficiency, and 5 of them had VKDB.

Four of the infants experienced intracranial hemorrhaging, and 2 required urgent neurosurgical intervention.

These cases were diagnosed at Monroe Carell Jr. Children’s Hospital at Vanderbilt in Nashville.

And they were described in Pediatric Neurology.

Now, the authors are calling for a state and national tracking system to help them determine how many infants are not receiving a vitamin K shot at birth.

“There is no national tracking of this in the US, unfortunately, and cases are rarely reported,” said Robert Sidonio Jr, MD, of Vanderbilt University School of Medicine.

“We are probably just seeing the tip of the iceberg, and I worry that people are missing these cases often and not considering this diagnosis when presented with a sick infant.”

He and his colleagues are also calling for better education on this issue for healthcare providers and families. The group believes misinformation—that the shot causes leukemia, is a toxin, or is unnecessary in uncomplicated births—may be leading some families to decline the shot.

The American Academy of Pediatrics has recommended the single-dose shot of vitamin K at birth since 1961. Most cases of VKDB seen today occur in infants in the first 6 months of life who did not get the shot and are exclusively breastfed or who have an undiagnosed liver disorder.

Following a recent rise in cases in Tennessee, the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention discovered that 28% (61/218) of parents of children born at private birthing centers in the state declined the shot.

Mark and Melissa Knotowicz declined the shot for their twins, Silas and Abel, following their birth last July at a Nashville hospital.

“From the information we had, we heard the main side effect was a preservative in the shot that could lead to childhood leukemia,” said Mark Knotowicz. “We thought, ‘We don’t want our kids to have childhood leukemia,’ so we declined it without really hearing any of the benefits.”

At about 6 weeks old, Silas was noticeably fussy. He vomited overnight, woke up extremely pale, and wouldn’t nurse.

The twins had a checkup scheduled that day. The pediatrician suspected sepsis and told the Knotowiczes to take Silas to the Emergency Department at Monroe Carell Jr. Children’s Hospital.

Because of a rash of VKBD cases, the staff there had received additional education. After Silas’s parents confirmed that he had not received the vitamin K shot, CT scans and blood work revealed he had suffered multiple brain bleeds.

Silas received a double dose of vitamin K to get the bleeding under control. His twin, Abel, was diagnosed with asymptomatic vitamin K deficiency and received the shot.

Silas spent a week in the hospital. Today, he undergoes physical therapy for neuromuscular development issues. Any effects on cognitive development aren’t yet known.

“The twins’ cases highlight our inability to determine which infants will go on to develop vitamin K deficiency bleeding, as they both had prolonged bleeding times at presentation,” Dr Sidonio said.

Mark Knotowicz wishes medical staff at the birthing hospital had more clearly defined the risks of declining the shot.

“Why didn’t they say, ‘There have been 4 other cases in Nashville, and we’re trying to prevent a lethal brain hemorrhage in your child?’”

 

 

Anna Morad, MD, of the Vanderbilt University School of Medicine, has worked to raise awareness about the vitamin K shot and the risk of VKDB, with some success.

“After our educational outreach, we have seen a decrease in our refusal rates [with about 3.4% of parents declining vitamin K],” she said. “Our goal is to fully educate parents on the risk of declining so they can make an informed choice for their baby.”

Publications
Publications
Topics
Article Type
Display Headline
Rise in VKDB cases prompts call for a tracking system
Display Headline
Rise in VKDB cases prompts call for a tracking system
Disallow All Ads
Content Gating
No Gating (article Unlocked/Free)
Alternative CME
Disqus Comments
Default
Use ProPublica

INR test strips linked to bleeding, deaths

Article Type
Changed
Wed, 05/07/2014 - 06:00
Display Headline
INR test strips linked to bleeding, deaths

Warfarin tablets

Alere Inc., has initiated a Class 1 recall in the US of the Alere INRatio2 PT/INR Professional Test Strips (PN 99008G2).

The strips are used by healthcare professionals to determine the international normalized ratio (INR) in fresh capillary whole blood to monitor the effect of warfarin on clotting time.

Alere has received reports of patients who had a therapeutic or near therapeutic INR with the test strips but a significantly higher INR in tests performed by a central lab.

This error has been linked to 9 reports of serious adverse events, 3 of which described bleeding associated with patient deaths.

So the company has issued a recall of the Alere INRatio2 PT/INR Professional Test Strips (PN 99008G2). This recall does not include the Alere INRatio PT/INR Test Strip (PN 100071), which is used by patients for home INR monitoring.

Alere has not determined the root cause of the error but is concerned that the test strips may continue to report inaccurately low INR results. In the reports, the test strip results were between 3.1 and 12.2 INR units lower than the lab results.

Customers should stop using the Alere INRatio2 PT/INR Professional Test Strips immediately and return unused product to the company.

Alere will transition customers from the current Alere INRatio2 PT/INR Professional Test Strip to the Alere INRatio PT/INR Test Strip (PN 100139).

Alere said it has reported this issue to the US Food and Drug Administration and is conducting a thorough investigation into the adverse events.

Customers with questions about this recall and those who require replacement product can contact Alere at 844-292-5373. For additional information on the recall, visit www.inr-care.com.

Any adverse events or quality problems related to use of the test strips can be reported to the FDA’s MedWatch Adverse Event Reporting Program.

Publications
Topics

Warfarin tablets

Alere Inc., has initiated a Class 1 recall in the US of the Alere INRatio2 PT/INR Professional Test Strips (PN 99008G2).

The strips are used by healthcare professionals to determine the international normalized ratio (INR) in fresh capillary whole blood to monitor the effect of warfarin on clotting time.

Alere has received reports of patients who had a therapeutic or near therapeutic INR with the test strips but a significantly higher INR in tests performed by a central lab.

This error has been linked to 9 reports of serious adverse events, 3 of which described bleeding associated with patient deaths.

So the company has issued a recall of the Alere INRatio2 PT/INR Professional Test Strips (PN 99008G2). This recall does not include the Alere INRatio PT/INR Test Strip (PN 100071), which is used by patients for home INR monitoring.

Alere has not determined the root cause of the error but is concerned that the test strips may continue to report inaccurately low INR results. In the reports, the test strip results were between 3.1 and 12.2 INR units lower than the lab results.

Customers should stop using the Alere INRatio2 PT/INR Professional Test Strips immediately and return unused product to the company.

Alere will transition customers from the current Alere INRatio2 PT/INR Professional Test Strip to the Alere INRatio PT/INR Test Strip (PN 100139).

Alere said it has reported this issue to the US Food and Drug Administration and is conducting a thorough investigation into the adverse events.

Customers with questions about this recall and those who require replacement product can contact Alere at 844-292-5373. For additional information on the recall, visit www.inr-care.com.

Any adverse events or quality problems related to use of the test strips can be reported to the FDA’s MedWatch Adverse Event Reporting Program.

Warfarin tablets

Alere Inc., has initiated a Class 1 recall in the US of the Alere INRatio2 PT/INR Professional Test Strips (PN 99008G2).

The strips are used by healthcare professionals to determine the international normalized ratio (INR) in fresh capillary whole blood to monitor the effect of warfarin on clotting time.

Alere has received reports of patients who had a therapeutic or near therapeutic INR with the test strips but a significantly higher INR in tests performed by a central lab.

This error has been linked to 9 reports of serious adverse events, 3 of which described bleeding associated with patient deaths.

So the company has issued a recall of the Alere INRatio2 PT/INR Professional Test Strips (PN 99008G2). This recall does not include the Alere INRatio PT/INR Test Strip (PN 100071), which is used by patients for home INR monitoring.

Alere has not determined the root cause of the error but is concerned that the test strips may continue to report inaccurately low INR results. In the reports, the test strip results were between 3.1 and 12.2 INR units lower than the lab results.

Customers should stop using the Alere INRatio2 PT/INR Professional Test Strips immediately and return unused product to the company.

Alere will transition customers from the current Alere INRatio2 PT/INR Professional Test Strip to the Alere INRatio PT/INR Test Strip (PN 100139).

Alere said it has reported this issue to the US Food and Drug Administration and is conducting a thorough investigation into the adverse events.

Customers with questions about this recall and those who require replacement product can contact Alere at 844-292-5373. For additional information on the recall, visit www.inr-care.com.

Any adverse events or quality problems related to use of the test strips can be reported to the FDA’s MedWatch Adverse Event Reporting Program.

Publications
Publications
Topics
Article Type
Display Headline
INR test strips linked to bleeding, deaths
Display Headline
INR test strips linked to bleeding, deaths
Disallow All Ads
Content Gating
No Gating (article Unlocked/Free)
Alternative CME
Disqus Comments
Default
Use ProPublica

Eculizumab gets full FDA approval for aHUS

Article Type
Changed
Wed, 05/07/2014 - 05:00
Display Headline
Eculizumab gets full FDA approval for aHUS

Vial of Soliris

Credit: Globovision

The US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has granted full approval for eculizumab (Soliris) to treat adult and pediatric patients with atypical

hemolytic uremic syndrome (aHUS).

The drug received accelerated approval for this indication in 2011.

Now, eculizumab has received full FDA approval based on the fulfillment of post-marketing requirements, including the submission of data from 2 additional prospective trials of eculizumab in patients with aHUS.

The revised eculizumab label now includes results with 2 years of ongoing treatment in aHUS patients and data on the use of eculizumab prior to supportive care with plasma or plasma exchange in prospective clinical trials.

The drug’s label also includes a boxed warning informing readers that life-threatening and fatal meningococcal infections have occurred in patients treated with eculizumab.

About aHUS and eculizumab

aHUS is a chronic, life-threatening disease in which a genetic deficiency in one or more complement regulatory genes causes chronic, uncontrolled complement activation. This results in complement-mediated thrombotic microangiopathy (TMA), the formation of blood clots in small blood vessels throughout the body.

Permanent, uncontrolled complement activation in aHUS causes a life-long risk for TMA, which leads to sudden and life-threatening damage to the kidney, brain, heart, and other vital organs, as well as premature death. Complement-mediated TMA also causes thrombocytopenia and hemolysis.

Eculizumab is a first-in-class terminal complement inhibitor indicated to inhibit complement-mediated TMA. The drug’s effectiveness in aHUS is based on its effects on TMA and renal function.

Eculizumab received accelerated FDA approval to treat aHUS in September 2011. The FDA granted this approval based on the results of 2 trials that suggested the drug was likely to provide a clinical benefit.

To achieve traditional FDA approval, the drug’s developer, Alexion Pharmaceuticals, was required to submit additional data that confirm the drug provides a clinical benefit.

To that end, the Clinical Studies section (Section 14.2) of the revised eculizumab prescribing information now contains results from 4 prospective, single-arm studies in patients with aHUS.

This includes updated data from the first 2 trials, as well as data from 2 new trials, 1 in pediatric patients with aHUS and the other in adolescents and adults with aHUS.

For details on these trials, see the full prescribing information.

Publications
Topics

Vial of Soliris

Credit: Globovision

The US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has granted full approval for eculizumab (Soliris) to treat adult and pediatric patients with atypical

hemolytic uremic syndrome (aHUS).

The drug received accelerated approval for this indication in 2011.

Now, eculizumab has received full FDA approval based on the fulfillment of post-marketing requirements, including the submission of data from 2 additional prospective trials of eculizumab in patients with aHUS.

The revised eculizumab label now includes results with 2 years of ongoing treatment in aHUS patients and data on the use of eculizumab prior to supportive care with plasma or plasma exchange in prospective clinical trials.

The drug’s label also includes a boxed warning informing readers that life-threatening and fatal meningococcal infections have occurred in patients treated with eculizumab.

About aHUS and eculizumab

aHUS is a chronic, life-threatening disease in which a genetic deficiency in one or more complement regulatory genes causes chronic, uncontrolled complement activation. This results in complement-mediated thrombotic microangiopathy (TMA), the formation of blood clots in small blood vessels throughout the body.

Permanent, uncontrolled complement activation in aHUS causes a life-long risk for TMA, which leads to sudden and life-threatening damage to the kidney, brain, heart, and other vital organs, as well as premature death. Complement-mediated TMA also causes thrombocytopenia and hemolysis.

Eculizumab is a first-in-class terminal complement inhibitor indicated to inhibit complement-mediated TMA. The drug’s effectiveness in aHUS is based on its effects on TMA and renal function.

Eculizumab received accelerated FDA approval to treat aHUS in September 2011. The FDA granted this approval based on the results of 2 trials that suggested the drug was likely to provide a clinical benefit.

To achieve traditional FDA approval, the drug’s developer, Alexion Pharmaceuticals, was required to submit additional data that confirm the drug provides a clinical benefit.

To that end, the Clinical Studies section (Section 14.2) of the revised eculizumab prescribing information now contains results from 4 prospective, single-arm studies in patients with aHUS.

This includes updated data from the first 2 trials, as well as data from 2 new trials, 1 in pediatric patients with aHUS and the other in adolescents and adults with aHUS.

For details on these trials, see the full prescribing information.

Vial of Soliris

Credit: Globovision

The US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has granted full approval for eculizumab (Soliris) to treat adult and pediatric patients with atypical

hemolytic uremic syndrome (aHUS).

The drug received accelerated approval for this indication in 2011.

Now, eculizumab has received full FDA approval based on the fulfillment of post-marketing requirements, including the submission of data from 2 additional prospective trials of eculizumab in patients with aHUS.

The revised eculizumab label now includes results with 2 years of ongoing treatment in aHUS patients and data on the use of eculizumab prior to supportive care with plasma or plasma exchange in prospective clinical trials.

The drug’s label also includes a boxed warning informing readers that life-threatening and fatal meningococcal infections have occurred in patients treated with eculizumab.

About aHUS and eculizumab

aHUS is a chronic, life-threatening disease in which a genetic deficiency in one or more complement regulatory genes causes chronic, uncontrolled complement activation. This results in complement-mediated thrombotic microangiopathy (TMA), the formation of blood clots in small blood vessels throughout the body.

Permanent, uncontrolled complement activation in aHUS causes a life-long risk for TMA, which leads to sudden and life-threatening damage to the kidney, brain, heart, and other vital organs, as well as premature death. Complement-mediated TMA also causes thrombocytopenia and hemolysis.

Eculizumab is a first-in-class terminal complement inhibitor indicated to inhibit complement-mediated TMA. The drug’s effectiveness in aHUS is based on its effects on TMA and renal function.

Eculizumab received accelerated FDA approval to treat aHUS in September 2011. The FDA granted this approval based on the results of 2 trials that suggested the drug was likely to provide a clinical benefit.

To achieve traditional FDA approval, the drug’s developer, Alexion Pharmaceuticals, was required to submit additional data that confirm the drug provides a clinical benefit.

To that end, the Clinical Studies section (Section 14.2) of the revised eculizumab prescribing information now contains results from 4 prospective, single-arm studies in patients with aHUS.

This includes updated data from the first 2 trials, as well as data from 2 new trials, 1 in pediatric patients with aHUS and the other in adolescents and adults with aHUS.

For details on these trials, see the full prescribing information.

Publications
Publications
Topics
Article Type
Display Headline
Eculizumab gets full FDA approval for aHUS
Display Headline
Eculizumab gets full FDA approval for aHUS
Disallow All Ads
Content Gating
No Gating (article Unlocked/Free)
Alternative CME
Disqus Comments
Default
Use ProPublica

Artificial bone marrow seems just like the real thing

Article Type
Changed
Wed, 05/07/2014 - 05:00
Display Headline
Artificial bone marrow seems just like the real thing

Engineered bone marrow

Credit: James Weaver,

Harvard’s Wyss Institute

Researchers have created a device that reproduces the structure, function, and cellular make-up of bone marrow, according to a paper published

in Nature Methods.

The device, dubbed “bone marrow on a chip,” could serve as a new tool for testing the effects of radiation and other toxic agents on whole bone marrow.

The researchers believe this bone marrow on a chip could provide an alternative to animal testing, although the device itself was generated in mice.

The team also thinks that, in the future, the engineered bone marrow could be used to maintain a cancer patient’s own marrow temporarily during radiation or high-dose chemotherapy.

In an initial test, the engineered bone marrow withered in response to radiation, just as natural bone marrow does. And, as in natural marrow, granulocyte colony-stimulating factor conferred a protective effect on the engineered marrow.

“Bone marrow is an incredibly complex organ that is responsible for producing all of the blood cell types in our body, and our bone marrow chips are able to recapitulate this complexity in its entirety and maintain it in a functional form in vitro,” said study author Donald Ingber, MD, PhD, of the Wyss Institute for Biologically Inspired Engineering at Harvard University in Boston.

Dr Ingber leads an effort to develop human organs on chips—small microfluidic devices that mimic the physiology of living organs. To build these devices, researchers combine multiple types of cells from an organ on a plastic microfluidic device, while steadily supplying nutrients, removing waste, and applying mechanical forces the tissues would face in the body.

But bone marrow is so complex that Dr Ingber and his colleagues needed a new approach to mimic organ function. Rather than trying to reproduce such a complex structure cell by cell, the team used mice.

Specifically, the researchers packed dried bone powder into an open, ring-shaped mold the size of a coin battery and implanted the mold under the skin on the animal’s back.

After 8 weeks, the team surgically removed the disk-shaped bone that had formed in the mold and examined it with a specialized CAT scanner. The scan showed a honeycomb-like structure that looked identical to natural trabecular bone.

The marrow looked like the real thing as well. When the researchers stained the tissue and examined it under a microscope, the marrow was packed with blood cells, just like marrow from a living mouse.

And when the team sorted the bone marrow cells by type and tallied their numbers, the mix of different types of blood and immune cells in the engineered bone marrow was identical to that in a mouse thighbone.

To sustain the engineered bone marrow outside of a living animal, the researchers surgically removed the engineered bone from mice, then placed it in a microfluidic device that mimics the circulation the tissue would experience in the body.

Marrow in the device remained healthy for up to 1 week. This is typically long enough to test the toxicity and effectiveness of a new drug, the team said.

The device also passed an initial test of its drug-testing capabilities. Like marrow from live mice, this engineered marrow was susceptible to radiation, but granulocyte colony-stimulating factor conferred a protective effect.

The researchers believe that, in the future, they could potentially grow human bone marrow in immune-deficient mice. And their bone marrow on a chip could generate blood cells, which could circulate in an artificial circulatory system to supply a network of other organs on chips.

Publications
Topics

Engineered bone marrow

Credit: James Weaver,

Harvard’s Wyss Institute

Researchers have created a device that reproduces the structure, function, and cellular make-up of bone marrow, according to a paper published

in Nature Methods.

