Search

Increasing the number of vaginal birth after cesarean (VBAC) deliveries is one strategy to reduce the cesarean rate in the United States. Despite evidence of its safety, access to trial of labor after cesarean (TOLAC) and VBAC are limited by many clinical and non-clinical factors. We used a scoping review methodology to identify barriers to access of TOLAC and VBAC in the United States and extract potential leverage points from the literature. We searched PubMed, Embase, Cochrane, and CINAHL for peer-reviewed, English-language studies published after 1990, focusing on access to TOLAC and/or VBAC in the United States. Themes and potential leverage points were mapped onto the Minority Health and Health Disparities Research Framework. The search yielded 21 peer-reviewed papers. Barriers varied across levels of influence and included factors related to restrictive clinical guidelines, provider reluctance, geographic disparities, and midwifery scopes of practice. While barriers varied in levels of influence, the majority were related to systemic and interpersonal factors. Barriers to TOLAC and VBAC exist at many levels and are both clinical and non-clinical in nature. The existing body of literature can benefit from more research examining the impact of recent revisions to clinical guidelines related to VBAC as well as additional qualitative studies to more deeply understand the complexity of provider reluctance. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

At the heart of the unparalleled crisis of COVID-19, healthcare workers (HCWs) face several challenges treating patients with COVID-19: reducing the spread of infection; developing suitable short-term strategies; and formulating long-term plans. The psychological burden and overall wellness of HCWs has received heightened awareness in news and research publications. The purpose of this study was to provide a review on current publications measuring the effects of COVID-19 on wellness of healthcare providers to inform interventional strategies. Between April 6–May 17, 2020, we conducted systematic searches using combinations of these keywords and synonyms in conjunction with the controlled vocabulary of the database: “physician,” “wellness, “wellbeing,” “stress,” “burnout,” “COVID-19,” and “SARS-CoV-2.” We excluded articles without original data, research studies regarding the wellness of non-healthcare occupations or the general public exclusively, other outbreaks, or wellness as an epidemic. A total of 37 studies were included in this review. The review of literature revealed consistent reports of stress, anxiety, and depressive symptoms in HCWs as a result of COVID-19. We describe published data on HCW distress and burnout but urge future research on strategies to enhance HCW well-being. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Malpractice in emergency medicine is of high concern for medical providers, the fear of which continues to drive decision-making. The body of evidence evaluating risk specific to emergency physicians is disjointed, and thus it remains difficult to derive cohesive themes and strategies for risk minimization.Objective: This review evaluates the state of malpractice in emergency medicine and summarizes a concise approach for the emergency physician to minimize risk.Discussion: The environment of the emergency department (ED) represents moderate overall malpractice risk and yields a heavy burden in finance and time. Key areas of relatively high litigation occurrence include missed acute myocardial infarction, missed fractures/foreign bodies, abdominal pain/appendicitis, wounds, intracranial bleeding, aortic aneurysm, and pediatric meningitis. Mitigation of risk is best accomplished through constructive communication, intelligent documentation, utilization of clinical practice guidelines and generalizable diagnoses, careful management of discharge against medical advice, and establishing follow-up for diagnostic studies ordered while in the ED (especially x-ray studies). Communication breakdown seems to be more predictive of malpractice litigation than injury experienced.Conclusions: There are consistent diagnoses that are associated with increased litigation incidence. A combination of mitigation approaches may assist providers in mitigation of malpractice risk. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]