Best Practices for Writing Letters of Recommendation for Maternal-Fetal Medicine Fellowship: An Empty Scoping Review.

OBJECTIVES: Though letters of recommendation (LOR) for Maternal-Fetal Medicine (MFM) fellowship are a critical part of application process, little is known regarding best practices for writing them. This scoping review sought to identify published data outlining best practices in writing MFM fellowship LOR. STUDY DESIGN: Scoping review conducted using Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) and JBI guidelines. MEDLINE, Embase, Web of Science, and ERIC were searched, by professional medical librarian using database-specific controlled vocabulary and keywords representing MFM, fellowship, as well as personnel selection, academic performance, examinations, or clinical competence in 4/22. Prior to execution, the search was peer reviewed by another professional medical librarian using the Peer Review Electronic Search Strategies (PRESS) checklist. Citations imported to Covidence, dual screened by authors with disagreements resolved by discussion, and extraction performed by one author and checked by the second. RESULTS: A total of 1,154 studies were identified, with 162 removed as duplicates. Of the 992 screened, 10 imported for full-text review. None of these met inclusion criteria; four were not about fellows and six did not report on best practices for writing LOR for MFM. CONCLUSION: No articles were identified that outlined best practices for writing LOR for MFM fellowship. The lack of guidance and published data guiding those writing LOR for MFM fellowship applicants is concerning given the importance of these as a tool used by fellowship directors in selecting applicants for interviews and ranking. KEY POINTS: · No published articles were identified addressing best practices for writing LOR for MFM fellowship.. · Fellowship directors rely on LOR for offering interviews and rank list.. · Future research is urgently needed to identify best practices..

Attitudes of patients with renal disease on xenotransplantation: A systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Recent years have seen major advancements in xenotransplantation: the first pig-to-human heart transplant, the development of a brain-dead recipient model for kidney xenotransplantation, and the registration of the first xenokidney clinical trial. The attitudes of patients with kidney disease or transplants on xenotransplantation and an assessment of their reservations and considerations regarding the technology are crucial to successful clinical translation and eventual widespread implementation. METHODS: This systematic review was registered through PROSPERO (CRD42022344581) prior to initiation of the study and reported using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. We included studies that evaluated attitudes towards and willingness to undergo xenotransplantation in patients with end-stage renal disease (ESRD), including those who had already undergone transplantation. MEDLINE (via Ovid), Embase (via Elsevier), and Web of Science (via Clarivate) were searched from database inception to July 15, 2022 by an experienced medical librarian for studies on xenotransplantation and attitudes. Abstracts and full text were screened using Covidence software and data items regarding study methodology, patient demographics, and attitudes regarding xenotransplantation were extracted using Microsoft Excel. Risk of bias assessments were performed using the Critical Appraisal Skills Programmed and National Institute of Health study quality assessment tools. RESULTS: Of 1992 studies identified, 14 studies met the inclusion criteria. These studies were conducted across eight countries, four in the United States, for a total of 3114 patients on the kidney waitlist or with a kidney transplant. All patients were over 17 years old and 58% were male. Acceptance of a xenotransplant was assessed using surveys in 12 studies. Sixty-three percent (n = 1354) of kidney patients reported that they would accept a xenotransplant with function comparable to that of an allotransplant. Acceptance of xenografts with inferior function to allografts (15%) or as bridge organs (35%) to allotransplantation was lower. Specific concerns expressed by patients included graft function, infection, social stigma, and animal rights. Subgroup analyses showed higher acceptance in already transplanted compared to waitlist patients and white compared to Black Americans. CONCLUSION: An understanding of patient attitudes and reservations is key to the successful execution of the first xenotransplantation clinical trials. This study compiles important factors to consider, such as patient concerns, attitudes regarding practical clinical scenarios for the use of xenotransplantation, and the impact of demographic factors on acceptance of this emerging technology.

Videoconferencing of Movement-Based and Psychologically Informed Interventions for Chronic Pain: A Systematic Review and Horizon Scan.