The device, dubbed “bone marrow on a chip,” could serve as a new tool for testing the effects of radiation and other toxic agents on whole bone marrow.

The researchers believe this bone marrow on a chip could provide an alternative to animal testing, although the device itself was generated in mice.

The team also thinks that, in the future, the engineered bone marrow could be used to maintain a cancer patient’s own marrow temporarily during radiation or high-dose chemotherapy.

In an initial test, the engineered bone marrow withered in response to radiation, just as natural bone marrow does. And, as in natural marrow, granulocyte colony-stimulating factor conferred a protective effect on the engineered marrow.

“Bone marrow is an incredibly complex organ that is responsible for producing all of the blood cell types in our body, and our bone marrow chips are able to recapitulate this complexity in its entirety and maintain it in a functional form in vitro,” said study author Donald Ingber, MD, PhD, of the Wyss Institute for Biologically Inspired Engineering at Harvard University in Boston.

Dr Ingber leads an effort to develop human organs on chips—small microfluidic devices that mimic the physiology of living organs. To build these devices, researchers combine multiple types of cells from an organ on a plastic microfluidic device, while steadily supplying nutrients, removing waste, and applying mechanical forces the tissues would face in the body.

But bone marrow is so complex that Dr Ingber and his colleagues needed a new approach to mimic organ function. Rather than trying to reproduce such a complex structure cell by cell, the team used mice.

Specifically, the researchers packed dried bone powder into an open, ring-shaped mold the size of a coin battery and implanted the mold under the skin on the animal’s back.

After 8 weeks, the team surgically removed the disk-shaped bone that had formed in the mold and examined it with a specialized CAT scanner. The scan showed a honeycomb-like structure that looked identical to natural trabecular bone.

The marrow looked like the real thing as well. When the researchers stained the tissue and examined it under a microscope, the marrow was packed with blood cells, just like marrow from a living mouse.

And when the team sorted the bone marrow cells by type and tallied their numbers, the mix of different types of blood and immune cells in the engineered bone marrow was identical to that in a mouse thighbone.

To sustain the engineered bone marrow outside of a living animal, the researchers surgically removed the engineered bone from mice, then placed it in a microfluidic device that mimics the circulation the tissue would experience in the body.

Marrow in the device remained healthy for up to 1 week. This is typically long enough to test the toxicity and effectiveness of a new drug, the team said.

The device also passed an initial test of its drug-testing capabilities. Like marrow from live mice, this engineered marrow was susceptible to radiation, but granulocyte colony-stimulating factor conferred a protective effect.

The researchers believe that, in the future, they could potentially grow human bone marrow in immune-deficient mice. And their bone marrow on a chip could generate blood cells, which could circulate in an artificial circulatory system to supply a network of other organs on chips.

Engineered bone marrow

Credit: James Weaver,

Harvard’s Wyss Institute

Researchers have created a device that reproduces the structure, function, and cellular make-up of bone marrow, according to a paper published

in Nature Methods.

The device, dubbed “bone marrow on a chip,” could serve as a new tool for testing the effects of radiation and other toxic agents on whole bone marrow.

The researchers believe this bone marrow on a chip could provide an alternative to animal testing, although the device itself was generated in mice.

The team also thinks that, in the future, the engineered bone marrow could be used to maintain a cancer patient’s own marrow temporarily during radiation or high-dose chemotherapy.

In an initial test, the engineered bone marrow withered in response to radiation, just as natural bone marrow does. And, as in natural marrow, granulocyte colony-stimulating factor conferred a protective effect on the engineered marrow.

“Bone marrow is an incredibly complex organ that is responsible for producing all of the blood cell types in our body, and our bone marrow chips are able to recapitulate this complexity in its entirety and maintain it in a functional form in vitro,” said study author Donald Ingber, MD, PhD, of the Wyss Institute for Biologically Inspired Engineering at Harvard University in Boston.

Dr Ingber leads an effort to develop human organs on chips—small microfluidic devices that mimic the physiology of living organs. To build these devices, researchers combine multiple types of cells from an organ on a plastic microfluidic device, while steadily supplying nutrients, removing waste, and applying mechanical forces the tissues would face in the body.

But bone marrow is so complex that Dr Ingber and his colleagues needed a new approach to mimic organ function. Rather than trying to reproduce such a complex structure cell by cell, the team used mice.

Specifically, the researchers packed dried bone powder into an open, ring-shaped mold the size of a coin battery and implanted the mold under the skin on the animal’s back.

After 8 weeks, the team surgically removed the disk-shaped bone that had formed in the mold and examined it with a specialized CAT scanner. The scan showed a honeycomb-like structure that looked identical to natural trabecular bone.

The marrow looked like the real thing as well. When the researchers stained the tissue and examined it under a microscope, the marrow was packed with blood cells, just like marrow from a living mouse.

And when the team sorted the bone marrow cells by type and tallied their numbers, the mix of different types of blood and immune cells in the engineered bone marrow was identical to that in a mouse thighbone.

To sustain the engineered bone marrow outside of a living animal, the researchers surgically removed the engineered bone from mice, then placed it in a microfluidic device that mimics the circulation the tissue would experience in the body.

Marrow in the device remained healthy for up to 1 week. This is typically long enough to test the toxicity and effectiveness of a new drug, the team said.

The device also passed an initial test of its drug-testing capabilities. Like marrow from live mice, this engineered marrow was susceptible to radiation, but granulocyte colony-stimulating factor conferred a protective effect.

The researchers believe that, in the future, they could potentially grow human bone marrow in immune-deficient mice. And their bone marrow on a chip could generate blood cells, which could circulate in an artificial circulatory system to supply a network of other organs on chips.

Publications
Publications
Topics
Article Type
Display Headline
Artificial bone marrow seems just like the real thing
Display Headline
Artificial bone marrow seems just like the real thing
Disallow All Ads
Content Gating
No Gating (article Unlocked/Free)
Alternative CME
Disqus Comments
Default
Use ProPublica

The ICU: From bed to bedside

Article Type
Changed
Fri, 01/18/2019 - 13:32
Display Headline
The ICU: From bed to bedside

I recently came to the realization that one doesn’t usually end up in an ICU unless the odds of making it out are not in one’s favor.

Now, I want to make it clear from the very first that my wife and I survived life-threatening medical experiences as a result of the superb care provided to both of us. Nevertheless, the experience made me aware of how ICU and hospital care has changed in the last 50 years. I have spent most of my life in ICUs from the "invention" of the Coronary Care Unit in the mid-1960s to its current iteration of an intensely monitored hospital room where emergency surgery could be performed if need be. Much of that change is a result of the variety of medical specialists who are players in the ICU drama. The other major changes have been the time restraints of house staff rotation to meet certification criteria and rotation of the senior staff in order to provide continuing on-site coverage of the ICU. As the acuteness of hospital admissions has increased, the ICU and its management have assumed a larger role in the care and the finances of major hospitals.

Some years ago, we hosted a distinguished European physician who spent 2 months with us as a visiting professor. It was at a time when we felt a need to begin to develop subspecialties in angiography, electrophysiology, and echocardiography in order to provide a research and training atmosphere for our fellowship program. Later, he wrote an editorial in his local medical journal criticizing cardiac care in the United States because of the lack of continuity. He was of the tradition that mandated that he would see the patient in the clinic, perform a cardiac catheterization himself, and follow his patient through surgery and manage their postoperative care, as was standard practice in the mid-20th century. He believed that the concept of delegating diagnostic and care responsibilities to specialty trained colleagues that he observed here was a major disaster. He should see the system now. Nevertheless, his plea for continuity in care resonates in my mind.

That need for continuity came back to me as I experienced the dizzying rotation of house staff and senior staff that takes place in the ICU today. Any semblance of continuity of care was lacking at a time when there was a need to provide information to anxious patients and their families. In the environment of medical uncertainty, when you would like to find a familiar physician to ask "How are we doing," the attending physician or medical resident in charge was either on another rotation or being covered by a colleague. No training or adherence to "sign-off" rounds can replace the need for that professional continuity. As competent and well meaning the covering doctor was, answers to questions seemed shallow. It was difficult even to express gratitude to "a" physician who had tipped the scales in my favor. One had to direct it to an amorphous team of doctors, nurses, and technicians who had participated in care. That is a reality that describes the methodology of ICU and its success. It is a reality that to a similar degree characterizes the current management of inpatient care.

It seemed that in the setting of a life-threatening experience, the link between the treating physicians and the patients or family has almost disappeared in the ICU. The challenge to us as we play our role in the ICU, and the CCU, is to establish and maintain a personal relationship with the patients and their family.

Dr. Goldstein, medical editor of Cardiology News, is professor of medicine at Wayne State University and division head emeritus of cardiovascular medicine at Henry Ford Hospital, both in Detroit. He is on data safety monitoring committees for the National Institutes of Health and several pharmaceutical companies.

Name
Sidney Goldstein, M.D.
Author and Disclosure Information

Publications
Legacy Keywords
cardiology, ICU
Sections
Author and Disclosure Information

Author and Disclosure Information

Name
Sidney Goldstein, M.D.
Name
Sidney Goldstein, M.D.

I recently came to the realization that one doesn’t usually end up in an ICU unless the odds of making it out are not in one’s favor.

Now, I want to make it clear from the very first that my wife and I survived life-threatening medical experiences as a result of the superb care provided to both of us. Nevertheless, the experience made me aware of how ICU and hospital care has changed in the last 50 years. I have spent most of my life in ICUs from the "invention" of the Coronary Care Unit in the mid-1960s to its current iteration of an intensely monitored hospital room where emergency surgery could be performed if need be. Much of that change is a result of the variety of medical specialists who are players in the ICU drama. The other major changes have been the time restraints of house staff rotation to meet certification criteria and rotation of the senior staff in order to provide continuing on-site coverage of the ICU. As the acuteness of hospital admissions has increased, the ICU and its management have assumed a larger role in the care and the finances of major hospitals.

Some years ago, we hosted a distinguished European physician who spent 2 months with us as a visiting professor. It was at a time when we felt a need to begin to develop subspecialties in angiography, electrophysiology, and echocardiography in order to provide a research and training atmosphere for our fellowship program. Later, he wrote an editorial in his local medical journal criticizing cardiac care in the United States because of the lack of continuity. He was of the tradition that mandated that he would see the patient in the clinic, perform a cardiac catheterization himself, and follow his patient through surgery and manage their postoperative care, as was standard practice in the mid-20th century. He believed that the concept of delegating diagnostic and care responsibilities to specialty trained colleagues that he observed here was a major disaster. He should see the system now. Nevertheless, his plea for continuity in care resonates in my mind.

That need for continuity came back to me as I experienced the dizzying rotation of house staff and senior staff that takes place in the ICU today. Any semblance of continuity of care was lacking at a time when there was a need to provide information to anxious patients and their families. In the environment of medical uncertainty, when you would like to find a familiar physician to ask "How are we doing," the attending physician or medical resident in charge was either on another rotation or being covered by a colleague. No training or adherence to "sign-off" rounds can replace the need for that professional continuity. As competent and well meaning the covering doctor was, answers to questions seemed shallow. It was difficult even to express gratitude to "a" physician who had tipped the scales in my favor. One had to direct it to an amorphous team of doctors, nurses, and technicians who had participated in care. That is a reality that describes the methodology of ICU and its success. It is a reality that to a similar degree characterizes the current management of inpatient care.

It seemed that in the setting of a life-threatening experience, the link between the treating physicians and the patients or family has almost disappeared in the ICU. The challenge to us as we play our role in the ICU, and the CCU, is to establish and maintain a personal relationship with the patients and their family.

Dr. Goldstein, medical editor of Cardiology News, is professor of medicine at Wayne State University and division head emeritus of cardiovascular medicine at Henry Ford Hospital, both in Detroit. He is on data safety monitoring committees for the National Institutes of Health and several pharmaceutical companies.

I recently came to the realization that one doesn’t usually end up in an ICU unless the odds of making it out are not in one’s favor.

Now, I want to make it clear from the very first that my wife and I survived life-threatening medical experiences as a result of the superb care provided to both of us. Nevertheless, the experience made me aware of how ICU and hospital care has changed in the last 50 years. I have spent most of my life in ICUs from the "invention" of the Coronary Care Unit in the mid-1960s to its current iteration of an intensely monitored hospital room where emergency surgery could be performed if need be. Much of that change is a result of the variety of medical specialists who are players in the ICU drama. The other major changes have been the time restraints of house staff rotation to meet certification criteria and rotation of the senior staff in order to provide continuing on-site coverage of the ICU. As the acuteness of hospital admissions has increased, the ICU and its management have assumed a larger role in the care and the finances of major hospitals.

Some years ago, we hosted a distinguished European physician who spent 2 months with us as a visiting professor. It was at a time when we felt a need to begin to develop subspecialties in angiography, electrophysiology, and echocardiography in order to provide a research and training atmosphere for our fellowship program. Later, he wrote an editorial in his local medical journal criticizing cardiac care in the United States because of the lack of continuity. He was of the tradition that mandated that he would see the patient in the clinic, perform a cardiac catheterization himself, and follow his patient through surgery and manage their postoperative care, as was standard practice in the mid-20th century. He believed that the concept of delegating diagnostic and care responsibilities to specialty trained colleagues that he observed here was a major disaster. He should see the system now. Nevertheless, his plea for continuity in care resonates in my mind.

That need for continuity came back to me as I experienced the dizzying rotation of house staff and senior staff that takes place in the ICU today. Any semblance of continuity of care was lacking at a time when there was a need to provide information to anxious patients and their families. In the environment of medical uncertainty, when you would like to find a familiar physician to ask "How are we doing," the attending physician or medical resident in charge was either on another rotation or being covered by a colleague. No training or adherence to "sign-off" rounds can replace the need for that professional continuity. As competent and well meaning the covering doctor was, answers to questions seemed shallow. It was difficult even to express gratitude to "a" physician who had tipped the scales in my favor. One had to direct it to an amorphous team of doctors, nurses, and technicians who had participated in care. That is a reality that describes the methodology of ICU and its success. It is a reality that to a similar degree characterizes the current management of inpatient care.

It seemed that in the setting of a life-threatening experience, the link between the treating physicians and the patients or family has almost disappeared in the ICU. The challenge to us as we play our role in the ICU, and the CCU, is to establish and maintain a personal relationship with the patients and their family.

Dr. Goldstein, medical editor of Cardiology News, is professor of medicine at Wayne State University and division head emeritus of cardiovascular medicine at Henry Ford Hospital, both in Detroit. He is on data safety monitoring committees for the National Institutes of Health and several pharmaceutical companies.

Publications
Publications
Article Type
Display Headline
The ICU: From bed to bedside
Display Headline
The ICU: From bed to bedside
Legacy Keywords
cardiology, ICU
Legacy Keywords
cardiology, ICU
Sections
Article Source

PURLs Copyright

Inside the Article

Team describes protein’s antimyeloma effects

Article Type
Changed
Tue, 05/06/2014 - 05:00
Display Headline
Team describes protein’s antimyeloma effects

Adipose tissue

Researchers say they’ve discovered how a lack of the protein adiponectin promotes disease progression in patients with multiple myeloma (MM).

Obesity is known to increase the risk of developing MM, and obese individuals have lower-than-normal levels of adiponectin.

So the researchers set out to characterize the relationship between adiponectin and MM.

They found evidence to suggest the protein induces apoptosis in MM cells by suppressing lipogenesis. And this points to new treatment avenues for MM.

Edward Medina, MD, PhD, of University of Texas Health Science Center at San Antonio, and his colleagues described this research in Leukemia.

The team noted that adiponectin plays several roles in preserving health, including killing cancer cells. And, as levels of adiponectin are reduced in obese individuals, the protein has been implicated in MM progression.

Furthermore, adipocytes in obese individuals produce more fatty acids, and it’s likely that MM cells feed on these fatty acids.

“Synthesizing fatty acids is important for myeloma cells to build vital structures, including cell membranes, that enable them to keep on growing,” Dr Medina said.

With this in mind, he and his colleagues set out to determine how prolonged exposure to adiponectin affects MM cell survival and to describe exactly how the protein works.

Their experiments revealed that adiponectin activates protein kinase A (PKA). This leads to a decrease in AKT activity and an increase in AMP-activated protein kinase (AMPK) activation. Then, AMPK induces cell-cycle arrest and apoptosis.

The researchers said this apoptosis may be mediated, at least partly, by a decline in the expression of acetyl-CoA-carboxylase (ACC), which is essential to lipogenesis.

So the team introduced palmitic acid, the preliminary end product of fatty acid synthesis, to the MM cells and found it prevented adiponectin-induced apoptosis.

In addition, the ACC inhibitor 5-(tetradecyloxy)-2-furancarboxylic acid had an antiproliferative effect on MM cells. But an increase in fatty acids inhibited that effect.

The researchers said this new understanding of the pathways adiponectin uses to kill MM cells might lead to the development of drugs that would function in the same way.

“If we could pharmacologically suppress these fatty acid levels in obese myeloma patients, we could boost the effects of the chemotherapy that targets PKA or fatty acid synthesis and potentially decrease the chemotherapeutic dose,” Dr Medina said. “Also, it would give your own body’s protective measures more of a chance to work against the cancer.”

Publications
Topics

Adipose tissue

Researchers say they’ve discovered how a lack of the protein adiponectin promotes disease progression in patients with multiple myeloma (MM).

Obesity is known to increase the risk of developing MM, and obese individuals have lower-than-normal levels of adiponectin.

So the researchers set out to characterize the relationship between adiponectin and MM.

They found evidence to suggest the protein induces apoptosis in MM cells by suppressing lipogenesis. And this points to new treatment avenues for MM.

Edward Medina, MD, PhD, of University of Texas Health Science Center at San Antonio, and his colleagues described this research in Leukemia.

The team noted that adiponectin plays several roles in preserving health, including killing cancer cells. And, as levels of adiponectin are reduced in obese individuals, the protein has been implicated in MM progression.

Furthermore, adipocytes in obese individuals produce more fatty acids, and it’s likely that MM cells feed on these fatty acids.

“Synthesizing fatty acids is important for myeloma cells to build vital structures, including cell membranes, that enable them to keep on growing,” Dr Medina said.

With this in mind, he and his colleagues set out to determine how prolonged exposure to adiponectin affects MM cell survival and to describe exactly how the protein works.

Their experiments revealed that adiponectin activates protein kinase A (PKA). This leads to a decrease in AKT activity and an increase in AMP-activated protein kinase (AMPK) activation. Then, AMPK induces cell-cycle arrest and apoptosis.

