Background

Malignant pleural effusions (MPE) are a frequent cause of dyspnea and discomfort at the end of cancer patients' lives. The tunneled indwelling pleural catheter (TIPC) was approved by the FDA in 1997 and has been investigated as a treatment for MPE.

Objective

To systematically review published data on the efficacy and safety of the TIPC for treatment of MPE.

Design

We searched the MEDLINE, EMBASE, and ISI Web of Science databases to identify studies published through October 2009 that reported outcomes in adult patients with MPE treated with a TIPC. Data were aggregated using summary statistics when outcomes were described in the same way among multiple primary studies.

Main measures

Symptomatic improvement and complications associated with use of the TIPC.

Key results

Nineteen studies with a total of 1,370 patients met criteria for inclusion in the review. Only one randomized study directly compared the TIPC with the current gold standard treatment, pleurodesis. All other studies were case series. Symptomatic improvement was reported in 628/657 patients (95.6%). Quality of life measurements were infrequently reported. Spontaneous pleurodesis occurred in 430/943 patients (45.6%). Serious complications were rare and included empyema in 33/1168 patients (2.8%), pneumothorax requiring a chest tube in 3/51 (5.9%), and unspecified pneumothorax in 17/439 (3.9%). Minor complications included cellulitis in 32/935 (3.4%), obstruction/clogging in 33/895 (3.7%) and unspecified malfunction of the catheter in 11/121 (9.1%). The use of the TIPC was without complication in 517/591 patients (87.5%).

Conclusions

Based on low-quality evidence in the form of case series, the TIPC may improve symptoms for patients with MPE and does not appear to be associated with major complications. Prospective randomized studies comparing the TIPC to pleurodesis are needed before the TIPC can be definitively recommended as a first-line treatment of MPE.

Background

Due to concerns of inadequate primary care access, national agencies like the Health Resources and Services Administration (HRSA) support primary care (PC) residencies. Recent research demonstrates that up to 35% of PC alumni lost interest in PC during residency. These alumni who lost interest noted that their continuity clinic experience influenced their career choice. The purpose of this study was to identify the specific aspects of PC residency experience that influenced career choice.

Methods

We conducted a cross-sectional electronic survey of a PC internal medicine alumni cohort (2000-2015) from a large, academic residency. Our primary predictor was PC career and our primary outcome was influential factors on career choice. We performed chi-squared or Fisher's exact tests for categorical variables and t tests for continuous variables.

Results

Of the 317 PC alumni in the last 15 years, 305 were contacted. One hundred seventy-two (56%) responded with 94 (55%) reporting current careers in PC and 78 (45%) in non-PC fields. Ninety-four percent of respondents expressed interest prior to residency, while only 68% remained interested at the conclusion of residency. Sixty-one percent of PC alumni rated the overall clinic experience as the most influential factor towards their ultimate career choice. The patient-physician relationship was the most frequently endorsed positively influential factor in career choice in both groups (95% of PC alumni, 76% non-PC). There was no difference among all alumni in common frustrations of clinic including clerical duties, encounter documentation, or visit length. Similarly, resident debt did not differ between groups.

Conclusions

Strong interpersonal relationships with patients and clinic mentors were associated with a PC career. These factors may compensate for the reported frustrations of clinic. Enhancing patient and mentor relationships may increase the retention of PC residents in ambulatory careers and may help address the current and projected shortage of primary care physicians.

Background

Night float rotations, where residents admit patients to the hospital, are opportunities for practice-based learning. However, night float residents receive little feedback on their diagnostic and management reasoning, which limits learning.

Aim

Improve night float residents' practice-based learning skills through feedback solicitation and chart review with guided reflection.

Setting/participants

Second- and third-year internal medicine residents on a 1-month night float rotation between January and August 2017.

Program description

Residents performed chart review of a subset of patients they admitted during a night float rotation and completed reflection worksheets detailing patients' clinical courses. Residents solicited feedback regarding their initial management from day team attending physicians and senior residents.

Program evaluation

Sixty-eight of 82 (83%) eligible residents participated in this intervention. We evaluated 248 reflection worksheets using content analysis. Major themes that emerged from chart review included residents' identification of future clinical practice changes, evolution of differential diagnoses, recognition of clinical reasoning gaps, and evaluation of resident-provider interactions.

Discussion

Structured reflection and feedback during night float rotations is an opportunity to improve practice-based learning through lessons on disease progression, clinical reasoning, and communication.

Purpose

Professional and governmental organizations recommend an ideal US physician workforce composed of at least 40 % primary care physicians. They also support primary care residencies to promote careers in primary care. Our study examines the relationship between graduation from a primary care or categorical internal medicine residency program and subsequent career choice.

Methods

We conducted a cross-sectional electronic survey of a cohort of internal medicine residency alumni who graduated between 2001 and 2010 from a large academic center. Our primary predictor was graduation from a primary care versus a categorical internal medicine program and our primary outcome is current career role. We performed chi-square analysis comparing responses of primary care and categorical residents.

Results

We contacted 481 out of 513 alumni, of whom 322 responded (67 %). We compared 106 responses from primary care alumni to 169 responses from categorical alumni. Fifty-four percent of primary care alumni agreed that the majority of their current clinical work is in outpatient primary care vs. 20 % of categorical alumni (p < 0.001). While 92.5 % of primary-care alumni were interested in a primary care career prior to residency, only 63 % remained interested after residency. Thirty of the 34 primary care alumni (88 %) who lost interest in a primary care career during residency agreed that their ambulatory experience during residency influenced their subsequent career choice.

Conclusions

A higher percentage of primary care alumni practice outpatient primary care as compared to categorical alumni. Some alumni lost interest in primary care during residency. The outpatient clinic experience may impact interest in primary care.