Introduction: With the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, use of telehealth technology increased dramatically. Nonpharmacological approaches to pain management may be well suited for virtual care. Yet, it is not widely understood if this treatment modality is effective when delivered via videoconferencing. This review examines the effectiveness of movement-based and psychologically informed chronic pain management interventions delivered via videoconferencing compared to in-person care. Methods: Searches of MEDLINE® (via Ovid®), Embase (via Elsevier), CINAHL Complete (via EBSCO), and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (via Ovid) were performed from inception to June 10, 2021. All articles meeting eligibility criteria were included for data abstraction. Results: Eight thousand two hundred fifty-two citations were identified, and after removing duplicates, 4,661 citations remained. One study investigating acceptance and commitment therapy met eligibility criteria. The noninferiority randomized trial found no statistically significant difference in outcomes between delivery modalities. A horizon scan was conducted to assess planned or recent studies. Horizon scan results yielded six protocols in trial databases, one pilot study, and three published protocols for ongoing studies. Discussion: Findings from this study indicate that virtually delivered pain management is a possible substitute for in-person care. Given the paucity of evidence on this topic, further comparative and adequately powered studies that assess the impact of movement-based and psychologically informed pain management delivered via videoconferencing are needed. Conclusions: Research is needed to understand patient preferences of such interventions within a variety of settings. Such evaluations will be needed to guide clinical and operations practice to optimize equitable deployment and access to high-quality health care delivered via videoconferencing.

Virtual Care for the Longitudinal Management of Chronic Conditions: A Systematic Review

As both the largest integrated health system and largest provider of telehealth in the country, the Veterans Health Administration (VHA) has a particular interest in understanding how best to implement and utilize virtual care. VHA has long embraced virtual care as part of its mission to "serve all who have served” regardless of their socioeconomic and geographic circumstances. Having begun conducting "virtual care” in the 1960s when doctors first communicated with patient's via TV screens,1 VHA has since provided over 2.6 million episodes of care to more than 900,000 Veterans in 20192 and has distributed over 50,000 data- and video-enabled iPads for Veterans throughout the country.3 Virtual care within VHA includes services such as MyHealtheVet secure messaging, the Home Telehealth program that combines case management principles with remote monitoring to improve access and coordinate care, and the VA Video Connect (VVC) video platform for synchronous visits within both specialty and primary care.4 Increasing Veteran access to care via virtual care has been an integral part of VHA's strategy for improving chronic disease management for a population that is on average older and sicker than their civilian counterparts.5,6 Given the importance that virtual care has for Veteran care even beyond the COVID-19 pandemic, understanding the strengths and limitations associated with synchronous virtual care will be critical in shaping how VHA utilizes virtual care going forward.

Telehealth for the Longitudinal Management of Chronic Conditions: Systematic Review.

BACKGROUND: Extensive literature support telehealth as a supplement or adjunct to in-person care for the management of chronic conditions such as congestive heart failure (CHF) and type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). Evidence is needed to support the use of telehealth as an equivalent and equitable replacement for in-person care and to assess potential adverse effects. OBJECTIVE: We conducted a systematic review to address the following question: among adults, what is the effect of synchronous telehealth (real-time response among individuals via phone or phone and video) compared with in-person care (or compared with phone, if synchronous video care) for chronic management of CHF, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, and T2DM on key disease-specific clinical outcomes and health care use? METHODS: We followed systematic review methodologies and searched two databases (MEDLINE and Embase). We included randomized or quasi-experimental studies that evaluated the effect of synchronously delivered telehealth for relevant chronic conditions that occurred over ≥2 encounters and in which some or all in-person care was supplanted by care delivered via phone or video. We assessed the bias using the Cochrane Effective Practice and Organization of Care risk of bias (ROB) tool and the certainty of evidence using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation. We described the findings narratively and did not conduct meta-analysis owing to the small number of studies and the conceptual heterogeneity of the identified interventions. RESULTS: We identified 8662 studies, and 129 (1.49%) were reviewed at the full-text stage. In total, 3.9% (5/129) of the articles were retained for data extraction, all of which (5/5, 100%) were randomized controlled trials. The CHF study (1/5, 20%) was found to have high ROB and randomized patients (n=210) to receive quarterly automated asynchronous web-based review and follow-up of telemetry data versus synchronous personal follow-up (in-person vs phone-based) for 1 year. A 3-way comparison across study arms found no significant differences in clinical outcomes. Overall, 80% (4/5) of the studies (n=466) evaluated synchronous care for patients with T2DM (ROB was judged to be low for 2, 50% of studies and high for 2, 50% of studies). In total, 20% (1/5) of the studies were adequately powered to assess the difference in glycosylated hemoglobin level between groups; however, no significant difference was found. Intervention design varied greatly from remote monitoring of blood glucose combined with video versus in-person visits to an endocrinology clinic to a brief, 3-week remote intervention to stabilize uncontrolled diabetes. No articles were identified for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. CONCLUSIONS: This review found few studies with a variety of designs and interventions that used telehealth as a replacement for in-person care. Future research should consider including observational studies and studies on additional highly prevalent chronic diseases.