The researchers said this apoptosis may be mediated, at least partly, by a decline in the expression of acetyl-CoA-carboxylase (ACC), which is essential to lipogenesis.

So the team introduced palmitic acid, the preliminary end product of fatty acid synthesis, to the MM cells and found it prevented adiponectin-induced apoptosis.

In addition, the ACC inhibitor 5-(tetradecyloxy)-2-furancarboxylic acid had an antiproliferative effect on MM cells. But an increase in fatty acids inhibited that effect.

The researchers said this new understanding of the pathways adiponectin uses to kill MM cells might lead to the development of drugs that would function in the same way.

“If we could pharmacologically suppress these fatty acid levels in obese myeloma patients, we could boost the effects of the chemotherapy that targets PKA or fatty acid synthesis and potentially decrease the chemotherapeutic dose,” Dr Medina said. “Also, it would give your own body’s protective measures more of a chance to work against the cancer.”

Adipose tissue

Researchers say they’ve discovered how a lack of the protein adiponectin promotes disease progression in patients with multiple myeloma (MM).

Obesity is known to increase the risk of developing MM, and obese individuals have lower-than-normal levels of adiponectin.

So the researchers set out to characterize the relationship between adiponectin and MM.

They found evidence to suggest the protein induces apoptosis in MM cells by suppressing lipogenesis. And this points to new treatment avenues for MM.

Edward Medina, MD, PhD, of University of Texas Health Science Center at San Antonio, and his colleagues described this research in Leukemia.

The team noted that adiponectin plays several roles in preserving health, including killing cancer cells. And, as levels of adiponectin are reduced in obese individuals, the protein has been implicated in MM progression.

Furthermore, adipocytes in obese individuals produce more fatty acids, and it’s likely that MM cells feed on these fatty acids.

“Synthesizing fatty acids is important for myeloma cells to build vital structures, including cell membranes, that enable them to keep on growing,” Dr Medina said.

With this in mind, he and his colleagues set out to determine how prolonged exposure to adiponectin affects MM cell survival and to describe exactly how the protein works.

Their experiments revealed that adiponectin activates protein kinase A (PKA). This leads to a decrease in AKT activity and an increase in AMP-activated protein kinase (AMPK) activation. Then, AMPK induces cell-cycle arrest and apoptosis.

The researchers said this apoptosis may be mediated, at least partly, by a decline in the expression of acetyl-CoA-carboxylase (ACC), which is essential to lipogenesis.

So the team introduced palmitic acid, the preliminary end product of fatty acid synthesis, to the MM cells and found it prevented adiponectin-induced apoptosis.

In addition, the ACC inhibitor 5-(tetradecyloxy)-2-furancarboxylic acid had an antiproliferative effect on MM cells. But an increase in fatty acids inhibited that effect.

The researchers said this new understanding of the pathways adiponectin uses to kill MM cells might lead to the development of drugs that would function in the same way.

“If we could pharmacologically suppress these fatty acid levels in obese myeloma patients, we could boost the effects of the chemotherapy that targets PKA or fatty acid synthesis and potentially decrease the chemotherapeutic dose,” Dr Medina said. “Also, it would give your own body’s protective measures more of a chance to work against the cancer.”

Publications
Publications
Topics
Article Type
Display Headline
Team describes protein’s antimyeloma effects
Display Headline
Team describes protein’s antimyeloma effects
Disallow All Ads
Content Gating
No Gating (article Unlocked/Free)
Alternative CME
Disqus Comments
Default
Use ProPublica

Portable spectrometers can detect malaria early, group says

Article Type
Changed
Tue, 05/06/2014 - 05:00
Display Headline
Portable spectrometers can detect malaria early, group says

P falciparum in a red blood cell

Credit: St Jude Children’s

Research Hospital

An infrared spectroscopy technique can detect malaria parasites at early stages of development, according to preclinical research published in Analytical Chemistry.

A group of biochemists found this method could detect Plasmodium falciparum in red blood cells by picking up on a fatty acid signature.

This allowed the researchers to identify and quantify parasites at various stages of development, including the ring and gametocyte stages.

The team also pointed out that the spectrometer they used is portable, inexpensive, and does not require highly trained staff for operation. It could therefore prove useful in the field.

“Current tests for malaria suffer from serious limitations,” said study author Bayden Wood, PhD, of Monash University in Victoria, Australia.

“Many are expensive [and] require specialist instruments and highly trained staff to judge whether blood samples contain the parasite. What’s been holding us back is the lack of an accurate and inexpensive test to detect malaria early and stop it in its tracks. We believe we’ve found it.”

Dr Wood and his colleagues already knew that fatty acids were a marker for malaria from previous studies conducted at the Australian Synchrotron. The Synchrotron allowed the team to see the different life stages of the parasite and the variation in its fatty acids.

The researchers thought they might be able to use this information for diagnosis, but they needed a more portable detection method.

So they decided to test whether attenuated total reflectance Fourier transform infrared spectroscopy (ATR-FT-IR) could detect the fatty acid signature. The technique utilizes infrared light to pick up on the vibrations of molecules.

The researchers spiked red blood cells with parasites of different numbers and life stages and observed them using ATR-FT-IR.

Dr Wood said the method produced results within minutes. And it gave a clear indication of malaria at a much earlier stage of infection than current tests on the market—at the ring and gametocyte stages.

The absolute detection limit was 0.00001% parasitemia (<1 parasite/μL of blood) for cultured early ring-stage parasites in a suspension of normal red blood cells.

“Now that we can detect the early stages of a parasite’s life in the bloodstream, the disease will be much easier to test and treat,” Dr Wood said. “The big advantage of our test is that it doesn’t need scientists and expensive equipment. This has the potential to dramatically reduce the number of people dying from this disease in remote communities.”

The method also shows the potential to detect a number of other blood-borne diseases, according to the researchers. Dr Wood and his colleagues are now planning a clinical trial of ATR-FT-IR in Thailand.

Publications
Topics

P falciparum in a red blood cell

Credit: St Jude Children’s

Research Hospital

An infrared spectroscopy technique can detect malaria parasites at early stages of development, according to preclinical research published in Analytical Chemistry.

A group of biochemists found this method could detect Plasmodium falciparum in red blood cells by picking up on a fatty acid signature.

This allowed the researchers to identify and quantify parasites at various stages of development, including the ring and gametocyte stages.

The team also pointed out that the spectrometer they used is portable, inexpensive, and does not require highly trained staff for operation. It could therefore prove useful in the field.

“Current tests for malaria suffer from serious limitations,” said study author Bayden Wood, PhD, of Monash University in Victoria, Australia.

“Many are expensive [and] require specialist instruments and highly trained staff to judge whether blood samples contain the parasite. What’s been holding us back is the lack of an accurate and inexpensive test to detect malaria early and stop it in its tracks. We believe we’ve found it.”

Dr Wood and his colleagues already knew that fatty acids were a marker for malaria from previous studies conducted at the Australian Synchrotron. The Synchrotron allowed the team to see the different life stages of the parasite and the variation in its fatty acids.

The researchers thought they might be able to use this information for diagnosis, but they needed a more portable detection method.

So they decided to test whether attenuated total reflectance Fourier transform infrared spectroscopy (ATR-FT-IR) could detect the fatty acid signature. The technique utilizes infrared light to pick up on the vibrations of molecules.

The researchers spiked red blood cells with parasites of different numbers and life stages and observed them using ATR-FT-IR.

Dr Wood said the method produced results within minutes. And it gave a clear indication of malaria at a much earlier stage of infection than current tests on the market—at the ring and gametocyte stages.

The absolute detection limit was 0.00001% parasitemia (<1 parasite/μL of blood) for cultured early ring-stage parasites in a suspension of normal red blood cells.

“Now that we can detect the early stages of a parasite’s life in the bloodstream, the disease will be much easier to test and treat,” Dr Wood said. “The big advantage of our test is that it doesn’t need scientists and expensive equipment. This has the potential to dramatically reduce the number of people dying from this disease in remote communities.”

The method also shows the potential to detect a number of other blood-borne diseases, according to the researchers. Dr Wood and his colleagues are now planning a clinical trial of ATR-FT-IR in Thailand.

P falciparum in a red blood cell

Credit: St Jude Children’s

Research Hospital

An infrared spectroscopy technique can detect malaria parasites at early stages of development, according to preclinical research published in Analytical Chemistry.

A group of biochemists found this method could detect Plasmodium falciparum in red blood cells by picking up on a fatty acid signature.

This allowed the researchers to identify and quantify parasites at various stages of development, including the ring and gametocyte stages.

The team also pointed out that the spectrometer they used is portable, inexpensive, and does not require highly trained staff for operation. It could therefore prove useful in the field.

“Current tests for malaria suffer from serious limitations,” said study author Bayden Wood, PhD, of Monash University in Victoria, Australia.

“Many are expensive [and] require specialist instruments and highly trained staff to judge whether blood samples contain the parasite. What’s been holding us back is the lack of an accurate and inexpensive test to detect malaria early and stop it in its tracks. We believe we’ve found it.”

Dr Wood and his colleagues already knew that fatty acids were a marker for malaria from previous studies conducted at the Australian Synchrotron. The Synchrotron allowed the team to see the different life stages of the parasite and the variation in its fatty acids.

The researchers thought they might be able to use this information for diagnosis, but they needed a more portable detection method.

So they decided to test whether attenuated total reflectance Fourier transform infrared spectroscopy (ATR-FT-IR) could detect the fatty acid signature. The technique utilizes infrared light to pick up on the vibrations of molecules.

The researchers spiked red blood cells with parasites of different numbers and life stages and observed them using ATR-FT-IR.

Dr Wood said the method produced results within minutes. And it gave a clear indication of malaria at a much earlier stage of infection than current tests on the market—at the ring and gametocyte stages.

The absolute detection limit was 0.00001% parasitemia (<1 parasite/μL of blood) for cultured early ring-stage parasites in a suspension of normal red blood cells.

“Now that we can detect the early stages of a parasite’s life in the bloodstream, the disease will be much easier to test and treat,” Dr Wood said. “The big advantage of our test is that it doesn’t need scientists and expensive equipment. This has the potential to dramatically reduce the number of people dying from this disease in remote communities.”

The method also shows the potential to detect a number of other blood-borne diseases, according to the researchers. Dr Wood and his colleagues are now planning a clinical trial of ATR-FT-IR in Thailand.

Publications
Publications
Topics
Article Type
Display Headline
Portable spectrometers can detect malaria early, group says
Display Headline
Portable spectrometers can detect malaria early, group says
Disallow All Ads
Content Gating
No Gating (article Unlocked/Free)
Alternative CME
Disqus Comments
Default
Use ProPublica

Hospira issues Class I recall of infusion pumps

Article Type
Changed
Tue, 05/06/2014 - 05:00
Display Headline
Hospira issues Class I recall of infusion pumps

Blood for transfusion

Credit: Daniel Gay

Hospira, Inc., has issued a Class I recall of Abbott Acclaim infusion pumps and Hospira Acclaim Encore infusion pumps, after receiving reports of broken door assemblies on these products.

If a door assembly breaks, the door may not close properly and an over-infusion or a delay of therapy may occur.

If the door cannot be closed, the pump cannot be used, and this can result in a delay of therapy.

Use of these products may cause serious adverse events, including death.

These pumps are used to deliver hydration fluids, drugs, blood and blood fractions, intravenous nutritionals, and enteral nutritionals.

The affected Abbott Acclaim Infusion Pumps, list Number 12032, were manufactured from February 1998 to November 1998 and distributed from September 1998 through February 2004.

The affected Hospira Acclaim Encore infusion pumps, list Number 12237, were manufactured from February 1997 to February 2010 and distributed from July 1999 through November 2013.

Hospira is recommending that users inspect each Hospira/Abbott Acclaim Encore infusion pump for door handle cracks prior to programming a therapy, by taking the following steps:

1. After inserting the tubing (with the roller clamp closed) and closing the door handle against the infusion pump, check that the door is fully closed.

If a pump has a door that does not close properly and a gap or separation exists between the completely closed door and the pump itself, remove the pump from clinical service, and call Hospira at 1-800-441-4100 (M-F, 8am-5pm, CT). If the door closes correctly, proceed to Step 2.

2. If the door closes correctly and a gap or separation does not exist between the completely closed door and the pump itself, check that there is no free flow activity in the drip chamber of the administration set by opening the roller clamp.

If free flow is detected, close the roller clamp, remove the pump from clinical service, and call Hospira at 1-800-441-4100 (M-F, 8am-5pm, CT).

3. If no issues are found through steps 1 and 2, the pump is acceptable for use. However, healthcare professionals should still ensure that anyone in their facility who might use these products is made aware of this safety notification and the recommended actions.

Healthcare professionals and patients can report adverse events or side effects related to the use of these products to the FDA’s MedWatch Program.

Publications
Topics

Blood for transfusion

Credit: Daniel Gay

Hospira, Inc., has issued a Class I recall of Abbott Acclaim infusion pumps and Hospira Acclaim Encore infusion pumps, after receiving reports of broken door assemblies on these products.

If a door assembly breaks, the door may not close properly and an over-infusion or a delay of therapy may occur.

If the door cannot be closed, the pump cannot be used, and this can result in a delay of therapy.

Use of these products may cause serious adverse events, including death.

These pumps are used to deliver hydration fluids, drugs, blood and blood fractions, intravenous nutritionals, and enteral nutritionals.

The affected Abbott Acclaim Infusion Pumps, list Number 12032, were manufactured from February 1998 to November 1998 and distributed from September 1998 through February 2004.

The affected Hospira Acclaim Encore infusion pumps, list Number 12237, were manufactured from February 1997 to February 2010 and distributed from July 1999 through November 2013.

Hospira is recommending that users inspect each Hospira/Abbott Acclaim Encore infusion pump for door handle cracks prior to programming a therapy, by taking the following steps:

1. After inserting the tubing (with the roller clamp closed) and closing the door handle against the infusion pump, check that the door is fully closed.

If a pump has a door that does not close properly and a gap or separation exists between the completely closed door and the pump itself, remove the pump from clinical service, and call Hospira at 1-800-441-4100 (M-F, 8am-5pm, CT). If the door closes correctly, proceed to Step 2.

2. If the door closes correctly and a gap or separation does not exist between the completely closed door and the pump itself, check that there is no free flow activity in the drip chamber of the administration set by opening the roller clamp.

If free flow is detected, close the roller clamp, remove the pump from clinical service, and call Hospira at 1-800-441-4100 (M-F, 8am-5pm, CT).

3. If no issues are found through steps 1 and 2, the pump is acceptable for use. However, healthcare professionals should still ensure that anyone in their facility who might use these products is made aware of this safety notification and the recommended actions.

Healthcare professionals and patients can report adverse events or side effects related to the use of these products to the FDA’s MedWatch Program.

Blood for transfusion

Credit: Daniel Gay

Hospira, Inc., has issued a Class I recall of Abbott Acclaim infusion pumps and Hospira Acclaim Encore infusion pumps, after receiving reports of broken door assemblies on these products.

If a door assembly breaks, the door may not close properly and an over-infusion or a delay of therapy may occur.

If the door cannot be closed, the pump cannot be used, and this can result in a delay of therapy.

Use of these products may cause serious adverse events, including death.

These pumps are used to deliver hydration fluids, drugs, blood and blood fractions, intravenous nutritionals, and enteral nutritionals.

The affected Abbott Acclaim Infusion Pumps, list Number 12032, were manufactured from February 1998 to November 1998 and distributed from September 1998 through February 2004.

The affected Hospira Acclaim Encore infusion pumps, list Number 12237, were manufactured from February 1997 to February 2010 and distributed from July 1999 through November 2013.

Hospira is recommending that users inspect each Hospira/Abbott Acclaim Encore infusion pump for door handle cracks prior to programming a therapy, by taking the following steps:

1. After inserting the tubing (with the roller clamp closed) and closing the door handle against the infusion pump, check that the door is fully closed.

If a pump has a door that does not close properly and a gap or separation exists between the completely closed door and the pump itself, remove the pump from clinical service, and call Hospira at 1-800-441-4100 (M-F, 8am-5pm, CT). If the door closes correctly, proceed to Step 2.

2. If the door closes correctly and a gap or separation does not exist between the completely closed door and the pump itself, check that there is no free flow activity in the drip chamber of the administration set by opening the roller clamp.

If free flow is detected, close the roller clamp, remove the pump from clinical service, and call Hospira at 1-800-441-4100 (M-F, 8am-5pm, CT).

3. If no issues are found through steps 1 and 2, the pump is acceptable for use. However, healthcare professionals should still ensure that anyone in their facility who might use these products is made aware of this safety notification and the recommended actions.

Healthcare professionals and patients can report adverse events or side effects related to the use of these products to the FDA’s MedWatch Program.

Publications
Publications
Topics
Article Type
Display Headline
Hospira issues Class I recall of infusion pumps
Display Headline
Hospira issues Class I recall of infusion pumps
Disallow All Ads
Content Gating
No Gating (article Unlocked/Free)
Alternative CME
Disqus Comments
Default
Use ProPublica

FDA approves CML drug for home administration

Article Type
Changed
Tue, 05/06/2014 - 05:00
Display Headline
FDA approves CML drug for home administration

vials and a syringe

Drug vials and a syringe

The US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has expanded the approval of omacetaxine mepesuccinate (Synribo) to include home administration.

The drug is already FDA-approved to treat adults with chronic or accelerated phase chronic myeloid leukemia (CML) who do not respond to or cannot tolerate 2 or more tyrosine kinase inhibitors.

The new approval allows CML patients to self-administer subcutaneous injections of omacetaxine mepesuccinate at home.

“It had been necessary for adults living with chronic or accelerated phase CML who are prescribed Synribo to travel to their doctor’s office twice a day for 2 weeks, which can be extremely burdensome and inconvenient to both patients and their caregivers,” said Meir Wetzler, MD, FACP, Chief of the Leukemia Section at Roswell Park Cancer Institute in Buffalo, New York.

“Now, physicians can decide if their patients are candidates for self-administration and, if so, provide their patients with guidance on how to properly administer reconstituted Synribo in the home.”

The drug’s maker, Teva Pharmaceutical Industries, Ltd., is working to finalize a pharmacy support program that will help facilitate successful home administration of omacetaxine mepesuccinate. The program is expected to “go live” this month or next.

About omacetaxine mepesuccinate

Omacetaxine mepesuccinate is a protein synthesis inhibitor. Although the drug’s mechanism of action is not fully understood, it is known to prevent the production of Bcr-Abl and Mcl-1, which help drive CML.

