Search

BACKGROUND: Training medical students in tobacco prevention and treatment skills is critical if we are to have competent physicians prepared to address the grave levels of morbidity and mortality associated with tobacco use. Tobacco Prevention and Cessation Education at US Medical Schools (PACE), a National Cancer Institute funded project, was launched to assess and improve curriculum content and teaching at 12 US medical schools. METHODS: The 2003 survey was completed by faculty and administrators. The survey was divided into four main sections: tobacco content and skills, curricular evaluation, faculty perceptions of barriers and promoters, and educational vision. RESULTS: Thirty-six percent of all medical school courses had some tobacco-related content. Five schools provided a total of between 4 and 8 hours of teaching, 5 schools provided 10-13 hours, and 2 schools provided 17 and 18 hours of teaching. Of the 12 schools, 8 had fewer hours devoted to tobacco teaching in the clerkships than during the 1st-year courses. Only 2 schools noted any tobacco content for Obstetrics/Gynecology clerkships, and only 4 schools provided teaching in the pediatric setting (range 5-201 minutes). CONCLUSION: In comparison to earlier studies, it appears that more tobacco content is now integrated into medical school courses. More improvement is necessary, however, particularly in tobacco use prevention. Institutions need to examine the role of faculty in prioritizing tobacco information and promoting a culture that builds competency in tobacco control and treatment. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Insomnia affects up to 50% of patients with cancer, but has received little attention from the oncology community compared with other symptoms such as pain and fatigue. Insomnia and subsequent sleep disturbances can lead to fatigue, mood disturbances, and contribute to immunosuppression, which can have a profound impact on quality of life and perhaps affect the course of disease. Insomnia in cancer patients must be distinguished from cancer-related fatigue. Although they are 2 distinct conditions, insomnia and fatigue are interrelated. Insomnia often leads to daytime fatigue that interferes with normal functioning. Conversely, daytime fatigue can lead to behaviors such as napping, which result in insomnia. The primary goal of insomnia treatment should first be to relieve any underlying disorder (eg, cancer pain, depression, anxiety) that may be causing the sleep disturbance. Because insomnia in this patient population may be due to a variety of causes, treatment must be multimodal and include both pharmacologic and nonpharmacologic therapies. A plan that combines attention to sleep hygiene and cognitive-behavioral therapy with prescription of hypnotic medications can help relieve the symptoms of insomnia in cancer patients and improve their quality of life. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This manuscript illustrates general concepts of mentoring in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). The focus of this manuscript is on public health research based on our experiences with the Cancer Epidemiology Education in Special Populations (CEESP) Program which is further illustrated in this Supplement. While the CEESP Program provides research training in global and US minority settings, this manuscript is focused on the global aspects of the program. We describe the process of selecting students into the CEESP Program, the process of mentoring them, and the preparation of the mentoring sites. We emphasize the review of the CEESP mentors in LMICs and put forward recommendations for enhancing their mentoring skills and disseminating the experience to other US and global institutions interested in global cancer education., (© 2021. American Association for Cancer Education.)

Background: Nasal High Flow (NHF) therapy delivers flows of heated humidified gases up to 60 LPM (litres per minute) via a nasal cannula. Particles of oral/nasal fluid released by patients undergoing NHF therapy may pose a cross-infection risk, which is a potential concern for treating COVID-19 patients., Methods: Liquid particles within the exhaled breath of healthy participants were measured with two protocols: (1) high speed camera imaging and counting exhaled particles under high magnification (6 participants) and (2) measuring the deposition of a chemical marker (riboflavin-5-monophosphate) at a distance of 100 and 500 mm on filter papers through which air was drawn (10 participants). The filter papers were assayed with HPLC. Breathing conditions tested included quiet (resting) breathing and vigorous breathing (which here means nasal snorting, voluntary coughing and voluntary sneezing). Unsupported (natural) breathing and NHF at 30 and 60 LPM were compared., Results: Imaging: During quiet breathing, no particles were recorded with unsupported breathing or 30 LPM NHF (detection limit for single particles 33 μm). Particles were detected from 2 of 6 participants at 60 LPM quiet breathing at approximately 10% of the rate caused by unsupported vigorous breathing. Unsupported vigorous breathing released the greatest numbers of particles. Vigorous breathing with NHF at 60 LPM, released half the number of particles compared to vigorous breathing without NHF.Chemical marker tests: No oral/nasal fluid was detected in quiet breathing without NHF (detection limit 0.28 μL/m3). In quiet breathing with NHF at 60 LPM, small quantities were detected in 4 out of 29 quiet breathing tests, not exceeding 17 μL/m3. Vigorous breathing released 200-1000 times more fluid than the quiet breathing with NHF. The quantities detected in vigorous breathing were similar whether using NHF or not., Conclusion: During quiet breathing, 60 LPM NHF therapy may cause oral/nasal fluid to be released as particles, at levels of tens of μL per cubic metre of air. Vigorous breathing (snort, cough or sneeze) releases 200 to 1000 times more oral/nasal fluid than quiet breathing (p < 0.001 with both imaging and chemical marker methods). During vigorous breathing, 60 LPM NHF therapy caused no statistically significant difference in the quantity of oral/nasal fluid released compared to unsupported breathing. NHF use does not increase the risk of dispersing infectious aerosols above the risk of unsupported vigorous breathing. Standard infection prevention and control measures should apply when dealing with a patient who has an acute respiratory infection, independent of which, if any, respiratory support is being used., Clinical Trial Registration: ACTRN12614000924651., Competing Interests: Authors CJS, JFO, RK and PR are employees of the funder, Fisher and Paykel Healthcare. The specific roles of these authors are articulated in the ‘author contributions’ section. YJ and HH carried out statistical analyses under consulting service agreements with Fisher & Paykel Healthcare Ltd. This does not alter our adherence to PLOS ONE policies on sharing data and materials.” I am not aware that the work described in the manuscript has had any impact on product development or marketing, and I am not aware of any affiliation between any of the authors and any manufacturers competing with the funder.