Coagulation Abnormalities and Clinical Complications in Children With SARS-CoV-2: A Systematic Review of 48,322 Patients.

Given the limited information on the coagulation abnormalities of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) in pediatric patients, we designed a systematic review to evaluate this topic. A comprehensive literature search was conducted for "SARS-CoV-2," "coagulopathy," and "pediatrics." Two authors independently screened the articles that the search returned for bleeding, thrombosis, anticoagulant and/or antiplatelet usage, and abnormal laboratory markers in pediatric patients with SARS-CoV-2, and the authors then extracted the relevant data. One hundred twenty-six publications were included. Thirty-four (27%) studies reported thrombotic complications in 504 patients. Thirty-one (25%) studies reported bleeding complications in 410 patients. Ninety-eight (78%) studies reported abnormal laboratory values in 6580 patients. Finally, 56 (44%) studies reported anticoagulant and/or antiplatelet usage in 3124 patients. The variety of laboratory abnormalities and coagulation complications associated with SARS-CoV-2 presented in this review highlights the complexity and variability of the disease presentation in infants and children.

Risk of Transmitting Coronavirus Disease 2019 During Nebulizer Treatment: A Systematic Review.

Rationale: There is an urgent need to understand the risk of viral transmission during nebulizer treatment of patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Objectives: To assess the risk of transmitting severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), SARS, Middle East respiratory syndrome (MERS), and influenza with administration of drugs via nebulizer. Methods: We searched multiple electronic databases, including PubMed®, China National Knowledge Infrastructure, Wanfang, preprint databases, and clinicaltrials.gov through December 1, 2020. Any study design in any language describing the risk of viral transmission with nebulizer treatment was eligible. Data were abstracted by one investigator and verified by a second. Results: We identified 22 articles: 1 systematic review, 7 cohort/case-control studies, 7 case series, and 7 simulation-based studies. Eight individual studies involved patients with SARS, five involved MERS, and one involved SARS-CoV-2. The seven cohort/case-control studies (four high risk of bias [ROB], three unclear ROB) found mixed results (median odds ratio 3.91, range 0.08-20.67) based on very weak data among a small number of health care workers (HCWs) with variable use of personal protective equipment (PPE). Case series had multiple potential contributors to transmission. Simulation studies found evidence for droplet dispersion after saline nebulization and measureable influenza viral particles up to 1.7 m from the source after 10 minutes of nebulization with a patient simulator. Study heterogeneity prevented meta-analysis. Conclusions: Case series raise concern of transmission risk, and simulation studies demonstrate droplet dispersion with virus recovery, but specific evidence that exposure to nebulizer treatment increases transmission of coronaviruses similar to COVID-19 is inconclusive. Tradeoffs balancing HCW safety and patient appropriateness can potentially minimize risk, including choice of delivery method for inhaled medications (e.g., nebulizer vs. metered dose inhaler) and PPE (e.g., N95 vs. surgical mask).