In October 2012, the FDA granted omacetaxine mepesuccinate accelerated approval for the treatment of adult patients with chronic or accelerated phase CML with resistance and/or intolerance to 2 or more tyrosine kinase inhibitors. Omacetaxine mepesuccinate gained full FDA approval in February.

The drug has been associated with severe and fatal myelosuppression, including thrombocytopenia, neutropenia, and anemia in some patients. So healthcare professionals should monitor patients’ complete blood counts weekly during induction and initial maintenance cycles and every 2 weeks during later maintenance cycles, as clinically indicated.

Omacetaxine mepesuccinate has been known to cause severe thrombocytopenia, which increases the risk of hemorrhage. Fatalities from cerebral hemorrhage have occurred. And severe, non-fatal gastrointestinal hemorrhages have occurred.

So healthcare professionals should monitor platelet counts as part of the complete blood count as recommended. Patients should not receive anticoagulants, aspirin, or non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs when their platelet counts are <50,000/μL, as these drugs may increase the risk of bleeding.

Omacetaxine mepesuccinate can induce glucose intolerance as well. So healthcare professionals should monitor blood glucose levels frequently, especially in patients with diabetes or risk factors for diabetes. Patients with poorly controlled diabetes mellitus should not receive omacetaxine mepesuccinate until good glycemic control has been established.

Omacetaxine mepesuccinate can cause fetal harm when administered to a pregnant woman. So women should be advised to avoid becoming pregnant while using the drug.

For more details on omacetaxine mepesuccinate, see the full prescribing information.

Publications
Topics

vials and a syringe

Drug vials and a syringe

The US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has expanded the approval of omacetaxine mepesuccinate (Synribo) to include home administration.

The drug is already FDA-approved to treat adults with chronic or accelerated phase chronic myeloid leukemia (CML) who do not respond to or cannot tolerate 2 or more tyrosine kinase inhibitors.

The new approval allows CML patients to self-administer subcutaneous injections of omacetaxine mepesuccinate at home.

“It had been necessary for adults living with chronic or accelerated phase CML who are prescribed Synribo to travel to their doctor’s office twice a day for 2 weeks, which can be extremely burdensome and inconvenient to both patients and their caregivers,” said Meir Wetzler, MD, FACP, Chief of the Leukemia Section at Roswell Park Cancer Institute in Buffalo, New York.

“Now, physicians can decide if their patients are candidates for self-administration and, if so, provide their patients with guidance on how to properly administer reconstituted Synribo in the home.”

The drug’s maker, Teva Pharmaceutical Industries, Ltd., is working to finalize a pharmacy support program that will help facilitate successful home administration of omacetaxine mepesuccinate. The program is expected to “go live” this month or next.

About omacetaxine mepesuccinate

Omacetaxine mepesuccinate is a protein synthesis inhibitor. Although the drug’s mechanism of action is not fully understood, it is known to prevent the production of Bcr-Abl and Mcl-1, which help drive CML.

In October 2012, the FDA granted omacetaxine mepesuccinate accelerated approval for the treatment of adult patients with chronic or accelerated phase CML with resistance and/or intolerance to 2 or more tyrosine kinase inhibitors. Omacetaxine mepesuccinate gained full FDA approval in February.

The drug has been associated with severe and fatal myelosuppression, including thrombocytopenia, neutropenia, and anemia in some patients. So healthcare professionals should monitor patients’ complete blood counts weekly during induction and initial maintenance cycles and every 2 weeks during later maintenance cycles, as clinically indicated.

Omacetaxine mepesuccinate has been known to cause severe thrombocytopenia, which increases the risk of hemorrhage. Fatalities from cerebral hemorrhage have occurred. And severe, non-fatal gastrointestinal hemorrhages have occurred.

So healthcare professionals should monitor platelet counts as part of the complete blood count as recommended. Patients should not receive anticoagulants, aspirin, or non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs when their platelet counts are <50,000/μL, as these drugs may increase the risk of bleeding.

Omacetaxine mepesuccinate can induce glucose intolerance as well. So healthcare professionals should monitor blood glucose levels frequently, especially in patients with diabetes or risk factors for diabetes. Patients with poorly controlled diabetes mellitus should not receive omacetaxine mepesuccinate until good glycemic control has been established.

Omacetaxine mepesuccinate can cause fetal harm when administered to a pregnant woman. So women should be advised to avoid becoming pregnant while using the drug.

For more details on omacetaxine mepesuccinate, see the full prescribing information.

vials and a syringe

Drug vials and a syringe

The US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has expanded the approval of omacetaxine mepesuccinate (Synribo) to include home administration.

The drug is already FDA-approved to treat adults with chronic or accelerated phase chronic myeloid leukemia (CML) who do not respond to or cannot tolerate 2 or more tyrosine kinase inhibitors.

The new approval allows CML patients to self-administer subcutaneous injections of omacetaxine mepesuccinate at home.

“It had been necessary for adults living with chronic or accelerated phase CML who are prescribed Synribo to travel to their doctor’s office twice a day for 2 weeks, which can be extremely burdensome and inconvenient to both patients and their caregivers,” said Meir Wetzler, MD, FACP, Chief of the Leukemia Section at Roswell Park Cancer Institute in Buffalo, New York.

“Now, physicians can decide if their patients are candidates for self-administration and, if so, provide their patients with guidance on how to properly administer reconstituted Synribo in the home.”

The drug’s maker, Teva Pharmaceutical Industries, Ltd., is working to finalize a pharmacy support program that will help facilitate successful home administration of omacetaxine mepesuccinate. The program is expected to “go live” this month or next.

About omacetaxine mepesuccinate

Omacetaxine mepesuccinate is a protein synthesis inhibitor. Although the drug’s mechanism of action is not fully understood, it is known to prevent the production of Bcr-Abl and Mcl-1, which help drive CML.

In October 2012, the FDA granted omacetaxine mepesuccinate accelerated approval for the treatment of adult patients with chronic or accelerated phase CML with resistance and/or intolerance to 2 or more tyrosine kinase inhibitors. Omacetaxine mepesuccinate gained full FDA approval in February.

The drug has been associated with severe and fatal myelosuppression, including thrombocytopenia, neutropenia, and anemia in some patients. So healthcare professionals should monitor patients’ complete blood counts weekly during induction and initial maintenance cycles and every 2 weeks during later maintenance cycles, as clinically indicated.

Omacetaxine mepesuccinate has been known to cause severe thrombocytopenia, which increases the risk of hemorrhage. Fatalities from cerebral hemorrhage have occurred. And severe, non-fatal gastrointestinal hemorrhages have occurred.

So healthcare professionals should monitor platelet counts as part of the complete blood count as recommended. Patients should not receive anticoagulants, aspirin, or non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs when their platelet counts are <50,000/μL, as these drugs may increase the risk of bleeding.

Omacetaxine mepesuccinate can induce glucose intolerance as well. So healthcare professionals should monitor blood glucose levels frequently, especially in patients with diabetes or risk factors for diabetes. Patients with poorly controlled diabetes mellitus should not receive omacetaxine mepesuccinate until good glycemic control has been established.

Omacetaxine mepesuccinate can cause fetal harm when administered to a pregnant woman. So women should be advised to avoid becoming pregnant while using the drug.

For more details on omacetaxine mepesuccinate, see the full prescribing information.

Publications
Publications
Topics
Article Type
Display Headline
FDA approves CML drug for home administration
Display Headline
FDA approves CML drug for home administration
Disallow All Ads
Content Gating
No Gating (article Unlocked/Free)
Alternative CME
Disqus Comments
Default
Use ProPublica

Teaching Cases Perception vs Reality

Article Type
Changed
Sun, 05/21/2017 - 14:03
Display Headline
Resident and hospitalist perspectives on the “great teaching case”: Correlation with actual patient assignment decisions

The advent of work‐hour restrictions and admission limits for teaching services has led many academic hospitals to implement hospitalist‐run staff (ie, nonteaching) services.[1] Although this practice is not new,[2] it is growing in popularity[3] and has been endorsed as a way to protect resident teaching and prevent excessive workload.[4] One potential benefit is the assignment of more educational cases to teaching services, whereas the nonteaching services receive more patients whose care is presumably relatively mundane or routine.[5]

Despite the rapid growth of this system of educational triage,[6] little is known about the factors considered when teaching versus nonteaching decisions are made. Studies of clinical outcomes for patients assigned to teaching versus nonteaching services have understandably used random assignment,[7, 8] whereas a study finding that patients with unhealthy substance use were more likely to be on teaching services than nonteaching services relied on patient assignment based on the identity of the patient's primary care provider or insurer.[9] In 2009, O'Connor et al. reported that implementation of nonteaching services at 2 hospitals had led to unequal distribution of patients in terms of demographics, diagnosis, and illness severity.[10] Triage decisions were made by either a nurse coordinator or a medical chief resident, and sicker patients (and occasionally good teaching cases) were preferentially placed on the teaching services, reportedly out of respect for the comfort level of the midlevel providers who staffed the nonteaching services.

Our institution has used a system of hospitalist educational triage since 1998. Over that time, residents have often expressed concerns about the assignment of patients to the teaching services, reporting in particular that they receive a disproportionate number of complex cases and outside transfers. In 2006, the hospitalist group attempted to address these concerns by collecting real‐time admission data, but the application of the data was limited by suspicion on both sides of a Hawthorne effect (data not published).

If trainee and hospitalist expectations for what constitutes a great teaching case differ substantially, that difference can have significant implications for resident and medical student teaching, self‐perceived roles, and satisfaction. More significantly, an understanding of what faculty perceive as ideal teaching cases would provide valuable information about the strengths and weaknesses of the teachingnonteaching model, which may prove useful to other academic institutions considering such a system. In this study, we endeavored to understand what residents and hospitalists consider an educational admission and to compare these expectations to the actual triage decisions of hospitalists.

METHODS

Mayo Clinic Hospital (Phoenix, Arizona) has used separate teaching and nonteaching services since opening in 1998. At our institution, like many others,[11] a hospitalist is assigned to take all calls for emergency department (ED) admissions, admissions from outpatient clinics, and transfer requests; this physician directs patients to the teaching or nonteaching service. At the time of our study, the 2 teaching services alternated days in which they admitted up to 7 patients, and the 5 nonteaching services admitted all other patients and provided medicine consultative services for the hospital. Teaching services consisted of 1 hospitalist, 2 senior residents, 2 or 3 first‐year residents, and sometimes 1 third‐ or fourth‐year medical student. Nonteaching services consisted of a hospitalist with intermittent assistance from a physician assistant or nurse practitioner.

Although there are no formal guidelines for the hospitalist triage role, hospitalists are encouraged to assign more educational cases to the teaching services and to allow the residents enough time to address the acute needs of the prior admission before receiving the next admission. Residents are not assigned any patients between 4:00 am and 7:00 am. The goals and objectives for the resident rotation on the medicine teaching service include a list of diagnoses with which residents are expected to become familiar during their residency; triage hospitalists have on‐line access to these goals and objectives.

To assess resident and hospitalist opinions about what types of patients should or should not be admitted to teaching services and to compare those characteristics with those of the patients actually admitted to teaching services, we began by administering a simple, open‐ended survey and asked both groups: (1) In an ideal world, what kinds of patients should be admitted to the internal medicine teaching services at Mayo Clinic Hospital? (2) In the real world, what kinds of patients are admitted to the internal medicine teaching services at Mayo Clinic Hospital?

Ample space was provided for free‐text entries. Residents were additionally asked their postgraduate year level. The survey was administered in April 2011, at which time all residents would have rotated on the medicine teaching services several times. Survey responses were anonymous and were compiled and retyped by someone unfamiliar with the subjects' handwriting.

Two authors (D.L.R. and H.R.L.) reviewed the results of the first survey and used conventional content analysis to group responses into categories and tally them.[12] Responses from hospitalists and residents were used to determine the content for a second, quantitative survey that asked respondents to rate specific possible factors that affected triage decisions on a Likert scale from 1 (Argues against teaching admission) to 5 (Argues for teaching admission). The second survey, administered to the same residents and hospitalists in May 2011, asked: (1) In an ideal world, how do these factors contribute to the decision about which patients should be admitted to the internal medicine teaching services at Mayo Clinic Hospital? (2) In the real world, how do these factors contribute to the decision about which patients are admitted to the internal medicine teaching services at Mayo Clinic Hospital?

Assuming a 3:1 ratio of nonteaching to teaching admissions, we calculated that we would need to analyze 1028 admissions to detect a 10% difference in the proportion of a specific trait present in 50% of patients admitted to the nonteaching service, with the use of a 2‐sided test with 80% statistical power and a significance level of 0.05.

We collected data on patient assignment via retrospective chart review to avoid the possibility of a Hawthorne effect. We studied all admissions to the internal medicine services for a 3‐month period before the administration of the first survey (January 1, 2011 through March 31, 2011). The following patient data were collected: service assignment (teaching vs nonteaching), age, sex, source of admission (ED, direct from clinic, outside transfer, internal transfer from another hospital service), first visit to our institution, prior hematology or oncology visit at our institution (as a surrogate for cancer), prior psychiatry visit at our institution (as a surrogate for psychiatric disease), transplantation history, human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) or acquired immune deficiency syndrome (AIDS) history, chronic or functional pain mentioned in ED or admission note, need for translator, and benefactor status. Additionally, an online calculator was used to determine the Charlson Comorbidity Index score for each patient.[13] We collected actual patient data corresponding to factors reported by survey respondents whenever possible and practical, but not every factor reported by survey respondents was amenable to rigorous analysis; for example, no unbiased method could be devised to rigorously categorize patients whose admissions are likely to take more time or difficult patients and families.

Responses to the second (quantitative) survey and patient data were compared using the Pearson [2] and Fisher exact test for categorical variables and the Student t test or Wilcoxon rank sum test for continuous variables. Categorical variables that achieved statistical significance for overall difference were analyzed on a post hoc basis using the Bonferroni method to control for the overall type I error rate. We also examined the differences between actual and ideal triage decisions using the Wilcoxon signed rank test. Data were analyzed using SAS 9.3 (SAS Institute, Inc., Cary, NC). Statistical significance was defined as P<0.05.

The project was deemed exempt by the Mayo Clinic institutional review board.

RESULTS

We surveyed all categorical internal medicine residents (n=30, 10 each from postgraduate year [PGY]‐1, PGY‐2, and PGY‐3) and hospitalists except the authors (n=21; average years since completing training=13.3; range, 129 years). For both surveys, responses were collected from 29 (96.7%) residents. The nonresponding resident was a PGY‐2. The response rate for hospitalists was 20/21 (95.2%) for the first survey and 16/21 (76.2%) for the second survey.

First Survey

Table 1 compares the most frequent resident and faculty responses to the initial, open‐ended survey about what types of patients should or should not be admitted to teaching services. Residents most commonly indicated that ideal patients were traditional medicine cases (ie, bread‐and‐butter admissions, with 13 residents using that exact phrase), and others supplied specific examples of such cases, including chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, pneumonia, diabetic ketoacidosis, congestive heart failure, chest pain, and gastrointestinal tract bleeding. Only 1 faculty member mentioned bread‐and‐butter admissions, although several listed examples like chest pain and pneumonia. A smaller number of residents pointed to the importance of rare cases, whereas faculty considered rare cases to be ideal for teaching services, followed by variety of pathology and complexity.

Most Frequent Resident and Faculty Responses to an Open‐Ended Survey About Types of Patients Admitted (Ideal vs Actual)
 Residents (n=29)Faculty (n=20)
QuestionCharacteristicNo. (%)CharacteristicNo. (%)
  • NOTE: Abbreviations: AIDS, acquired immunodeficiency syndrome; HIV, human immunodeficiency virus.

  • Similar responses were grouped via content analysis.

  • Specific examples cited include chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, pneumonia, diabetic ketoacidosis, congestive heart failure, chest pain, and gastrointestinal tract bleeding.

In an ideal world, what kinds of patients should be admitted to the internal medicine teaching services at Mayo Clinic Hospital?Bread‐and butter admissionsb14 (44.8)Rare cases9 (45.0)
Rare cases9 (31.0)Variety of pathology7 (35.0)
No social admissions7 (24.1)Complex cases5 (25.0)
New diagnoses instead of chronic management4 (13.8)Variety of complexity5 (25.0)
Variety of complexity4 (13.8)Patients with HIV/AIDS3 (15.0)
Diagnostic dilemmas3 (15.0)
New diagnoses instead of chronic management3 (15.0)
In the real world, what kinds of patients are admitted to the internal medicine teaching services at Mayo Clinic Hospital?Patients with cancer11 (37.9)Complex patients6 (30.0)
Complex patients10 (34.5)Difficult patients5 (25.0)
Social admissions9 (31.0)Patients whose admissions are expected to be time consuming5 (25.0)
Acutely ill patients6 (20.7)Rare cases3 (15.0)
Variety of pathology6 (20.7)Cases determined by the time of day3 (15.0)

With regard to actual admissions, residents and faculty agreed that they often were complex, but residents were more likely to suggest high rates of patients with cancer (11 residents vs 2 hospitalists) and social admissions (9 residents vs 2 hospitalists). Four residents each believed that they preferentially received elderly patients, outside transfers, and patients with functional pain, and 2 perceived a disproportionate number of patients making their first visit to Mayo Clinic. One hospitalist believed that residents were more likely to receive non‐English speakers.

Second Survey

Table 2 compares the resident and faculty responses to the second, numerical survey regarding ideal admissions to the teaching services. In contrast to the first survey, residents prioritized rare cases as the feature they most associated with ideal teaching admissions. They also placed a premium on variety of pathology, patients with unique findings, and patients likely to be written up or presented. The patients they believed were least appropriate for a teaching service were social admissions or those with placement issues, patients with functional or chronic pain, and benefactors or public figures.

Resident and Faculty Survey Responses Regarding Ideal Admissions to Teaching Services
FactorResident, n=29Faculty, n=16P Value
  • NOTE: Participants rated each factor on a Likert scale from 1 (Argues against teaching admission) to 5 (Argues for teaching admission), with 3 representing No impact on admission decision. Abbreviations: AIDS, acquired immune deficiency syndrome; HIV, human immunodeficiency virus; SD, standard deviation.

