Search

As part of an institutional effort to develop an atmosphere of communication and encourage mutual appreciation of respective viewpoints, we used a cross-sectional survey to investigate the perceptions of emergency (EM) and internal medicine (IM) residents and faculty, particularly, their attitudes about collaboration, mutual respect, and mistreatment. This cross-sectional survey was administered to the EM and IM faculty and residents of a county, academic hospital with a Level 1 Trauma Center to evaluate each specialty's current perception of professional behavior and observations of unprofessional behavior in order to identify areas for improvement. The survey items were answered using a 5-point Likert scale and was analyzed using the unpaired t-test. A total of 68 residents and faculty completed the survey, 32 (59.4% residents) from EM and 36 (94.4% residents) from IM. Among all EM and IM clinicians, 48.6% felt that there was a culture of clinical collaboration. Approximately half of the respondents (51.5%) felt that the state of professionalism between the two departments was below that of other departments. About 10% (11.8%) of all respondents reported experiencing unprofessional behaviors from the other department at least once a month. Challenges identified by EM faculty and residents included time to consult, recommendations, and disposition. Challenges identified by IM included difficulty contacting EM providers and lack of communication regarding patient's clinical status changes. Both specialties emphasized the importance of improved patient care transitional processes. This study is an important first look at the prevalence of negative attitudes and misperceptions between EM and IM providers. These perspectives can occur due to breakdown of communication and differing expectations. Such asynchronies can cause a toxic workplace environment, diminished performance, and poor patient outcomes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

To assess complications of condom catheters compared with indwelling urethral catheters, we conducted a prospective cohort study in two Veterans Affairs hospitals. Male patients who used a condom catheter or indwelling urethral catheter during their hospital stay were followed for one month by interview and medical record review. Participants included 36 men who used condom catheters and 44 who used indwelling urethral catheters. At least one catheter-related complication was reported by 80.6% of condom catheter users and 88.6% of indwelling catheter users (P = .32), and noninfectious complications (eg, leaking urine, pain, or discomfort) were more common than infectious complications in both groups. Condom catheter patients were significantly less likely than indwelling catheter patients to report complications during catheter placement (13.9% vs 43.2%; P < .001). Patients reported approximately three times more noninfectious complications than the number recorded in the medical record.