Association of part-time clinical work with well-being and mental health in General Internal Medicine: A survey among Swiss hospitalists.

INTRODUCTION: Burnout and low job satisfaction are increasing among the General Internal Medicine (GIM) workforce. Whether part-time compared to full-time clinical employment is associated with better wellbeing, job satisfaction and health among hospitalists remains unclear. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We conducted an anonymized cross-sectional survey among board-certified general internists (i.e. hospitalists) from GIM departments in 14 Swiss hospitals. Part-time clinical work was defined as employment of <100% as a clinician. The primary outcome was well-being, as measured by the extended Physician Well-Being Index (ePWBI), an ePWBI ≥3 indicating poor wellbeing. Secondary outcomes included depressive symptoms, mental and physical health, and job satisfaction. We compared outcomes in part-time and full time workers using propensity score-adjusted multivariate regression models. RESULTS: Of 199 hospitalists invited, 137 (69%) responded to the survey, and 124 were eligible for analysis (57 full-time and 67 part-time clinicians). Full-time clinicians were more likely to have poor wellbeing compared to part-time clinicians (ePWBI ≥3 54% vs. 31%, p = 0.012). Part-time compared to full-time clinical work was associated with a lower risk of poor well-being in adjusted analyses (odds ratio 0.20, 95% confidence interval 0.07-0.59, p = 0.004). Compared to full-time clinicians, there were fewer depressive symptoms (3% vs. 18%, p = 0.006), and mental health was better (mean SF-8 Mental Component Summary score 47.2 vs. 43.2, p = 0.028) in part-time clinicians, without significant differences in physical health and job satisfaction. CONCLUSIONS: Full-time clinical hospitalists in GIM have a high risk of poor well-being. Part-time compared to full-time clinical work is associated with better well-being and mental health, and fewer depressive symptoms.

[Polypharmacy and inappropriate medications in multimorbid elderly patients - What OPERAM taught us and will teach us]. / Polypharmacie et medicaments inappropriés chez les patients âgés multimorbides - Ce que l'étude OPERAM nous apprend et va nous apprendre.

Polypharmacy and inappropriate medication use are very common in multimorbid older patients. This population has unfortunately been excluded from most large, randomized studies. In a recent multicenter randomized study (OPERAM), we included over 2000 multimorbid patients. We found that 86% of the patients aged 70 years and more had inappropriate medications and that these medications could be discontinued without negative impact on the health of these patients. This cohort of multimorbid patients will be followed for 10 years to evaluate their prognosis, life expectancy, treatments and quality of life, with numerous projects to better understand the inappropriate prescribing of individual drugs and their consequences on the health of this population.

La polypharmacie et les médicaments inappropriés sont très fréquents chez les patients âgés multimorbides. Cette population a malheureusement été exclue de la plupart des grandes études randomisées. Dans une récente étude randomisée multicentrique (OPERAM), nous avons inclus plus de 2000 patients multimorbides. Celle-ci a montré que 86 % des patients âgés de 70 ans et plus avaient des médicaments inappropriés et qu'il était possible de stopper leur administration, sans répercussion négative sur leur santé. Ces patients multimorbides constituent une cohorte qui va être suivie sur 10 ans pour évaluer leurs pronostic, espérance de vie, traitements et qualité de vie. Cela permettra la réalisation de nombreux projets, notamment pour mieux comprendre les conséquences de la prescription inappropriée de médicaments.

Optimizing Therapy to Prevent Avoidable Hospital Admissions in Multimorbid Older Adults (OPERAM): cluster randomised controlled trial.