Rare diseases  0.22
Mean (SD)4.8 (0.5)4.9 (0.3) 
Median55 
Variety of pathology  0.22
Mean (SD)4.7 (0.5)4.5 (0.5) 
Median55 
Cases that might be written up or presented  0.35
Mean (SD)4.7 (0.5)4.8 (0.6) 
Median55 
Bread‐and‐butter cases  0.001
Mean (SD)4.6 (0.7)3.7 (0.9) 
Median54 
Unique physical findings  0.67
Mean (SD)4.6 (0.6)4.7 (0.5) 
Median55 
Variety of complexity  0.21
Mean (SD)4.3 (0.7)4.1 (0.6) 
Median44 
Variety of acuity  0.40
Mean (SD)4.2 (0.7)4.1 (0.7) 
Median44 
Spectrum of ages  0.046
Mean (SD)4.1 (0.8)3.6 (0.8) 
Median43 
HIV or AIDS  0.39
Mean (SD)4.1 (0.9)4.4 (0.5) 
Median44 
Acutely ill or unstable  0.54
Mean (SD)4.0 (0.9)3.9 (0.6) 
Median44 
Complex patients  0.94
Mean (SD)4.0 (0.8)3.9 (0.6) 
Median44 
Patients at end of life  0.16
Mean (SD)3.5 (0.8)3.1 (0.6) 
Median33 
First‐time Mayo patients  0.45
Mean (SD)3.5 (0.7)3.3 (0.5) 
Median33 
Younger patients  0.50
Mean (SD)3.5 (0.9)3.3 (0.6) 
Median33 
Stable patients  0.21
Mean (SD)3.3 (0.8)3.1 (0.3) 
Median33 
Patients with cancer  0.67
Mean (SD)3.3 (0.8)3.1 (0.4) 
Median33 
Straightforward patients  0.64
Mean (SD)3.2 (0.8)3.1 (0.8) 
Median33 
Older patients  0.73
Mean (SD)3.2 (0.7)3.1 (0.3) 
Median33 
Patients with a history of transplantation  0.67
Mean (SD)3.1 (1.1)3.3 (0.6) 
Median33 
Time of day of admission  0.71
Mean (SD)3.1 (1.0)3.1 (0.5) 
Median33 
Patients with a history of psychiatric illness  0.59
Mean (SD)3.1 (1.0)3.1 (0.6) 
Median33 
Patients who require a translator  0.49
Mean (SD)3.0 (0.9)3.1 (0.5) 
Median33 
Patients whose admissions are expected to take more time  0.13
Mean (SD)2.9 (0.8)3.2 (0.6) 
Median33 
Difficult patients and families  0.55
Mean (SD)2.8 (1.0)2.6 (0.8) 
Median33 
Transfers from other hospitals  0.11
Mean (SD)2.7 (1.1)3.1 (0.3) 
Median33 
Benefactors and public figures  0.49
Mean (SD)2.7 (1.0)2.5 (0.7) 
Median33 
Patients with functional or chronic pain  0.87
Mean (SD)2.4 (1.1)2.4 (1.0)
Median23 
Social admissions or placement issues  0.99
Mean (SD)2.1 (1.1)2.0 (1.0) 
Median22 

Faculty prioritized many of the same features for ideal teaching cases as residents; 4 of their 5 highest‐scoring factors were the same (rare diseases, patients whose cases might be written up or presented, patients with unique physical findings, and variety of pathology). They also agreed on the least ideal features (social admissions or placement issues, patients with functional or chronic pain, and benefactors or public figures). The only significant differences between resident and faculty ratings for ideal teaching cases were for bread‐and‐butter cases and a spectrum of ages.

Discordance between resident and faculty survey responses on actual admission decisions (Table 3) was starker; residents rated several features significantly higher than faculty as features contributing to triage decisions including older patients; patients with functional or chronic pain, social admissions, or placement issues; patients with cancer; transfers from other hospitals; and difficult patients and families. Relative to residents, faculty reported that patients with HIV or AIDS, and patients whose cases were likely to be written up or presented, were more likely to be admitted to teaching services.

Resident and Faculty Survey Responses Regarding Actual Admissions to Teaching Services
FactorResident, n=29Faculty, n=16P Value
  • NOTE: Participants rated each factor on a Likert scale from 1 (Argues against teaching admission) to 5 (Argues for teaching admission), with 3 representing No impact on admission decision. Abbreviations: AIDS, acquired immune deficiency syndrome; HIV, human immunodeficiency virus; SD, standard deviation.

Rare diseases  0.14
Mean (SD)4.4 (0.6)4.7 (0.6) 
Median45 
Complex patients  0.83
Mean (SD)4.3 (0.6)4.3 (0.6) 
Median44 
Acutely ill or unstable  0.18
Mean (SD)4.3 (0.7)3.9 (0.9) 
Median44 
Unique physical findings  0.18
Mean (SD)4.1 (0.8)4.5 (0.6) 
Median45 
Transfers from other hospitals  0.003
Mean (SD)4.1 (1.0)3.5 (0.5) 
Median43 
Cases that might be written up or presented  0.03
Mean (SD)4.1 (0.7)4.6 (0.6) 
Median45 
Older patients  <0.001
Mean (SD)3.9 (0.8)3.0 (0.7) 
Median43 
Time of day of admission  0.50
Mean (SD)3.9 (1.1)3.7 (0.9) 
Median44 
Patients with cancer  0.01
Mean (SD)3.9 (0.9)3.3 (0.5) 
Median43 
Variety of pathology  0.21
Mean (SD)3.9 (0.8)4.2 (0.7) 
Median44 
Patients whose admissions are expected to take more time  0.13
Mean (SD)3.9 (1.0)3.4 (0.9) 
Median43 
HIV or AIDS  0.008
Mean (SD)3.8 (0.9)4.5 (0.5) 
Median44.5 
Variety of complexity  0.31
Mean (SD)3.7 (0.9)3.9 (0.6) 
Median3.54 
Bread‐and‐butter cases  0.07
Mean (SD)3.6 (1.0)2.9 (1.2) 
Median33 
First‐time Mayo patients  0.82
Mean (SD)3.6 (0.9)3.5 (0.7) 
Median33 
Patients with functional or chronic pain  0.004
Mean (SD)3.6 (1.0)2.8 (0.7) 
Median43 
Social admissions or placement issues  0.03
Mean (SD)3.5 (1.2)2.7 (0.9) 
Median43 
Variety of acuity  0.25
Mean (SD)3.5 (0.8)3.7 (0.6) 
Median34 
Difficult patients and families  0.03
Mean (SD)3.4 (0.9)2.8 (0.7) 
Median33 
Patients at end of life  0.10
Mean (SD)3.4 (0.8)3.0 (0.5) 
Median33 
Spectrum of ages  0.80
Mean (SD)3.3 (0.7)3.3 (0.6) 
Median33 
Patients with a history of psychiatric illness  0.81
Mean (SD)3.3 (0.9)3.1 (0.6) 
Median33 
Patients with a history of transplantation  0.25
Mean (SD)3.2 (0.9)3.5 (0.5) 
Median33 
Patients who require a translator  0.60
Mean (SD)3.2 (0.7)3.2 (0.6) 
Median33 
Younger patients  0.42
Mean (SD)3.0 (0.9)3.1 (0.4) 
Median33 
Benefactors and public figures  0.09
Mean (SD)2.9 (1.0)2.3 (0.7) 
Median32 
Straightforward patients  0.18
Mean (SD)2.8 (1.0)2.4 (1.0) 
Median2.52 
Stable patients  0.53
Mean (SD)2.7 (1.0)2.8 (0.7) 
Median33 

Comparing resident survey ratings for ideal versus actual triage decisions gave some insight into the features that they thought were inappropriately emphasized or ignored when triage decisions were made. Differences in resident scores for ideal versus actual admissions were significantly different for 16 of 28 items (data available upon request), suggesting a degree of perceived discordance. The largest positive differences (ie, features they valued in teaching admissions but thought were less represented in actual admissions) were for bread‐and‐butter admissions, variety of pathology, a spectrum of ages, and variety of acuity. The largest negative differences (ie, features they thought were well represented in actual admissions but were less valuable) were for social admissions or placement issues, transfers from other hospitals, patients with functional or chronic pain, and patients whose admissions were expected to take more time.

In terms of ideal versus actual triage decisions, faculty reported less discordance than residents; ideal and actual triage behavior differed significantly only for 4 of 28 items (data available upon request). They did agree with residents about the relative lack of bread‐and‐butter admissions and the over‐representation of social admissions or placement issues and transfers from other hospitals. They additionally noted a lack of straightforward cases.

We reviewed records of the 1426 patients admitted to the internal medicine services during the study period. Of these, 359 (25.2%) were assigned to the teaching services. Patient characteristics are summarized in Table 4.

Characteristics of Patients Admitted to the Internal Medicine Services (N=1,426)
CharacteristicTeaching Service, n=359Nonteaching Service, n=1,067P Value
  • NOTE: Abbreviations: SD, standard deviation.

Age, y, mean (SD)66.7 (16.5)69.3 (15.7)0.008
Admission type, No. (%)  0.049
Admission from the emergency department315 (87.7)915 (85.8)0.34
Direct admission from Mayo outpatient clinic27 (7.5)114 (10.7)0.08
Transfer from another institution16 (4.5)27 (2.5)0.06
Internal transfer from a different hospital service1 (0.3)11 (1.0)0.31
First‐time Mayo patient, No. (%)61 (17.0)175 (16.4)0.79
Prior hematology or oncology visit, No. (%)86 (24.0)235 (22.0)0.45
History of transplantation, No. (%)20 (5.6)52 (4.9)0.60
Prior psychiatry visit, No. (%)53 (14.8)122 (11.4)0.10
History of chronic or functional pain, No. (%)122 (34.0)330 (30.9)0.28
Required translator, No. (%)5 (1.4)14 (1.3)0.91
Benefactor, No. (%)5 (1.4)24 (2.2)0.32
Charlson comorbidity score, mean (SD)2.7 (2.5)2.6 (2.5)0.49

DISCUSSION

The results of our qualitative and quantitative surveys showed significant differences between resident and staff perceptions of the faculty triage role. Although both groups similarly valued many features, residents expressed a clear preference for more bread‐and‐butter admissions, whereas the staff prioritized selecting the most complex, challenging, and rare cases from among the day's admissions to give to the residents. (Residents were also very interested in rare cases, suggesting that they saw benefit to admitting patients with a variety of degrees of rarity and complexity.) Residents and faculty seemed to agree that the number of social admissions and outside transfers admitted to teaching services was not ideal.

These perceptions have substantial implications. If the current triage process is to continue, there may be benefit to designing a faculty development project focused on the triage process, which previously has been largely unexamined. Efforts to remove or limit time barriers that prevent perceived educational cases from being admitted to teaching services is also a worthy endeavor (eg, structuring the 2 teams to admit simultaneously so that teaching teams can admit patients back to back without exceeding capacity). In addition, residents may benefit from teaching hospitalists who concentrate educational efforts on the learning that can be extracted from the care of any patient, including admissions that initially seem mundane or purely social.[14] A concerted effort to divert more traditional medicine admissions and fewer unusual cases to the teaching service might improve resident perceptions of the triage process. Further, although the care of any patient can have education benefit, the fact that both groups perceived excessive social admissions in the teaching service suggests that a potential benefit of a nonteaching service (ie, absorbing the most mundane admissions) may not yet be fully realized.

Despite the perceived differences noted on the surveys, we found remarkably few differences between patients admitted to the teaching and nonteaching services. Although both groups rated complexity; outside transfers; being seen at the institution for the first time; and histories of transplantation, cancer, chronic or functional pain, and psychiatric disease as increasing the likelihood of admission to a teaching service, no differences were observed for these factors or their quantifiable surrogates. (Although the overall test for admission type achieved marginal statistical significance, none of the individual admission types were significantly different in post hoc analysis.) Residents, but not faculty, thought that older patients were over‐represented on the teaching service, but their assigned patients were significantly younger than those on the nonteaching service.

These findings have several possible explanations. First, although most hospitalists spend time on teaching and nonteaching services (and therefore are familiar with the patient composition of each), residents get very little exposure to the nonteaching services (until they are senior residents with a rotation on a consulting service). Their impression of inequity may be due to misunderstanding the patient composition of the nonteaching services. Second, the mere existence of a triage role may create false expectations about patient composition; that is, simply by knowing that every admission was chosen for its educational merit, residents may have disproportionate perceptions about those cases judged to have less educational value, even ifas our data suggestassignments to teaching versus nonteaching services are occurring fairly equitably.

Study Limitations

We acknowledge several limitations of our study. First, many factors that were reported as important in the qualitative survey did not lend themselves to objective abstraction from patient records. For example, providers did not specifically document when an admission is purely social, nor was there an objective way to identify difficult patients or families or admissions that were expected to take more time. We attempted to limit the analysis to objective patient metrics that were (1) not influenced by the teaching or nonteaching assignment itself (eg, we avoided discharge diagnoses, which might be entered differently by residents and staff hospitalists) and (2) easily available to triage hospitalists. For the latter reason, we used a prior appointment in the hematology or oncology clinic as a surrogate for cancer patients and a prior psychiatry visit as a surrogate for patients with a history of psychiatric disease. These are naturally inexact surrogates, but they reflect the information a busy hospitalist is likely to access when making patient assignment decisions.

Second, it may well be that assigning patients equitably according to a certain trait is not the same as assigning patients ideally for the educational needs of residents. The patients admitted to our medicine services (teaching and nonteaching) were generally older than 60 years, had complex diagnoses, and had substantial pain. Residents on the teaching services potentially would benefit from an intentionally unbalanced admission policy that shunted patients to the teaching services on the basis of features other than individual perceived educational merit. It must also be borne in mind that resident, and for that matter faculty, perceptions of ideal teaching cases are likely inexact correlates of educational best practices; the ideal role of the triage hospitalist is to admit to the teaching services those patients that will best advance the education of the learners, including a consideration of the goals and objectives of the rotation. Future studies correlating different triage practices to actual educational outcomes would be very helpful.

Third, the analysis could not reliably eliminate patients whose admissions did not represent genuine triage decisions (eg, those assigned to the hospitalist service after the teaching service had reached its capacity or immediately after they had received a complex case). Studying admission decisions prospectively could eliminate this variability, but it could introduce a Hawthorne effect, the negative effects of which likely would outweigh this benefit.

CONCLUSION

Triage hospitalists distributed patients fairly evenly between teaching and nonteaching services, but residents and faculty alike perceived that residents would benefit from more bread‐and‐butter cases. Hospitals considering the addition of a nonteaching service may want to incorporate a faculty development project focused on the triage process to ensure that these traditional medicine cases are assigned to resident services and to ensure that the great teaching case is not considered such because of complexity and acuity alone.

Acknowledgements

The authors thank Elizabeth Jones and Lois Bell for their assistance with survey collection and collation.

Disclosures: This study (institutional review board application #11‐3;002635) was deemed exempt by the Mayo Clinic institutional review board on May 16, 2011. The authors report no conflicts of interest.

Files
References
  1. Weinstein DF. Duty hours for resident physicians: tough choices for teaching hospitals. N Engl J Med. 2002;347(16):12751278.
  2. Simmer TL, Nerenz DR, Rutt WM, Newcomb CS, Benfer DW. A randomized, controlled trial of an attending staff service in general internal medicine. Med Care. 1991;29(7 suppl):JS31JS40.
  3. Sehgal NL, Shah HM, Parekh , Roy CL, Williams MV. Non‐housestaff medicine services in academic centers: models and challenges. J Hosp Med. 2008;3(3):247255.
  4. Weinberger SE, Smith LG, Collier VU; Education Committee of the American College of Physicians. Redesigning training for internal medicine. Ann Intern Med. 2006;144(12):927932.
  5. Myers JS, Bellini LM, Rohrbach J, Shofer FS, Hollander JE. Improving resource utilization in a teaching hospital: development of a nonteaching service for chest pain admissions. Acad Med. 2006;81(5):432435.
  6. Howell EE, Bessman ES, Rubin HR. Hospitalists and an innovative emergency department admission process. J Gen Intern Med. 2004;19(3):266268.
  7. Khaliq AA, Huang CY, Ganti AK, Invie K, Smego RA. Comparison of resource utilization and clinical outcomes between teaching and nonteaching medical services. J Hosp Med. 2007;2(3):150157.
  8. Palacio C, Alexandraki I, House J, Mooradian AD. A comparative study of unscheduled hospital readmissions in a resident‐staffed teaching service and a hospitalist‐based service. South Med J. 2009;102(2):145149.
  9. Holt SR, Ramos J, Harma MA, et al. Prevalence of unhealthy substance use on teaching and hospitalist medical services: implications for education. Am J Addict. 2012;21(2):111119.
  10. O'Connor AB, Lang VJ, Lurie SJ, et al. The effect of nonteaching services on the distribution of inpatient cases for internal medicine residents. Acad Med. 2009;84(2):220225.
  11. Darves B. Teaching and nonteaching services: separate no more? Today's Hospitalist website. Available at: http://www.todayshospita list.com/index.php?b=articles_read15(9):12771288.
  12. Charlson comorbidity scoring system: estimating prognosis for dialysis patients. Touchcalc website. Available at: http://www.touchcalc.com/calculators/cci_js#t2_probability. Accessed January 15, 2014.
  13. Fitzgerald FT. Curiosity. Ann Intern Med. 1999;130(1):7071.
Article PDF
Issue
Journal of Hospital Medicine - 9(8)
Page Number
508-514
Sections
Files
Files
Article PDF
Article PDF

The advent of work‐hour restrictions and admission limits for teaching services has led many academic hospitals to implement hospitalist‐run staff (ie, nonteaching) services.[1] Although this practice is not new,[2] it is growing in popularity[3] and has been endorsed as a way to protect resident teaching and prevent excessive workload.[4] One potential benefit is the assignment of more educational cases to teaching services, whereas the nonteaching services receive more patients whose care is presumably relatively mundane or routine.[5]

Despite the rapid growth of this system of educational triage,[6] little is known about the factors considered when teaching versus nonteaching decisions are made. Studies of clinical outcomes for patients assigned to teaching versus nonteaching services have understandably used random assignment,[7, 8] whereas a study finding that patients with unhealthy substance use were more likely to be on teaching services than nonteaching services relied on patient assignment based on the identity of the patient's primary care provider or insurer.[9] In 2009, O'Connor et al. reported that implementation of nonteaching services at 2 hospitals had led to unequal distribution of patients in terms of demographics, diagnosis, and illness severity.[10] Triage decisions were made by either a nurse coordinator or a medical chief resident, and sicker patients (and occasionally good teaching cases) were preferentially placed on the teaching services, reportedly out of respect for the comfort level of the midlevel providers who staffed the nonteaching services.

