Harassment and discrimination in medical training: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

PURPOSE: Harassment and discrimination include a wide range of behaviors that medical trainees perceive as being humiliating, hostile, or abusive. To understand the significance of such mistreatment and to explore potential preventive strategies, the authors conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to examine the prevalence, risk factors, and sources of harassment and discrimination among medical trainees. METHOD: In 2011, the authors identified relevant studies by searching MEDLINE and EMBASE, scanning reference lists of relevant studies, and contacting experts. They included studies that reported the prevalence, risk factors, and sources of harassment and discrimination among medical trainees. Two reviewers independently screened all articles and abstracted study and participant characteristics and study results. The authors assessed the methodological quality in individual studies using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. They also conducted a meta-analysis. RESULTS: The authors included 57 cross-sectional and 2 cohort studies in their review. The meta-analysis of 51 studies demonstrated that 59.4% of medical trainees had experienced at least one form of harassment or discrimination during their training (95% confidence interval [CI]: 52.0%-66.7%). Verbal harassment was the most commonly cited form of harassment (prevalence: 63.0%; 95% CI: 54.8%-71.2%). Consultants were the most commonly cited source of harassment and discrimination, followed by patients or patients' families (34.4% and 21.9%, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: This review demonstrates the surprisingly high prevalence of harassment and discrimination among medical trainees that has not declined over time. The authors recommend both drafting policies and promoting cultural change within academic institutions to prevent future abuse.

Value of information methods for assessing a new diagnostic test.

Value-of-information methods are applied to assess the evidence in support of a new diagnostic test and, where the evidence is insufficient for decision making, to determine the optimal sample size for future studies. Net benefit formulations are derived under various diagnostic and treatment scenarios. The expressions for the expected opportunity loss of adopting strategies that include the new test are given. Expressions for the expected value of information from future studies are derived. One-sample and two-sample designs, with or without known prevalence, are considered. An example is given.

Use of a catalytic model to estimate hepatitis A incidence in a low-endemicity country: implications for modeling immunization policies.

BACKGROUND: Evaluating the cost-effectiveness of vaccine programs with dynamic modeling requires accurate estimates of incidence over time. Because infectious diseases are often underreported, supplementary data and statistical analyses are required to estimate true incidence. This study estimates the true incidence of hepatitis A virus (HAV) infection in Canada using a catalytic model. METHODS: A catalytic model was used to reconcile HAV seroprevalence data with the corresponding true cumulative risk of infection estimated from incidence data. RESULTS: The average annual reported incidence was 6.2 cases per 100,000 from 1980 to 1989 and 7.7/100,000 from 1990 to 1999, indicating that Canada is a low-incidence country. The seroprevalence in Canadian-born individuals (n = 7 studies) was approximately 1%-8% in ages <20, 1%-11% in ages 20-29, 7%-29% in ages 30-39, and higher in older age groups. Between 1980 and 1995, the catalytic model estimated an average annual incidence of 60/100,000 (95% confidence interval, 33-524); approximately 7.73 (4.21-67.33) times the average annual reported incidence of 7.78/100,000. For a typical birth cohort of 403 434 Canadians born in 1990, the model predicted 32 750 HAV cases by age 39, with a corresponding seroprevalence of approximately 8.12% by the year 2029. IMPLICATIONS: Reliable estimates of true incidence of infectious disease are required for cost-effectiveness analysis of infectious disease programs. Catalytic models enable the synthesis of dispersed data, quantification of data limitations, and reconciliation of these limitations to estimate true incidence for economic evaluations.

A prospective molecular surveillance study evaluating the clinical impact of community-acquired respiratory viruses in lung transplant recipients.