OBJECTIVE: To examine the effect of optimising drug treatment on drug related hospital admissions in older adults with multimorbidity and polypharmacy admitted to hospital. DESIGN: Cluster randomised controlled trial. SETTING: 110 clusters of inpatient wards within university based hospitals in four European countries (Switzerland, Netherlands, Belgium, and Republic of Ireland) defined by attending hospital doctors. PARTICIPANTS: 2008 older adults (≥70 years) with multimorbidity (≥3 chronic conditions) and polypharmacy (≥5 drugs used long term). INTERVENTION: Clinical staff clusters were randomised to usual care or a structured pharmacotherapy optimisation intervention performed at the individual level jointly by a doctor and a pharmacist, with the support of a clinical decision software system deploying the screening tool of older person's prescriptions and screening tool to alert to the right treatment (STOPP/START) criteria to identify potentially inappropriate prescribing. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: Primary outcome was first drug related hospital admission within 12 months. RESULTS: 2008 older adults (median nine drugs) were randomised and enrolled in 54 intervention clusters (963 participants) and 56 control clusters (1045 participants) receiving usual care. In the intervention arm, 86.1% of participants (n=789) had inappropriate prescribing, with a mean of 2.75 (SD 2.24) STOPP/START recommendations for each participant. 62.2% (n=491) had ≥1 recommendation successfully implemented at two months, predominantly discontinuation of potentially inappropriate drugs. In the intervention group, 211 participants (21.9%) experienced a first drug related hospital admission compared with 234 (22.4%) in the control group. In the intention-to-treat analysis censored for death as competing event (n=375, 18.7%), the hazard ratio for first drug related hospital admission was 0.95 (95% confidence interval 0.77 to 1.17). In the per protocol analysis, the hazard ratio for a drug related hospital admission was 0.91 (0.69 to 1.19). The hazard ratio for first fall was 0.96 (0.79 to 1.15; 237 v 263 first falls) and for death was 0.90 (0.71 to 1.13; 172 v 203 deaths). CONCLUSIONS: Inappropriate prescribing was common in older adults with multimorbidity and polypharmacy admitted to hospital and was reduced through an intervention to optimise pharmacotherapy, but without effect on drug related hospital admissions. Additional efforts are needed to identify pharmacotherapy optimisation interventions that reduce inappropriate prescribing and improve patient outcomes. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02986425.

Interventions for preventing falls and fall-related fractures in community-dwelling older adults: A systematic review and network meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVE: To compare the effectiveness of single, multiple, and multifactorial interventions to prevent falls and fall-related fractures in community-dwelling older persons. METHODS: MEDLINE, Embase, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were systematically searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating the effectiveness of fall prevention interventions in community-dwelling adults aged ≥65 years, from inception until February 27, 2019. Two large RCTs (published in 2020 after the search closed) were included in post hoc analyses. Pairwise meta-analysis and network meta-analysis (NMA) were conducted. RESULTS: NMA including 192 studies revealed that the following single interventions, compared with usual care, were associated with reductions in number of fallers: exercise (risk ratio [RR] 0.83; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.77-0.89) and quality improvement strategies (e.g., patient education) (RR 0.90; 95% CI 0.83-0.98). Exercise as a single intervention was associated with a reduction in falls rate (RR 0.79; 95% CI 0.73-0.86). Common components of multiple interventions significantly associated with a reduction in number of fallers and falls rate were exercise, assistive technology, environmental assessment and modifications, quality improvement strategies, and basic falls risk assessment (e.g., medication review). Multifactorial interventions were associated with a reduction in falls rate (RR 0.87; 95% CI 0.80-0.95), but not with a reduction in number of fallers (RR 0.95; 95% CI 0.89-1.01). The following single interventions, compared with usual care, were associated with reductions in number of fall-related fractures: basic falls risk assessment (RR 0.60; 95% CI 0.39-0.94) and exercise (RR 0.62; 95% CI 0.42-0.90). CONCLUSIONS: In keeping with Tricco et al. (2017), several single and multiple fall prevention interventions are associated with fewer falls. In addition to Tricco, we observe a benefit at the NMA-level of some single interventions on preventing fall-related fractures.

Medication review interventions to reduce hospital readmissions in older people.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the efficacy of medication review as an isolated intervention and with several co-interventions for preventing hospital readmissions in older adults. METHODS: Ovid MEDLINE, Embase, The Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials and CINAHL were searched for randomized controlled trials evaluating the effectiveness of medication review interventions with or without co-interventions to prevent hospital readmissions in hospitalized or recently discharged adults aged ≥65, until September 13, 2019. Included outcomes were "at least one all-cause hospital readmission within 30 days and at any time after discharge from the index admission." RESULTS: Twenty-five studies met the inclusion criteria. Of these, 11 studies (7,318 participants) contributed to the network meta-analysis (NMA) on all-cause hospital readmission within 30 days. Medication review in combination with (a) medication reconciliation and patient education (risk ratio (RR) 0.45; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.26-0.80) and (b) medication reconciliation, patient education, professional education and transitional care (RR 0.64; 95% CI 0.49-0.84) were associated with a lower risk of all-cause hospital readmission compared to usual care. Medication review in isolation did not significantly influence hospital readmissions (RR 1.06; 95% CI 0.45-2.51). The NMA on all-cause hospital readmission at any time included 24 studies (11,677 participants). Medication review combined with medication reconciliation, patient education, professional education and transitional care resulted in a reduction of hospital readmissions (RR 0.82; 95% CI 0.74-0.91) compared to usual care. The quality of the studies included in this systematic review raised some concerns, mainly regarding allocation concealment, blinding and contamination. CONCLUSION: Medication review in combination with medication reconciliation, patient education, professional education and transitional care, was associated with a lower risk of hospital readmissions compared to usual care. An effect of medication review without co-interventions was not demonstrated. Trials of higher quality are needed in this field.