Our institution has used a system of hospitalist educational triage since 1998. Over that time, residents have often expressed concerns about the assignment of patients to the teaching services, reporting in particular that they receive a disproportionate number of complex cases and outside transfers. In 2006, the hospitalist group attempted to address these concerns by collecting real‐time admission data, but the application of the data was limited by suspicion on both sides of a Hawthorne effect (data not published).

If trainee and hospitalist expectations for what constitutes a great teaching case differ substantially, that difference can have significant implications for resident and medical student teaching, self‐perceived roles, and satisfaction. More significantly, an understanding of what faculty perceive as ideal teaching cases would provide valuable information about the strengths and weaknesses of the teachingnonteaching model, which may prove useful to other academic institutions considering such a system. In this study, we endeavored to understand what residents and hospitalists consider an educational admission and to compare these expectations to the actual triage decisions of hospitalists.

METHODS

Mayo Clinic Hospital (Phoenix, Arizona) has used separate teaching and nonteaching services since opening in 1998. At our institution, like many others,[11] a hospitalist is assigned to take all calls for emergency department (ED) admissions, admissions from outpatient clinics, and transfer requests; this physician directs patients to the teaching or nonteaching service. At the time of our study, the 2 teaching services alternated days in which they admitted up to 7 patients, and the 5 nonteaching services admitted all other patients and provided medicine consultative services for the hospital. Teaching services consisted of 1 hospitalist, 2 senior residents, 2 or 3 first‐year residents, and sometimes 1 third‐ or fourth‐year medical student. Nonteaching services consisted of a hospitalist with intermittent assistance from a physician assistant or nurse practitioner.

Although there are no formal guidelines for the hospitalist triage role, hospitalists are encouraged to assign more educational cases to the teaching services and to allow the residents enough time to address the acute needs of the prior admission before receiving the next admission. Residents are not assigned any patients between 4:00 am and 7:00 am. The goals and objectives for the resident rotation on the medicine teaching service include a list of diagnoses with which residents are expected to become familiar during their residency; triage hospitalists have on‐line access to these goals and objectives.

To assess resident and hospitalist opinions about what types of patients should or should not be admitted to teaching services and to compare those characteristics with those of the patients actually admitted to teaching services, we began by administering a simple, open‐ended survey and asked both groups: (1) In an ideal world, what kinds of patients should be admitted to the internal medicine teaching services at Mayo Clinic Hospital? (2) In the real world, what kinds of patients are admitted to the internal medicine teaching services at Mayo Clinic Hospital?

Ample space was provided for free‐text entries. Residents were additionally asked their postgraduate year level. The survey was administered in April 2011, at which time all residents would have rotated on the medicine teaching services several times. Survey responses were anonymous and were compiled and retyped by someone unfamiliar with the subjects' handwriting.

Two authors (D.L.R. and H.R.L.) reviewed the results of the first survey and used conventional content analysis to group responses into categories and tally them.[12] Responses from hospitalists and residents were used to determine the content for a second, quantitative survey that asked respondents to rate specific possible factors that affected triage decisions on a Likert scale from 1 (Argues against teaching admission) to 5 (Argues for teaching admission). The second survey, administered to the same residents and hospitalists in May 2011, asked: (1) In an ideal world, how do these factors contribute to the decision about which patients should be admitted to the internal medicine teaching services at Mayo Clinic Hospital? (2) In the real world, how do these factors contribute to the decision about which patients are admitted to the internal medicine teaching services at Mayo Clinic Hospital?

Assuming a 3:1 ratio of nonteaching to teaching admissions, we calculated that we would need to analyze 1028 admissions to detect a 10% difference in the proportion of a specific trait present in 50% of patients admitted to the nonteaching service, with the use of a 2‐sided test with 80% statistical power and a significance level of 0.05.

We collected data on patient assignment via retrospective chart review to avoid the possibility of a Hawthorne effect. We studied all admissions to the internal medicine services for a 3‐month period before the administration of the first survey (January 1, 2011 through March 31, 2011). The following patient data were collected: service assignment (teaching vs nonteaching), age, sex, source of admission (ED, direct from clinic, outside transfer, internal transfer from another hospital service), first visit to our institution, prior hematology or oncology visit at our institution (as a surrogate for cancer), prior psychiatry visit at our institution (as a surrogate for psychiatric disease), transplantation history, human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) or acquired immune deficiency syndrome (AIDS) history, chronic or functional pain mentioned in ED or admission note, need for translator, and benefactor status. Additionally, an online calculator was used to determine the Charlson Comorbidity Index score for each patient.[13] We collected actual patient data corresponding to factors reported by survey respondents whenever possible and practical, but not every factor reported by survey respondents was amenable to rigorous analysis; for example, no unbiased method could be devised to rigorously categorize patients whose admissions are likely to take more time or difficult patients and families.

Responses to the second (quantitative) survey and patient data were compared using the Pearson [2] and Fisher exact test for categorical variables and the Student t test or Wilcoxon rank sum test for continuous variables. Categorical variables that achieved statistical significance for overall difference were analyzed on a post hoc basis using the Bonferroni method to control for the overall type I error rate. We also examined the differences between actual and ideal triage decisions using the Wilcoxon signed rank test. Data were analyzed using SAS 9.3 (SAS Institute, Inc., Cary, NC). Statistical significance was defined as P<0.05.

The project was deemed exempt by the Mayo Clinic institutional review board.

RESULTS

We surveyed all categorical internal medicine residents (n=30, 10 each from postgraduate year [PGY]‐1, PGY‐2, and PGY‐3) and hospitalists except the authors (n=21; average years since completing training=13.3; range, 129 years). For both surveys, responses were collected from 29 (96.7%) residents. The nonresponding resident was a PGY‐2. The response rate for hospitalists was 20/21 (95.2%) for the first survey and 16/21 (76.2%) for the second survey.

First Survey

Table 1 compares the most frequent resident and faculty responses to the initial, open‐ended survey about what types of patients should or should not be admitted to teaching services. Residents most commonly indicated that ideal patients were traditional medicine cases (ie, bread‐and‐butter admissions, with 13 residents using that exact phrase), and others supplied specific examples of such cases, including chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, pneumonia, diabetic ketoacidosis, congestive heart failure, chest pain, and gastrointestinal tract bleeding. Only 1 faculty member mentioned bread‐and‐butter admissions, although several listed examples like chest pain and pneumonia. A smaller number of residents pointed to the importance of rare cases, whereas faculty considered rare cases to be ideal for teaching services, followed by variety of pathology and complexity.

Most Frequent Resident and Faculty Responses to an Open‐Ended Survey About Types of Patients Admitted (Ideal vs Actual)
 Residents (n=29)Faculty (n=20)
QuestionCharacteristicNo. (%)CharacteristicNo. (%)
  • NOTE: Abbreviations: AIDS, acquired immunodeficiency syndrome; HIV, human immunodeficiency virus.

  • Similar responses were grouped via content analysis.

  • Specific examples cited include chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, pneumonia, diabetic ketoacidosis, congestive heart failure, chest pain, and gastrointestinal tract bleeding.

In an ideal world, what kinds of patients should be admitted to the internal medicine teaching services at Mayo Clinic Hospital?Bread‐and butter admissionsb14 (44.8)Rare cases9 (45.0)
Rare cases9 (31.0)Variety of pathology7 (35.0)
No social admissions7 (24.1)Complex cases5 (25.0)
New diagnoses instead of chronic management4 (13.8)Variety of complexity5 (25.0)
Variety of complexity4 (13.8)Patients with HIV/AIDS3 (15.0)
Diagnostic dilemmas3 (15.0)
New diagnoses instead of chronic management3 (15.0)
In the real world, what kinds of patients are admitted to the internal medicine teaching services at Mayo Clinic Hospital?Patients with cancer11 (37.9)Complex patients6 (30.0)
Complex patients10 (34.5)Difficult patients5 (25.0)
Social admissions9 (31.0)Patients whose admissions are expected to be time consuming5 (25.0)
Acutely ill patients6 (20.7)Rare cases3 (15.0)
Variety of pathology6 (20.7)Cases determined by the time of day3 (15.0)

With regard to actual admissions, residents and faculty agreed that they often were complex, but residents were more likely to suggest high rates of patients with cancer (11 residents vs 2 hospitalists) and social admissions (9 residents vs 2 hospitalists). Four residents each believed that they preferentially received elderly patients, outside transfers, and patients with functional pain, and 2 perceived a disproportionate number of patients making their first visit to Mayo Clinic. One hospitalist believed that residents were more likely to receive non‐English speakers.

Second Survey

Table 2 compares the resident and faculty responses to the second, numerical survey regarding ideal admissions to the teaching services. In contrast to the first survey, residents prioritized rare cases as the feature they most associated with ideal teaching admissions. They also placed a premium on variety of pathology, patients with unique findings, and patients likely to be written up or presented. The patients they believed were least appropriate for a teaching service were social admissions or those with placement issues, patients with functional or chronic pain, and benefactors or public figures.

Resident and Faculty Survey Responses Regarding Ideal Admissions to Teaching Services
FactorResident, n=29Faculty, n=16P Value
  • NOTE: Participants rated each factor on a Likert scale from 1 (Argues against teaching admission) to 5 (Argues for teaching admission), with 3 representing No impact on admission decision. Abbreviations: AIDS, acquired immune deficiency syndrome; HIV, human immunodeficiency virus; SD, standard deviation.

Rare diseases  0.22
Mean (SD)4.8 (0.5)4.9 (0.3) 
Median55 
Variety of pathology  0.22
Mean (SD)4.7 (0.5)4.5 (0.5) 
Median55 
Cases that might be written up or presented  0.35
Mean (SD)4.7 (0.5)4.8 (0.6) 
Median55 
Bread‐and‐butter cases  0.001
Mean (SD)4.6 (0.7)3.7 (0.9) 
Median54 
Unique physical findings  0.67
Mean (SD)4.6 (0.6)4.7 (0.5) 
Median55 
Variety of complexity  0.21
Mean (SD)4.3 (0.7)4.1 (0.6) 
Median44 
Variety of acuity  0.40
Mean (SD)4.2 (0.7)4.1 (0.7) 
Median44 
Spectrum of ages  0.046
Mean (SD)4.1 (0.8)3.6 (0.8) 
Median43 
HIV or AIDS  0.39
Mean (SD)4.1 (0.9)4.4 (0.5) 
Median44 
Acutely ill or unstable  0.54
Mean (SD)4.0 (0.9)3.9 (0.6) 
Median44 
Complex patients  0.94
Mean (SD)4.0 (0.8)3.9 (0.6) 
Median44 
Patients at end of life  0.16
Mean (SD)3.5 (0.8)3.1 (0.6) 
Median33 
First‐time Mayo patients  0.45
Mean (SD)3.5 (0.7)3.3 (0.5) 
Median33 
Younger patients  0.50
Mean (SD)3.5 (0.9)3.3 (0.6) 
Median33 
Stable patients  0.21
Mean (SD)3.3 (0.8)3.1 (0.3) 
Median33 
Patients with cancer  0.67
Mean (SD)3.3 (0.8)3.1 (0.4) 
Median33 
Straightforward patients  0.64
Mean (SD)3.2 (0.8)3.1 (0.8) 
Median33 
Older patients  0.73
Mean (SD)3.2 (0.7)3.1 (0.3) 
Median33 
Patients with a history of transplantation  0.67
Mean (SD)3.1 (1.1)3.3 (0.6) 
Median33 
Time of day of admission  0.71
Mean (SD)3.1 (1.0)3.1 (0.5) 
Median33 
Patients with a history of psychiatric illness  0.59
Mean (SD)3.1 (1.0)3.1 (0.6) 
Median33 
Patients who require a translator  0.49
Mean (SD)3.0 (0.9)3.1 (0.5) 
Median33 
Patients whose admissions are expected to take more time  0.13
Mean (SD)2.9 (0.8)3.2 (0.6) 
Median33 
Difficult patients and families  0.55
Mean (SD)2.8 (1.0)2.6 (0.8) 
Median33 
Transfers from other hospitals  0.11
Mean (SD)2.7 (1.1)3.1 (0.3) 
Median33 
Benefactors and public figures  0.49
Mean (SD)2.7 (1.0)2.5 (0.7) 
Median33 
Patients with functional or chronic pain  0.87
Mean (SD)2.4 (1.1)2.4 (1.0)
Median23 
Social admissions or placement issues  0.99
Mean (SD)2.1 (1.1)2.0 (1.0) 
Median22 

Faculty prioritized many of the same features for ideal teaching cases as residents; 4 of their 5 highest‐scoring factors were the same (rare diseases, patients whose cases might be written up or presented, patients with unique physical findings, and variety of pathology). They also agreed on the least ideal features (social admissions or placement issues, patients with functional or chronic pain, and benefactors or public figures). The only significant differences between resident and faculty ratings for ideal teaching cases were for bread‐and‐butter cases and a spectrum of ages.

Discordance between resident and faculty survey responses on actual admission decisions (Table 3) was starker; residents rated several features significantly higher than faculty as features contributing to triage decisions including older patients; patients with functional or chronic pain, social admissions, or placement issues; patients with cancer; transfers from other hospitals; and difficult patients and families. Relative to residents, faculty reported that patients with HIV or AIDS, and patients whose cases were likely to be written up or presented, were more likely to be admitted to teaching services.

Resident and Faculty Survey Responses Regarding Actual Admissions to Teaching Services
FactorResident, n=29Faculty, n=16P Value
  • NOTE: Participants rated each factor on a Likert scale from 1 (Argues against teaching admission) to 5 (Argues for teaching admission), with 3 representing No impact on admission decision. Abbreviations: AIDS, acquired immune deficiency syndrome; HIV, human immunodeficiency virus; SD, standard deviation.

Rare diseases  0.14
Mean (SD)4.4 (0.6)4.7 (0.6) 
Median45 
Complex patients  0.83
Mean (SD)4.3 (0.6)4.3 (0.6) 
Median44 
Acutely ill or unstable  0.18
Mean (SD)4.3 (0.7)3.9 (0.9) 
Median44 
Unique physical findings  0.18
Mean (SD)4.1 (0.8)4.5 (0.6) 
Median45 
Transfers from other hospitals  0.003
Mean (SD)4.1 (1.0)3.5 (0.5) 
Median43 
Cases that might be written up or presented  0.03
Mean (SD)4.1 (0.7)4.6 (0.6) 
Median45 
Older patients  <0.001
Mean (SD)3.9 (0.8)3.0 (0.7) 
Median43 
Time of day of admission  0.50
Mean (SD)3.9 (1.1)3.7 (0.9) 
Median44 
Patients with cancer  0.01
Mean (SD)3.9 (0.9)3.3 (0.5) 
Median43 
Variety of pathology  0.21
Mean (SD)3.9 (0.8)4.2 (0.7) 
Median44 
Patients whose admissions are expected to take more time  0.13
Mean (SD)3.9 (1.0)3.4 (0.9) 
Median43 
HIV or AIDS  0.008
Mean (SD)3.8 (0.9)4.5 (0.5) 
Median44.5 
Variety of complexity  0.31
Mean (SD)3.7 (0.9)3.9 (0.6) 
Median3.54 
Bread‐and‐butter cases  0.07
Mean (SD)3.6 (1.0)2.9 (1.2) 
Median33 
First‐time Mayo patients  0.82
Mean (SD)3.6 (0.9)3.5 (0.7) 
Median33 
Patients with functional or chronic pain  0.004
Mean (SD)3.6 (1.0)2.8 (0.7) 
Median43 
Social admissions or placement issues  0.03
Mean (SD)3.5 (1.2)2.7 (0.9) 
Median43 
Variety of acuity  0.25
Mean (SD)3.5 (0.8)3.7 (0.6) 
Median34 
Difficult patients and families  0.03
Mean (SD)3.4 (0.9)2.8 (0.7) 
Median33 
Patients at end of life  0.10
Mean (SD)3.4 (0.8)3.0 (0.5) 
Median33 
Spectrum of ages  0.80
Mean (SD)3.3 (0.7)3.3 (0.6) 
Median33 
Patients with a history of psychiatric illness  0.81
Mean (SD)3.3 (0.9)3.1 (0.6) 
Median33 
Patients with a history of transplantation  0.25
Mean (SD)3.2 (0.9)3.5 (0.5) 
Median33 
Patients who require a translator  0.60
Mean (SD)3.2 (0.7)3.2 (0.6) 
Median33 
Younger patients  0.42
Mean (SD)3.0 (0.9)3.1 (0.4) 
Median33 
Benefactors and public figures  0.09
Mean (SD)2.9 (1.0)2.3 (0.7) 
Median32 
Straightforward patients  0.18
Mean (SD)2.8 (1.0)2.4 (1.0) 
Median2.52 
Stable patients  0.53
Mean (SD)2.7 (1.0)2.8 (0.7) 
Median33 

Comparing resident survey ratings for ideal versus actual triage decisions gave some insight into the features that they thought were inappropriately emphasized or ignored when triage decisions were made. Differences in resident scores for ideal versus actual admissions were significantly different for 16 of 28 items (data available upon request), suggesting a degree of perceived discordance. The largest positive differences (ie, features they valued in teaching admissions but thought were less represented in actual admissions) were for bread‐and‐butter admissions, variety of pathology, a spectrum of ages, and variety of acuity. The largest negative differences (ie, features they thought were well represented in actual admissions but were less valuable) were for social admissions or placement issues, transfers from other hospitals, patients with functional or chronic pain, and patients whose admissions were expected to take more time.

In terms of ideal versus actual triage decisions, faculty reported less discordance than residents; ideal and actual triage behavior differed significantly only for 4 of 28 items (data available upon request). They did agree with residents about the relative lack of bread‐and‐butter admissions and the over‐representation of social admissions or placement issues and transfers from other hospitals. They additionally noted a lack of straightforward cases.

We reviewed records of the 1426 patients admitted to the internal medicine services during the study period. Of these, 359 (25.2%) were assigned to the teaching services. Patient characteristics are summarized in Table 4.

Characteristics of Patients Admitted to the Internal Medicine Services (N=1,426)
CharacteristicTeaching Service, n=359Nonteaching Service, n=1,067P Value
  • NOTE: Abbreviations: SD, standard deviation.

