Search

Introduction Teaching on physical examination, especially evidence-based physical diagnosis, is at times lacking on general medicine rounds. We created a hospitalist faculty workshop on teaching evidence-based physical diagnosis. Methods The workshop included a systematic approach to teaching evidence-based physical diagnosis, multiple teaching resources, and observed peer teaching. A long-term follow-up session was offered several months after the workshop. Participants completed questionnaires before and after the workshop as well as after the long-term follow-up session. Results Four workshops were conducted and attended by 28 unique participants. Five hospitalists attended long-term follow-up sessions. Due to the COVID-19 pandemic, repeat sessions and long-term follow-up were limited. In paired analyses compared to preworkshop, respondents after the workshop reported a higher rate of prioritizing ( p = .008), having a systematic approach to ( p < .001), and confidence in ( p = .001) teaching evidence-based physical diagnosis. Compared to before the workshop, participants after the workshop were able to name more resources to inform teaching of evidence-based physical diagnosis ( p < .001). Informal feedback was positive. Respondents noted that the workshop could be improved by allowing more practice of the actual physical exam maneuvers and more observed teaching. Discussion We created and implemented a workshop to train hospitalists in teaching evidence-based physical diagnosis. This workshop led to improvements in faculty attitudes and teaching skills. Long-term outcomes were limited by low participation due in part to the COVID-19 pandemic.

Introduction: Patient handoffs from emergency physicians (EP) to internal medicine (IM) physicians may be complicated by conflict with the potential for adverse outcomes. The objective of this study was to identify the specific types of, and contributors to, conflict between EPs and IM physicians in this context. Methods: We performed a qualitative focus group study using a constructivist grounded theory approach involving emergency medicine (EM) and IM residents and faculty at a large academic medical center. Focus groups assessed perspectives and experiences of EP/IM physician interactions related to patient handoffs. We interpreted data with the matrix analytic method. Results: From May to December 2019, 24 residents (IM = 11, EM = 13) and 11 faculty (IM = 6, EM = 5) from the two departments participated in eight focus groups and two interviews. Two key themes emerged: 1) disagreements about disposition (ie, whether a patient needed to be admitted, should go to an intensive care unit, or required additional testing before transfer to the floor); and 2) contextual factors (ie, the request to discuss an admission being a primer for conflict; lack of knowledge of the other person and their workflow; high clinical workload and volume; and different interdepartmental perspectives on the benefits of a rapid emergency department workflow). Conclusions: Causes of conflict at patient handover between EPs and IM physicians are related primarily to disposition concerns and contextual factors. Using theoretical models of task, process, and relationship conflict, we suggest recommendations to improve the EM/IM interaction to potentially reduce conflict and advance patient care.

BackgroundThe Ebola virus disease (EVD) epidemic has threatened access to basic health services through facility closures, resource diversion, and decreased demand due to community fear and distrust. While modeling studies have attempted to estimate the impact of these disruptions, no studies have yet utilized population-based survey data.Methods and findingsWe conducted a two-stage, cluster-sample household survey in Rivercess County, Liberia, in March-April 2015, which included a maternal and reproductive health module. We constructed a retrospective cohort of births beginning 4 y before the first day of survey administration (beginning March 24, 2011). We then fit logistic regression models to estimate associations between our primary outcome, facility-based delivery (FBD), and time period, defined as the pre-EVD period (March 24, 2011-June 14, 2014) or EVD period (June 15, 2014-April 13, 2015). We fit both univariable and multivariable models, adjusted for known predictors of facility delivery, accounting for clustering using linearized standard errors. To strengthen causal inference, we also conducted stratified analyses to assess changes in FBD by whether respondents believed that health facility attendance was an EVD risk factor. A total of 1,298 women from 941 households completed the survey. Median age at the time of survey was 29 y, and over 80% had a primary education or less. There were 686 births reported in the pre-EVD period and 212 in the EVD period. The unadjusted odds ratio of facility-based delivery in the EVD period was 0.66 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.48-0.90, p-value = 0.010). Adjustment for potential confounders did not change the observed association, either in the principal model (adjusted odds ratio [AOR] = 0.70, 95%CI 0.50-0.98, p = 0.037) or a fully adjusted model (AOR = 0.69, 95%CI 0.50-0.97, p = 0.033). The association was robust in sensitivity analyses. The reduction in FBD during the EVD period was observed among those reporting a belief that health facilities are or may be a source of Ebola transmission (AOR = 0.59, 95%CI 0.36-0.97, p = 0.038), but not those without such a belief (AOR = 0.90, 95%CI 0.59-1.37, p = 0.612). Limitations include the possibility of FBD secular trends coincident with the EVD period, recall errors, and social desirability bias.ConclusionsWe detected a 30% decreased odds of FBD after the start of EVD in a rural Liberian county with relatively few cases. Because health facilities never closed in Rivercess County, this estimate may under-approximate the effect seen in the most heavily affected areas. These are the first population-based survey data to show collateral disruptions to facility-based delivery caused by the West African EVD epidemic, and they reinforce the need to consider the full spectrum of implications caused by public health emergencies.

Objectives: To assess a community health worker (CHW) program's impact on childhood illness treatment in rural Liberia., Methods: We deployed CHWs in half of Rivercess County in August 2015 with the other half constituting a comparison group until July 2016. All CHWs were provided cash incentives, supply chain support, and monthly clinical supervision. We conducted stratified cluster-sample population-based surveys at baseline (March-April 2015) and follow-up (April-June 2016) and performed a difference-in-differences analysis, adjusted by inverse probability of treatment weighting, to assess changes in treatment of fever, diarrhea, and acute respiratory infection by a qualified provider., Results: We estimated a childhood treatment difference-in-differences of 56.4 percentage points (95% confidence interval [CI] = 36.4, 76.3). At follow-up, CHWs provided 57.6% (95% CI = 42.8, 71.2) of treatment in the intervention group. The difference-in-differences diarrhea oral rehydration therapy was 22.4 percentage points (95% CI = -0.7, 45.5)., Conclusions: Implementation of a CHW program in Rivercess County, Liberia, was associated with large, statistically significant improvements treatment by a qualified provider; however, improvements in correct diarrhea treatment were lower than improvements in coverage. Findings from this study offer support for expansion of Liberia's new National Community Health Assistant Program.