BACKGROUND: Community-acquired respiratory viral infections (RVIs) are common in lung transplant patients and may be associated with acute rejection and bronchiolitis obliterans syndrome (BOS). The use of sensitive molecular methods that can simultaneously detect a large panel of respiratory viruses may help better define their effects. METHODS: Lung transplant recipients undergoing serial surveillance and diagnostic bronchoalveolar lavages (BALs) during a period of 3 years were enrolled. BAL samples underwent multiplex testing for a panel of 19 respiratory viral types/subtypes using the Luminex xTAG respiratory virus panel assay. RESULTS: Demographics, symptoms, and forced expiratory volume in 1 sec were prospectively collected for 93 lung transplant recipients enrolled. Mean number of BAL samples was 6.2+/-3.1 per patient. A respiratory virus was isolated in 48 of 93 (51.6%) patients on at least one BAL sample. Of 81 positive samples, the viruses isolated included rhinovirus (n=46), parainfluenza 1 to 4 (n=17), coronavirus (n=11), influenza (n=4), metapneumovirus (n=4), and respiratory syncytial virus (n=2). Biopsy-proven acute rejection (> or =grade 2) or decline in forced expiratory volume in 1 sec > or =20% occurred in 16 of 48 (33.3%) patients within 3 months of RVI when compared with 3 of 45 (6.7%) RVI-negative patients within a comparable time frame (P=0.001). No significant difference was seen in incidence of acute rejection between symptomatic and asymptomatic patients. Biopsy-proven obliterative bronchiolitis or BOS was diagnosed in 10 of 16 (62.5%) patients within 1 year of infection. CONCLUSION: Community-acquired RVIs are frequently detected in BAL samples from lung transplant patients. In a significant percentage of patients, symptomatic or asymptomatic viral infection is a trigger for acute rejection and obliterative bronchiolitis/BOS.

A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial to evaluate the prime-boost strategy for pneumococcal vaccination in adult liver transplant recipients.

BACKGROUND: The 23-valent pneumococcal polysaccharide vaccine (PPV23) is recommended for disease prevention in solid-organ transplant recipients, but it may have suboptimal immunogenicity. It may be possible to enhance immunogenicity by priming the recipient with the 7-valent pneumococcal conjugate vaccine (PCV7), followed by boosting with PPV23. METHODS: We randomized adult liver transplant recipients to receive either (1) PCV7 followed by a PPV23 booster 8 weeks later (the "primed" group) or (2) placebo followed by a standard single dose of PPV23 (the "unprimed" group). Quantitative and functional antibody titers for 7 serotypes contained in both vaccines were measured at baseline, 8 weeks after enrollment, and 16 weeks after enrollment. Of 130 randomized patients, 113 completed the study. RESULTS: At week 16, response to at least 1 serotype was seen in 48 (85.7%) of 56 and 52 (91.2%) of 57 patients for the primed and unprimed groups, respectively (P=not significant). The mean number of serotypes to have responded (+/-SD) was 307+/-2.3 and 4.4+/-2.2 for the primed and unprimed groups, respectively (P=not significant). Functional antibody titers, which were measured with use of the opsonophagocytic assay, were also similar in both groups. CONCLUSIONS: The immunogenicity of pneumococcal vaccination was not enhanced by the prime-boost strategy, compared with vaccination with PPV23 alone. Administration of a single dose of PPV23 should continue to be the standard of care for adult liver transplant recipients. CLINICAL TRIALS REGISTRATION: NCT00152802 (http://www.clinicaltrials.gov).

A randomized, double-blind trial of pneumococcal vaccination in adult allogeneic stem cell transplant donors and recipients.

BACKGROUND: Adult allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplant (HSCT) recipients are at high risk of invasive pneumococcal disease but have suboptimal responses to the recommended pneumococcal polysaccharide vaccine (PPV23). Pneumococcal conjugate vaccine (PCV7) may improve immunogenicity in this population, and a donor vaccination strategy may benefit patients undergoing HSCT. METHODS: Sixty-four pairs of donors and recipients scheduled to undergo HSCT were randomized to receive either PPV23 or PCV7. Vaccinations were administered to donors before transplantation and to recipients at 6 months after transplantation. Serotype-specific antipneumococcal titers were measured in donors at the time of harvest and in recipients before transplantation and 6 and 12 months after transplantation. RESULTS: Overall, immunogenicity was poor with both strategies. However, at 6 months, response to at least 1 serotype was seen in 0 (0%) of 19 and 8 (38.6%) of 21 evaluable recipients whose donors had received PPV23 and PCV7, respectively (P=.003). At 12 months, response was seen in 10 (55.6%) of 18 and 20 (90.9%) of 22 HSCT recipients who had received PPV23 and PCV7, respectively (P=.02). Multivariate logistic regression revealed that, at 12 months after transplantation, the type of vaccine given was the only significant factor affecting response, with an odds ratio of 8.85 (95% confidence interval, 1.62-47.6; P=.012) favoring PCV7. CONCLUSION: A donor and recipient paired vaccination strategy with PCV7 demonstrated safety and greater immunogenicity than did a similar strategy with PPV23.