Age, y, mean (SD)66.7 (16.5)69.3 (15.7)0.008
Admission type, No. (%)  0.049
Admission from the emergency department315 (87.7)915 (85.8)0.34
Direct admission from Mayo outpatient clinic27 (7.5)114 (10.7)0.08
Transfer from another institution16 (4.5)27 (2.5)0.06
Internal transfer from a different hospital service1 (0.3)11 (1.0)0.31
First‐time Mayo patient, No. (%)61 (17.0)175 (16.4)0.79
Prior hematology or oncology visit, No. (%)86 (24.0)235 (22.0)0.45
History of transplantation, No. (%)20 (5.6)52 (4.9)0.60
Prior psychiatry visit, No. (%)53 (14.8)122 (11.4)0.10
History of chronic or functional pain, No. (%)122 (34.0)330 (30.9)0.28
Required translator, No. (%)5 (1.4)14 (1.3)0.91
Benefactor, No. (%)5 (1.4)24 (2.2)0.32
Charlson comorbidity score, mean (SD)2.7 (2.5)2.6 (2.5)0.49

DISCUSSION

The results of our qualitative and quantitative surveys showed significant differences between resident and staff perceptions of the faculty triage role. Although both groups similarly valued many features, residents expressed a clear preference for more bread‐and‐butter admissions, whereas the staff prioritized selecting the most complex, challenging, and rare cases from among the day's admissions to give to the residents. (Residents were also very interested in rare cases, suggesting that they saw benefit to admitting patients with a variety of degrees of rarity and complexity.) Residents and faculty seemed to agree that the number of social admissions and outside transfers admitted to teaching services was not ideal.

These perceptions have substantial implications. If the current triage process is to continue, there may be benefit to designing a faculty development project focused on the triage process, which previously has been largely unexamined. Efforts to remove or limit time barriers that prevent perceived educational cases from being admitted to teaching services is also a worthy endeavor (eg, structuring the 2 teams to admit simultaneously so that teaching teams can admit patients back to back without exceeding capacity). In addition, residents may benefit from teaching hospitalists who concentrate educational efforts on the learning that can be extracted from the care of any patient, including admissions that initially seem mundane or purely social.[14] A concerted effort to divert more traditional medicine admissions and fewer unusual cases to the teaching service might improve resident perceptions of the triage process. Further, although the care of any patient can have education benefit, the fact that both groups perceived excessive social admissions in the teaching service suggests that a potential benefit of a nonteaching service (ie, absorbing the most mundane admissions) may not yet be fully realized.

Despite the perceived differences noted on the surveys, we found remarkably few differences between patients admitted to the teaching and nonteaching services. Although both groups rated complexity; outside transfers; being seen at the institution for the first time; and histories of transplantation, cancer, chronic or functional pain, and psychiatric disease as increasing the likelihood of admission to a teaching service, no differences were observed for these factors or their quantifiable surrogates. (Although the overall test for admission type achieved marginal statistical significance, none of the individual admission types were significantly different in post hoc analysis.) Residents, but not faculty, thought that older patients were over‐represented on the teaching service, but their assigned patients were significantly younger than those on the nonteaching service.

These findings have several possible explanations. First, although most hospitalists spend time on teaching and nonteaching services (and therefore are familiar with the patient composition of each), residents get very little exposure to the nonteaching services (until they are senior residents with a rotation on a consulting service). Their impression of inequity may be due to misunderstanding the patient composition of the nonteaching services. Second, the mere existence of a triage role may create false expectations about patient composition; that is, simply by knowing that every admission was chosen for its educational merit, residents may have disproportionate perceptions about those cases judged to have less educational value, even ifas our data suggestassignments to teaching versus nonteaching services are occurring fairly equitably.

Study Limitations

We acknowledge several limitations of our study. First, many factors that were reported as important in the qualitative survey did not lend themselves to objective abstraction from patient records. For example, providers did not specifically document when an admission is purely social, nor was there an objective way to identify difficult patients or families or admissions that were expected to take more time. We attempted to limit the analysis to objective patient metrics that were (1) not influenced by the teaching or nonteaching assignment itself (eg, we avoided discharge diagnoses, which might be entered differently by residents and staff hospitalists) and (2) easily available to triage hospitalists. For the latter reason, we used a prior appointment in the hematology or oncology clinic as a surrogate for cancer patients and a prior psychiatry visit as a surrogate for patients with a history of psychiatric disease. These are naturally inexact surrogates, but they reflect the information a busy hospitalist is likely to access when making patient assignment decisions.

Second, it may well be that assigning patients equitably according to a certain trait is not the same as assigning patients ideally for the educational needs of residents. The patients admitted to our medicine services (teaching and nonteaching) were generally older than 60 years, had complex diagnoses, and had substantial pain. Residents on the teaching services potentially would benefit from an intentionally unbalanced admission policy that shunted patients to the teaching services on the basis of features other than individual perceived educational merit. It must also be borne in mind that resident, and for that matter faculty, perceptions of ideal teaching cases are likely inexact correlates of educational best practices; the ideal role of the triage hospitalist is to admit to the teaching services those patients that will best advance the education of the learners, including a consideration of the goals and objectives of the rotation. Future studies correlating different triage practices to actual educational outcomes would be very helpful.

Third, the analysis could not reliably eliminate patients whose admissions did not represent genuine triage decisions (eg, those assigned to the hospitalist service after the teaching service had reached its capacity or immediately after they had received a complex case). Studying admission decisions prospectively could eliminate this variability, but it could introduce a Hawthorne effect, the negative effects of which likely would outweigh this benefit.

CONCLUSION

Triage hospitalists distributed patients fairly evenly between teaching and nonteaching services, but residents and faculty alike perceived that residents would benefit from more bread‐and‐butter cases. Hospitals considering the addition of a nonteaching service may want to incorporate a faculty development project focused on the triage process to ensure that these traditional medicine cases are assigned to resident services and to ensure that the great teaching case is not considered such because of complexity and acuity alone.

Acknowledgements

The authors thank Elizabeth Jones and Lois Bell for their assistance with survey collection and collation.

Disclosures: This study (institutional review board application #11‐3;002635) was deemed exempt by the Mayo Clinic institutional review board on May 16, 2011. The authors report no conflicts of interest.

The advent of work‐hour restrictions and admission limits for teaching services has led many academic hospitals to implement hospitalist‐run staff (ie, nonteaching) services.[1] Although this practice is not new,[2] it is growing in popularity[3] and has been endorsed as a way to protect resident teaching and prevent excessive workload.[4] One potential benefit is the assignment of more educational cases to teaching services, whereas the nonteaching services receive more patients whose care is presumably relatively mundane or routine.[5]

Despite the rapid growth of this system of educational triage,[6] little is known about the factors considered when teaching versus nonteaching decisions are made. Studies of clinical outcomes for patients assigned to teaching versus nonteaching services have understandably used random assignment,[7, 8] whereas a study finding that patients with unhealthy substance use were more likely to be on teaching services than nonteaching services relied on patient assignment based on the identity of the patient's primary care provider or insurer.[9] In 2009, O'Connor et al. reported that implementation of nonteaching services at 2 hospitals had led to unequal distribution of patients in terms of demographics, diagnosis, and illness severity.[10] Triage decisions were made by either a nurse coordinator or a medical chief resident, and sicker patients (and occasionally good teaching cases) were preferentially placed on the teaching services, reportedly out of respect for the comfort level of the midlevel providers who staffed the nonteaching services.

Our institution has used a system of hospitalist educational triage since 1998. Over that time, residents have often expressed concerns about the assignment of patients to the teaching services, reporting in particular that they receive a disproportionate number of complex cases and outside transfers. In 2006, the hospitalist group attempted to address these concerns by collecting real‐time admission data, but the application of the data was limited by suspicion on both sides of a Hawthorne effect (data not published).

If trainee and hospitalist expectations for what constitutes a great teaching case differ substantially, that difference can have significant implications for resident and medical student teaching, self‐perceived roles, and satisfaction. More significantly, an understanding of what faculty perceive as ideal teaching cases would provide valuable information about the strengths and weaknesses of the teachingnonteaching model, which may prove useful to other academic institutions considering such a system. In this study, we endeavored to understand what residents and hospitalists consider an educational admission and to compare these expectations to the actual triage decisions of hospitalists.

METHODS

Mayo Clinic Hospital (Phoenix, Arizona) has used separate teaching and nonteaching services since opening in 1998. At our institution, like many others,[11] a hospitalist is assigned to take all calls for emergency department (ED) admissions, admissions from outpatient clinics, and transfer requests; this physician directs patients to the teaching or nonteaching service. At the time of our study, the 2 teaching services alternated days in which they admitted up to 7 patients, and the 5 nonteaching services admitted all other patients and provided medicine consultative services for the hospital. Teaching services consisted of 1 hospitalist, 2 senior residents, 2 or 3 first‐year residents, and sometimes 1 third‐ or fourth‐year medical student. Nonteaching services consisted of a hospitalist with intermittent assistance from a physician assistant or nurse practitioner.

Although there are no formal guidelines for the hospitalist triage role, hospitalists are encouraged to assign more educational cases to the teaching services and to allow the residents enough time to address the acute needs of the prior admission before receiving the next admission. Residents are not assigned any patients between 4:00 am and 7:00 am. The goals and objectives for the resident rotation on the medicine teaching service include a list of diagnoses with which residents are expected to become familiar during their residency; triage hospitalists have on‐line access to these goals and objectives.

To assess resident and hospitalist opinions about what types of patients should or should not be admitted to teaching services and to compare those characteristics with those of the patients actually admitted to teaching services, we began by administering a simple, open‐ended survey and asked both groups: (1) In an ideal world, what kinds of patients should be admitted to the internal medicine teaching services at Mayo Clinic Hospital? (2) In the real world, what kinds of patients are admitted to the internal medicine teaching services at Mayo Clinic Hospital?

Ample space was provided for free‐text entries. Residents were additionally asked their postgraduate year level. The survey was administered in April 2011, at which time all residents would have rotated on the medicine teaching services several times. Survey responses were anonymous and were compiled and retyped by someone unfamiliar with the subjects' handwriting.

Two authors (D.L.R. and H.R.L.) reviewed the results of the first survey and used conventional content analysis to group responses into categories and tally them.[12] Responses from hospitalists and residents were used to determine the content for a second, quantitative survey that asked respondents to rate specific possible factors that affected triage decisions on a Likert scale from 1 (Argues against teaching admission) to 5 (Argues for teaching admission). The second survey, administered to the same residents and hospitalists in May 2011, asked: (1) In an ideal world, how do these factors contribute to the decision about which patients should be admitted to the internal medicine teaching services at Mayo Clinic Hospital? (2) In the real world, how do these factors contribute to the decision about which patients are admitted to the internal medicine teaching services at Mayo Clinic Hospital?

Assuming a 3:1 ratio of nonteaching to teaching admissions, we calculated that we would need to analyze 1028 admissions to detect a 10% difference in the proportion of a specific trait present in 50% of patients admitted to the nonteaching service, with the use of a 2‐sided test with 80% statistical power and a significance level of 0.05.

We collected data on patient assignment via retrospective chart review to avoid the possibility of a Hawthorne effect. We studied all admissions to the internal medicine services for a 3‐month period before the administration of the first survey (January 1, 2011 through March 31, 2011). The following patient data were collected: service assignment (teaching vs nonteaching), age, sex, source of admission (ED, direct from clinic, outside transfer, internal transfer from another hospital service), first visit to our institution, prior hematology or oncology visit at our institution (as a surrogate for cancer), prior psychiatry visit at our institution (as a surrogate for psychiatric disease), transplantation history, human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) or acquired immune deficiency syndrome (AIDS) history, chronic or functional pain mentioned in ED or admission note, need for translator, and benefactor status. Additionally, an online calculator was used to determine the Charlson Comorbidity Index score for each patient.[13] We collected actual patient data corresponding to factors reported by survey respondents whenever possible and practical, but not every factor reported by survey respondents was amenable to rigorous analysis; for example, no unbiased method could be devised to rigorously categorize patients whose admissions are likely to take more time or difficult patients and families.

Responses to the second (quantitative) survey and patient data were compared using the Pearson [2] and Fisher exact test for categorical variables and the Student t test or Wilcoxon rank sum test for continuous variables. Categorical variables that achieved statistical significance for overall difference were analyzed on a post hoc basis using the Bonferroni method to control for the overall type I error rate. We also examined the differences between actual and ideal triage decisions using the Wilcoxon signed rank test. Data were analyzed using SAS 9.3 (SAS Institute, Inc., Cary, NC). Statistical significance was defined as P<0.05.

The project was deemed exempt by the Mayo Clinic institutional review board.

RESULTS

We surveyed all categorical internal medicine residents (n=30, 10 each from postgraduate year [PGY]‐1, PGY‐2, and PGY‐3) and hospitalists except the authors (n=21; average years since completing training=13.3; range, 129 years). For both surveys, responses were collected from 29 (96.7%) residents. The nonresponding resident was a PGY‐2. The response rate for hospitalists was 20/21 (95.2%) for the first survey and 16/21 (76.2%) for the second survey.

First Survey

Table 1 compares the most frequent resident and faculty responses to the initial, open‐ended survey about what types of patients should or should not be admitted to teaching services. Residents most commonly indicated that ideal patients were traditional medicine cases (ie, bread‐and‐butter admissions, with 13 residents using that exact phrase), and others supplied specific examples of such cases, including chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, pneumonia, diabetic ketoacidosis, congestive heart failure, chest pain, and gastrointestinal tract bleeding. Only 1 faculty member mentioned bread‐and‐butter admissions, although several listed examples like chest pain and pneumonia. A smaller number of residents pointed to the importance of rare cases, whereas faculty considered rare cases to be ideal for teaching services, followed by variety of pathology and complexity.

Most Frequent Resident and Faculty Responses to an Open‐Ended Survey About Types of Patients Admitted (Ideal vs Actual)
 Residents (n=29)Faculty (n=20)
QuestionCharacteristicNo. (%)CharacteristicNo. (%)
  • NOTE: Abbreviations: AIDS, acquired immunodeficiency syndrome; HIV, human immunodeficiency virus.

  • Similar responses were grouped via content analysis.

  • Specific examples cited include chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, pneumonia, diabetic ketoacidosis, congestive heart failure, chest pain, and gastrointestinal tract bleeding.

In an ideal world, what kinds of patients should be admitted to the internal medicine teaching services at Mayo Clinic Hospital?Bread‐and butter admissionsb14 (44.8)Rare cases9 (45.0)
Rare cases9 (31.0)Variety of pathology7 (35.0)
No social admissions7 (24.1)Complex cases5 (25.0)
New diagnoses instead of chronic management4 (13.8)Variety of complexity5 (25.0)
Variety of complexity4 (13.8)Patients with HIV/AIDS3 (15.0)
Diagnostic dilemmas3 (15.0)
New diagnoses instead of chronic management3 (15.0)
In the real world, what kinds of patients are admitted to the internal medicine teaching services at Mayo Clinic Hospital?Patients with cancer11 (37.9)Complex patients6 (30.0)
Complex patients10 (34.5)Difficult patients5 (25.0)
Social admissions9 (31.0)Patients whose admissions are expected to be time consuming5 (25.0)
Acutely ill patients6 (20.7)Rare cases3 (15.0)
Variety of pathology6 (20.7)Cases determined by the time of day3 (15.0)

With regard to actual admissions, residents and faculty agreed that they often were complex, but residents were more likely to suggest high rates of patients with cancer (11 residents vs 2 hospitalists) and social admissions (9 residents vs 2 hospitalists). Four residents each believed that they preferentially received elderly patients, outside transfers, and patients with functional pain, and 2 perceived a disproportionate number of patients making their first visit to Mayo Clinic. One hospitalist believed that residents were more likely to receive non‐English speakers.

Second Survey

Table 2 compares the resident and faculty responses to the second, numerical survey regarding ideal admissions to the teaching services. In contrast to the first survey, residents prioritized rare cases as the feature they most associated with ideal teaching admissions. They also placed a premium on variety of pathology, patients with unique findings, and patients likely to be written up or presented. The patients they believed were least appropriate for a teaching service were social admissions or those with placement issues, patients with functional or chronic pain, and benefactors or public figures.

Resident and Faculty Survey Responses Regarding Ideal Admissions to Teaching Services
FactorResident, n=29Faculty, n=16P Value
  • NOTE: Participants rated each factor on a Likert scale from 1 (Argues against teaching admission) to 5 (Argues for teaching admission), with 3 representing No impact on admission decision. Abbreviations: AIDS, acquired immune deficiency syndrome; HIV, human immunodeficiency virus; SD, standard deviation.

Rare diseases  0.22
Mean (SD)4.8 (0.5)4.9 (0.3) 
Median55 
Variety of pathology  0.22
Mean (SD)4.7 (0.5)4.5 (0.5) 
Median55 
Cases that might be written up or presented  0.35
Mean (SD)4.7 (0.5)4.8 (0.6) 
Median55 
Bread‐and‐butter cases  0.001
Mean (SD)4.6 (0.7)3.7 (0.9) 
Median54 
Unique physical findings  0.67
Mean (SD)4.6 (0.6)4.7 (0.5) 
Median55 
Variety of complexity  0.21
Mean (SD)4.3 (0.7)4.1 (0.6) 
Median44 
Variety of acuity  0.40
Mean (SD)4.2 (0.7)4.1 (0.7) 
Median44 
Spectrum of ages  0.046
Mean (SD)4.1 (0.8)3.6 (0.8) 
Median43 
HIV or AIDS  0.39
Mean (SD)4.1 (0.9)4.4 (0.5) 
Median44 
Acutely ill or unstable  0.54
Mean (SD)4.0 (0.9)3.9 (0.6) 
Median44 
Complex patients  0.94
Mean (SD)4.0 (0.8)3.9 (0.6) 
Median44 
Patients at end of life  0.16
Mean (SD)3.5 (0.8)3.1 (0.6) 
Median33 
First‐time Mayo patients  0.45
Mean (SD)3.5 (0.7)3.3 (0.5) 
Median33 
Younger patients  0.50
Mean (SD)3.5 (0.9)3.3 (0.6) 
Median33 
Stable patients  0.21
Mean (SD)3.3 (0.8)3.1 (0.3) 
Median33 
Patients with cancer  0.67
Mean (SD)3.3 (0.8)3.1 (0.4) 
Median33 
Straightforward patients  0.64
Mean (SD)3.2 (0.8)3.1 (0.8) 
Median33 
Older patients  0.73
Mean (SD)3.2 (0.7)3.1 (0.3) 
Median33 
Patients with a history of transplantation  0.67
Mean (SD)3.1 (1.1)3.3 (0.6) 
Median33 
Time of day of admission  0.71
Mean (SD)3.1 (1.0)3.1 (0.5) 
Median33 
Patients with a history of psychiatric illness  0.59
Mean (SD)3.1 (1.0)3.1 (0.6) 
Median33 
Patients who require a translator  0.49
Mean (SD)3.0 (0.9)3.1 (0.5) 
Median33 
Patients whose admissions are expected to take more time  0.13
Mean (SD)2.9 (0.8)3.2 (0.6) 
Median33 
Difficult patients and families  0.55
Mean (SD)2.8 (1.0)2.6 (0.8) 
Median33 
Transfers from other hospitals  0.11
Mean (SD)2.7 (1.1)3.1 (0.3) 
Median33 
Benefactors and public figures  0.49
Mean (SD)2.7 (1.0)2.5 (0.7) 
Median33 
Patients with functional or chronic pain  0.87
Mean (SD)2.4 (1.1)2.4 (1.0)
Median23 
Social admissions or placement issues  0.99
Mean (SD)2.1 (1.1)2.0 (1.0) 
Median22 

Faculty prioritized many of the same features for ideal teaching cases as residents; 4 of their 5 highest‐scoring factors were the same (rare diseases, patients whose cases might be written up or presented, patients with unique physical findings, and variety of pathology). They also agreed on the least ideal features (social admissions or placement issues, patients with functional or chronic pain, and benefactors or public figures). The only significant differences between resident and faculty ratings for ideal teaching cases were for bread‐and‐butter cases and a spectrum of ages.