This piece reflects on an innovative project that we undertook: interviewing master physicians across the world of oncology and asking them what was their secret to success. It provides insights into the answers received from over fifty interviews and the process that was followed.

Orthopedic surgery has a long and rich history. While the modern term orthopedics was coined in the 1700s, orthopedic principles were beginning to be developed and used during primitive times. The Egyptians continued these practices, and described ways to recognize and manage common orthopedic conditions. The Greeks and Romans subsequently began to study medicine in a systematic manner, and greatly improved our understanding of orthopedic anatomy and surgical technique. After a period of little progress during the Middle Ages, rapid advancement was noted during the Renaissance, including the description of various injuries, improvements in surgical technique, and development of orthopedic hospitals. Collectively, these advances provided the foundation for modern orthopedics. Currently, orthopedic surgery is a rapidly developing field that has benefited from the works of numerous scholars and surgeons. It is important to recognize the successes and failures of the past, in order to advance research and practice as well as improve patient care and clinical outcomes.

Cancer prevention has been associated with decreased rates of cancer incidence and increased survival. Cancer prevention, however, can have a greater impact if barriers to implementing cancer prevention into practice are removed and opportunities are both fostered and seized. The purpose of this article is to identify barriers and opportunities to cancer prevention in clinical practice and provide recommendations for the future. A multidisciplinary team participated in "The Future Directions Cancer Prevention and Control: Workforce Implications for Training, Practice and Policy" workshop on October 17-18, 2009 at The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center in Houston, TX. During the meeting, the team discussed barriers and opportunities for the implementation of cancer prevention into clinical practice. Further data were collected from peer-reviewed journals and published government and cancer agencies reports. Several issues were identified: (1) The funding allocated to basic cancer prevention research and application is not optimal and less than that for cancer treatment; (2) participation in cancer prevention behaviors and screening practices are lower than desired, especially among the uninsured; (3) a shortage in healthcare professionals is a major challenge in meeting the future needs of cancer prevention; (4) demands on medical schools to balance increased enrollment, incorporate cancer prevention in an already crowded curriculum, and develop faculty are daunting; and (5) healthcare reforms in 2010 provide both opportunities and additional challenges for cancer prevention. Based on the current state of cancer prevention, we formed six recommendations: (1) additional funding for cancer prevention research with a focus on implementation into practice, (2) improved tracking of cancer prevention research funding and the outcomes associated with it, (3) continued monitoring of cancer prevention services participation with emphasis on closing the gap in health disparities, (4) financial and technical assistance to healthcare professional schools for incorporating cancer prevention into curricula, (5) assessment of the current state of technology in cancer prevention care, and (6) the use of effective multidisciplinary teams in cancer prevention care. Improved delivery of cancer prevention services can have a tremendous impact on cancer incidence and survival rates.

Effective communication relevant to preventive services and practices has at its basis the physician's skills in not only basic history taking and data collection but also relationship building, facilitation, negotiation, and partnership. These skills, fundamental to doctor-patient communication, are now routinely and systematically taught in many U.S. medical schools. This article defines and examines a communication model for enhancing the provision and adoption of preventive practices in the primary care setting and discusses teaching that model in the medical school context. Within the office visit, broad areas for communication tasks important to providing preventive services are defined as: (1) the medical interview and preventive counseling; (2) working with patients to change unhealthy behaviors, promote healthy behaviors, and enhance adherence; and (3) communication related to office procedures for screening and prevention. Within each of these areas, communication and counseling skills and approaches are defined, and examples of associated prevention activities are provided. Methods for integrating communication skills for prevention into the medical school curriculum are discussed, and examples at Dartmouth, Brown, and MCP Hahnemann medical schools are presented.