[Controversies concerning screening and treatment of primary dyslipidemias in 2020]. / Controverses sur le dépistage et la prise en charge des dyslipidémies familiales en 2020.

Familial dyslipidemia is rare compared to polygenetic causes. Nevertheless, it is important not to miss this diagnosis, as it is more strongly associated with an increased risk of early cardiovascular disease and scores for calculating cardiovascular risk are not valid in this population. Early detection and management based on lifestyle optimization and treatment of cardiovascular risk factors can delay the onset of cardiovascular complications and thus improve patients' quality of life. A LDL-Cholesterol of 4,9 mmol/l has recently been suggested as the cut-off for starting lipid lowering therapy, but remains controversial because the majority of people above this threshold do not have primary monogenic dyslipidemia. The age at which therapy should be initiated as well as the targets for treatment are also controversial.

Les dyslipidémies familiales sont plus rares que les causes communes, mais il est important de ne pas les manquer vu qu'elles sont liées à un risque augmenté de maladie cardiovasculaire précoce et que les scores de risque ne sont pas valables chez ces patients. Un dépistage et une prise en charge précoces reposant sur une optimisation de l'hygiène de vie et une éviction des facteurs de risque cardiovasculaire permettent de retarder la survenue des complications cardiovasculaires et ainsi d'améliorer la qualité de vie des patients. Un seuil de LDL de 4,9 mmol/l pour débuter un traitement hypolipémiant a récemment été proposé, mais reste controversé car la majorité des patients au-dessus de ce seuil n'a pas une forme familiale. L'âge de début d'un traitement et les cibles de traitement sont également controversés.

Diagnostic Value of the CD103+CD4+/CD4+ Ratio to Differentiate Sarcoidosis from Other Causes of Lymphocytic Alveolitis.

BACKGROUND: The CD103 integrin is present on CD4+ lymphocytes of the bronchial mucosa, but not on peripheral blood CD4+ lymphocytes. It has been hypothesized that CD4+ lymphocytes in pulmonary sarcoidosis originate from redistribution from the peripheral blood to the lung, and therefore do not bear the CD103 integrin. Some data suggest that a low CD103+ percentage among bronchoalveolar lavage fluid (BALF) CD4+ lymphocytes discriminates between sarcoidosis and other diagnoses. OBJECTIVE: To determine the diagnostic value of BALF CD103+ to identify sarcoidosis among other causes of alveolar lymphocytosis in a large retrospective case series. METHODS: Among 391 consecutive bronchoalveolar lavages performed at our institution and analyzed by flow cytometry, we identified 207 cases, which were grouped into nine diagnostic categories: sarcoidosis, tuberculosis, non-tuberculous infections, hypersensitivity pneumonitis, non-specific interstitial pneumonia, organizing pneumonia, drug-induced lung diseases, other interstitial lung diseases (ILDs), and other diagnoses. To assess the discriminative value of the CD103+CD4+/CD4+ ratio to distinguish sarcoidosis from other entities, areas under ROC curves (AUC) were calculated. RESULTS: Sarcoidosis patients (n = 53) had significantly lower CD103+CD4+/CD4+ ratios than patients in other diagnostic categories. The AUC was 62% for sarcoidosis compared to all other diagnoses, and 69% for sarcoidosis compared to other ILDs. When combining CD103+CD4+/CD4+ and CD4+/CD8+ ratios, the AUC increased to 76 and 78%, respectively. When applying previously published cut-offs to our population, the AUC varied between 54 and 73%. CONCLUSIONS: The CD103+CD4+/CD4+ ratio does not accurately discriminate between sarcoidosis and other causes of lymphocytic alveolitis, neither alone nor in combination with the CD4+/CD8+ ratio, and is not a powerful marker for the diagnosis of sarcoidosis.