Discordance between resident and faculty survey responses on actual admission decisions (Table 3) was starker; residents rated several features significantly higher than faculty as features contributing to triage decisions including older patients; patients with functional or chronic pain, social admissions, or placement issues; patients with cancer; transfers from other hospitals; and difficult patients and families. Relative to residents, faculty reported that patients with HIV or AIDS, and patients whose cases were likely to be written up or presented, were more likely to be admitted to teaching services.

Resident and Faculty Survey Responses Regarding Actual Admissions to Teaching Services
FactorResident, n=29Faculty, n=16P Value
  • NOTE: Participants rated each factor on a Likert scale from 1 (Argues against teaching admission) to 5 (Argues for teaching admission), with 3 representing No impact on admission decision. Abbreviations: AIDS, acquired immune deficiency syndrome; HIV, human immunodeficiency virus; SD, standard deviation.

Rare diseases  0.14
Mean (SD)4.4 (0.6)4.7 (0.6) 
Median45 
Complex patients  0.83
Mean (SD)4.3 (0.6)4.3 (0.6) 
Median44 
Acutely ill or unstable  0.18
Mean (SD)4.3 (0.7)3.9 (0.9) 
Median44 
Unique physical findings  0.18
Mean (SD)4.1 (0.8)4.5 (0.6) 
Median45 
Transfers from other hospitals  0.003
Mean (SD)4.1 (1.0)3.5 (0.5) 
Median43 
Cases that might be written up or presented  0.03
Mean (SD)4.1 (0.7)4.6 (0.6) 
Median45 
Older patients  <0.001
Mean (SD)3.9 (0.8)3.0 (0.7) 
Median43 
Time of day of admission  0.50
Mean (SD)3.9 (1.1)3.7 (0.9) 
Median44 
Patients with cancer  0.01
Mean (SD)3.9 (0.9)3.3 (0.5) 
Median43 
Variety of pathology  0.21
Mean (SD)3.9 (0.8)4.2 (0.7) 
Median44 
Patients whose admissions are expected to take more time  0.13
Mean (SD)3.9 (1.0)3.4 (0.9) 
Median43 
HIV or AIDS  0.008
Mean (SD)3.8 (0.9)4.5 (0.5) 
Median44.5 
Variety of complexity  0.31
Mean (SD)3.7 (0.9)3.9 (0.6) 
Median3.54 
Bread‐and‐butter cases  0.07
Mean (SD)3.6 (1.0)2.9 (1.2) 
Median33 
First‐time Mayo patients  0.82
Mean (SD)3.6 (0.9)3.5 (0.7) 
Median33 
Patients with functional or chronic pain  0.004
Mean (SD)3.6 (1.0)2.8 (0.7) 
Median43 
Social admissions or placement issues  0.03
Mean (SD)3.5 (1.2)2.7 (0.9) 
Median43 
Variety of acuity  0.25
Mean (SD)3.5 (0.8)3.7 (0.6) 
Median34 
Difficult patients and families  0.03
Mean (SD)3.4 (0.9)2.8 (0.7) 
Median33 
Patients at end of life  0.10
Mean (SD)3.4 (0.8)3.0 (0.5) 
Median33 
Spectrum of ages  0.80
Mean (SD)3.3 (0.7)3.3 (0.6) 
Median33 
Patients with a history of psychiatric illness  0.81
Mean (SD)3.3 (0.9)3.1 (0.6) 
Median33 
Patients with a history of transplantation  0.25
Mean (SD)3.2 (0.9)3.5 (0.5) 
Median33 
Patients who require a translator  0.60
Mean (SD)3.2 (0.7)3.2 (0.6) 
Median33 
Younger patients  0.42
Mean (SD)3.0 (0.9)3.1 (0.4) 
Median33 
Benefactors and public figures  0.09
Mean (SD)2.9 (1.0)2.3 (0.7) 
Median32 
Straightforward patients  0.18
Mean (SD)2.8 (1.0)2.4 (1.0) 
Median2.52 
Stable patients  0.53
Mean (SD)2.7 (1.0)2.8 (0.7) 
Median33 

Comparing resident survey ratings for ideal versus actual triage decisions gave some insight into the features that they thought were inappropriately emphasized or ignored when triage decisions were made. Differences in resident scores for ideal versus actual admissions were significantly different for 16 of 28 items (data available upon request), suggesting a degree of perceived discordance. The largest positive differences (ie, features they valued in teaching admissions but thought were less represented in actual admissions) were for bread‐and‐butter admissions, variety of pathology, a spectrum of ages, and variety of acuity. The largest negative differences (ie, features they thought were well represented in actual admissions but were less valuable) were for social admissions or placement issues, transfers from other hospitals, patients with functional or chronic pain, and patients whose admissions were expected to take more time.

In terms of ideal versus actual triage decisions, faculty reported less discordance than residents; ideal and actual triage behavior differed significantly only for 4 of 28 items (data available upon request). They did agree with residents about the relative lack of bread‐and‐butter admissions and the over‐representation of social admissions or placement issues and transfers from other hospitals. They additionally noted a lack of straightforward cases.

We reviewed records of the 1426 patients admitted to the internal medicine services during the study period. Of these, 359 (25.2%) were assigned to the teaching services. Patient characteristics are summarized in Table 4.

Characteristics of Patients Admitted to the Internal Medicine Services (N=1,426)
CharacteristicTeaching Service, n=359Nonteaching Service, n=1,067P Value
  • NOTE: Abbreviations: SD, standard deviation.

Age, y, mean (SD)66.7 (16.5)69.3 (15.7)0.008
Admission type, No. (%)  0.049
Admission from the emergency department315 (87.7)915 (85.8)0.34
Direct admission from Mayo outpatient clinic27 (7.5)114 (10.7)0.08
Transfer from another institution16 (4.5)27 (2.5)0.06
Internal transfer from a different hospital service1 (0.3)11 (1.0)0.31
First‐time Mayo patient, No. (%)61 (17.0)175 (16.4)0.79
Prior hematology or oncology visit, No. (%)86 (24.0)235 (22.0)0.45
History of transplantation, No. (%)20 (5.6)52 (4.9)0.60
Prior psychiatry visit, No. (%)53 (14.8)122 (11.4)0.10
History of chronic or functional pain, No. (%)122 (34.0)330 (30.9)0.28
Required translator, No. (%)5 (1.4)14 (1.3)0.91
Benefactor, No. (%)5 (1.4)24 (2.2)0.32
Charlson comorbidity score, mean (SD)2.7 (2.5)2.6 (2.5)0.49

DISCUSSION

The results of our qualitative and quantitative surveys showed significant differences between resident and staff perceptions of the faculty triage role. Although both groups similarly valued many features, residents expressed a clear preference for more bread‐and‐butter admissions, whereas the staff prioritized selecting the most complex, challenging, and rare cases from among the day's admissions to give to the residents. (Residents were also very interested in rare cases, suggesting that they saw benefit to admitting patients with a variety of degrees of rarity and complexity.) Residents and faculty seemed to agree that the number of social admissions and outside transfers admitted to teaching services was not ideal.

These perceptions have substantial implications. If the current triage process is to continue, there may be benefit to designing a faculty development project focused on the triage process, which previously has been largely unexamined. Efforts to remove or limit time barriers that prevent perceived educational cases from being admitted to teaching services is also a worthy endeavor (eg, structuring the 2 teams to admit simultaneously so that teaching teams can admit patients back to back without exceeding capacity). In addition, residents may benefit from teaching hospitalists who concentrate educational efforts on the learning that can be extracted from the care of any patient, including admissions that initially seem mundane or purely social.[14] A concerted effort to divert more traditional medicine admissions and fewer unusual cases to the teaching service might improve resident perceptions of the triage process. Further, although the care of any patient can have education benefit, the fact that both groups perceived excessive social admissions in the teaching service suggests that a potential benefit of a nonteaching service (ie, absorbing the most mundane admissions) may not yet be fully realized.

Despite the perceived differences noted on the surveys, we found remarkably few differences between patients admitted to the teaching and nonteaching services. Although both groups rated complexity; outside transfers; being seen at the institution for the first time; and histories of transplantation, cancer, chronic or functional pain, and psychiatric disease as increasing the likelihood of admission to a teaching service, no differences were observed for these factors or their quantifiable surrogates. (Although the overall test for admission type achieved marginal statistical significance, none of the individual admission types were significantly different in post hoc analysis.) Residents, but not faculty, thought that older patients were over‐represented on the teaching service, but their assigned patients were significantly younger than those on the nonteaching service.

These findings have several possible explanations. First, although most hospitalists spend time on teaching and nonteaching services (and therefore are familiar with the patient composition of each), residents get very little exposure to the nonteaching services (until they are senior residents with a rotation on a consulting service). Their impression of inequity may be due to misunderstanding the patient composition of the nonteaching services. Second, the mere existence of a triage role may create false expectations about patient composition; that is, simply by knowing that every admission was chosen for its educational merit, residents may have disproportionate perceptions about those cases judged to have less educational value, even ifas our data suggestassignments to teaching versus nonteaching services are occurring fairly equitably.

Study Limitations

We acknowledge several limitations of our study. First, many factors that were reported as important in the qualitative survey did not lend themselves to objective abstraction from patient records. For example, providers did not specifically document when an admission is purely social, nor was there an objective way to identify difficult patients or families or admissions that were expected to take more time. We attempted to limit the analysis to objective patient metrics that were (1) not influenced by the teaching or nonteaching assignment itself (eg, we avoided discharge diagnoses, which might be entered differently by residents and staff hospitalists) and (2) easily available to triage hospitalists. For the latter reason, we used a prior appointment in the hematology or oncology clinic as a surrogate for cancer patients and a prior psychiatry visit as a surrogate for patients with a history of psychiatric disease. These are naturally inexact surrogates, but they reflect the information a busy hospitalist is likely to access when making patient assignment decisions.

Second, it may well be that assigning patients equitably according to a certain trait is not the same as assigning patients ideally for the educational needs of residents. The patients admitted to our medicine services (teaching and nonteaching) were generally older than 60 years, had complex diagnoses, and had substantial pain. Residents on the teaching services potentially would benefit from an intentionally unbalanced admission policy that shunted patients to the teaching services on the basis of features other than individual perceived educational merit. It must also be borne in mind that resident, and for that matter faculty, perceptions of ideal teaching cases are likely inexact correlates of educational best practices; the ideal role of the triage hospitalist is to admit to the teaching services those patients that will best advance the education of the learners, including a consideration of the goals and objectives of the rotation. Future studies correlating different triage practices to actual educational outcomes would be very helpful.

Third, the analysis could not reliably eliminate patients whose admissions did not represent genuine triage decisions (eg, those assigned to the hospitalist service after the teaching service had reached its capacity or immediately after they had received a complex case). Studying admission decisions prospectively could eliminate this variability, but it could introduce a Hawthorne effect, the negative effects of which likely would outweigh this benefit.

CONCLUSION

Triage hospitalists distributed patients fairly evenly between teaching and nonteaching services, but residents and faculty alike perceived that residents would benefit from more bread‐and‐butter cases. Hospitals considering the addition of a nonteaching service may want to incorporate a faculty development project focused on the triage process to ensure that these traditional medicine cases are assigned to resident services and to ensure that the great teaching case is not considered such because of complexity and acuity alone.

Acknowledgements

The authors thank Elizabeth Jones and Lois Bell for their assistance with survey collection and collation.

Disclosures: This study (institutional review board application #11‐3;002635) was deemed exempt by the Mayo Clinic institutional review board on May 16, 2011. The authors report no conflicts of interest.

References
  1. Weinstein DF. Duty hours for resident physicians: tough choices for teaching hospitals. N Engl J Med. 2002;347(16):12751278.
  2. Simmer TL, Nerenz DR, Rutt WM, Newcomb CS, Benfer DW. A randomized, controlled trial of an attending staff service in general internal medicine. Med Care. 1991;29(7 suppl):JS31JS40.
  3. Sehgal NL, Shah HM, Parekh , Roy CL, Williams MV. Non‐housestaff medicine services in academic centers: models and challenges. J Hosp Med. 2008;3(3):247255.
  4. Weinberger SE, Smith LG, Collier VU; Education Committee of the American College of Physicians. Redesigning training for internal medicine. Ann Intern Med. 2006;144(12):927932.
  5. Myers JS, Bellini LM, Rohrbach J, Shofer FS, Hollander JE. Improving resource utilization in a teaching hospital: development of a nonteaching service for chest pain admissions. Acad Med. 2006;81(5):432435.
  6. Howell EE, Bessman ES, Rubin HR. Hospitalists and an innovative emergency department admission process. J Gen Intern Med. 2004;19(3):266268.
  7. Khaliq AA, Huang CY, Ganti AK, Invie K, Smego RA. Comparison of resource utilization and clinical outcomes between teaching and nonteaching medical services. J Hosp Med. 2007;2(3):150157.
  8. Palacio C, Alexandraki I, House J, Mooradian AD. A comparative study of unscheduled hospital readmissions in a resident‐staffed teaching service and a hospitalist‐based service. South Med J. 2009;102(2):145149.
  9. Holt SR, Ramos J, Harma MA, et al. Prevalence of unhealthy substance use on teaching and hospitalist medical services: implications for education. Am J Addict. 2012;21(2):111119.
  10. O'Connor AB, Lang VJ, Lurie SJ, et al. The effect of nonteaching services on the distribution of inpatient cases for internal medicine residents. Acad Med. 2009;84(2):220225.
  11. Darves B. Teaching and nonteaching services: separate no more? Today's Hospitalist website. Available at: http://www.todayshospita list.com/index.php?b=articles_read15(9):12771288.
  12. Charlson comorbidity scoring system: estimating prognosis for dialysis patients. Touchcalc website. Available at: http://www.touchcalc.com/calculators/cci_js#t2_probability. Accessed January 15, 2014.
  13. Fitzgerald FT. Curiosity. Ann Intern Med. 1999;130(1):7071.
References
  1. Weinstein DF. Duty hours for resident physicians: tough choices for teaching hospitals. N Engl J Med. 2002;347(16):12751278.
  2. Simmer TL, Nerenz DR, Rutt WM, Newcomb CS, Benfer DW. A randomized, controlled trial of an attending staff service in general internal medicine. Med Care. 1991;29(7 suppl):JS31JS40.
  3. Sehgal NL, Shah HM, Parekh , Roy CL, Williams MV. Non‐housestaff medicine services in academic centers: models and challenges. J Hosp Med. 2008;3(3):247255.
  4. Weinberger SE, Smith LG, Collier VU; Education Committee of the American College of Physicians. Redesigning training for internal medicine. Ann Intern Med. 2006;144(12):927932.
  5. Myers JS, Bellini LM, Rohrbach J, Shofer FS, Hollander JE. Improving resource utilization in a teaching hospital: development of a nonteaching service for chest pain admissions. Acad Med. 2006;81(5):432435.
  6. Howell EE, Bessman ES, Rubin HR. Hospitalists and an innovative emergency department admission process. J Gen Intern Med. 2004;19(3):266268.
  7. Khaliq AA, Huang CY, Ganti AK, Invie K, Smego RA. Comparison of resource utilization and clinical outcomes between teaching and nonteaching medical services. J Hosp Med. 2007;2(3):150157.
  8. Palacio C, Alexandraki I, House J, Mooradian AD. A comparative study of unscheduled hospital readmissions in a resident‐staffed teaching service and a hospitalist‐based service. South Med J. 2009;102(2):145149.
  9. Holt SR, Ramos J, Harma MA, et al. Prevalence of unhealthy substance use on teaching and hospitalist medical services: implications for education. Am J Addict. 2012;21(2):111119.
  10. O'Connor AB, Lang VJ, Lurie SJ, et al. The effect of nonteaching services on the distribution of inpatient cases for internal medicine residents. Acad Med. 2009;84(2):220225.
  11. Darves B. Teaching and nonteaching services: separate no more? Today's Hospitalist website. Available at: http://www.todayshospita list.com/index.php?b=articles_read15(9):12771288.
  12. Charlson comorbidity scoring system: estimating prognosis for dialysis patients. Touchcalc website. Available at: http://www.touchcalc.com/calculators/cci_js#t2_probability. Accessed January 15, 2014.
  13. Fitzgerald FT. Curiosity. Ann Intern Med. 1999;130(1):7071.
Issue
Journal of Hospital Medicine - 9(8)
Issue
Journal of Hospital Medicine - 9(8)
Page Number
508-514
Page Number
508-514
Article Type
Display Headline
Resident and hospitalist perspectives on the “great teaching case”: Correlation with actual patient assignment decisions
Display Headline
Resident and hospitalist perspectives on the “great teaching case”: Correlation with actual patient assignment decisions
Sections
Article Source

© 2014 Society of Hospital Medicine

Disallow All Ads
Correspondence Location
Address for correspondence and reprint requests: Daniel L. Roberts, MD, Division of Hospital Internal Medicine, Mayo Clinic Hospital, 5777 East Mayo Boulevard, Phoenix, AZ 85054; Telephone: 480‐342‐1387; Fax: 480‐342‐1388; E‐mail: [email protected]
Content Gating
No Gating (article Unlocked/Free)
Alternative CME
Article PDF Media
Media Files