Provider Practice Patterns Regarding Over-The-Counter Continence Devices.

INTRODUCTION AND HYPOTHESIS: Vaginal inserts and continence devices are recommended as a conservative treatment option for the management of stress urinary incontinence (SUI); however, practice patterns for recommendation and use of such devices are currently unknown. Our objectives were to better understand counseling patterns relating to over-the-counter (OTC) continence devices, to assess perceived barriers to recommending these devices, and to estimate clinician familiarity with three such devices currently available in the USA. METHODS: In this cross-sectional study, an anonymous electronic survey was distributed to all Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education-accredited OB/GYN and Urology residency and Female Pelvic Medicine and Reconstructive Surgery (FPMRS) fellowship programs. A total of 326 survey responses were collected. Multivariate logistic regression was used to assess respondent characteristics associated with recommending OTC continence devices to patients. RESULTS: Sixty-four percent of respondents expressed familiarity with any OTC continence device. Of respondents who reported regular evaluation and treatment of women with SUI (n = 269), 60% reported ever recommending OTC devices for SUI. On multivariate regression, being a trainee and general OB/GYN provider were associated with being less likely to recommend OTC devices for SUI. Of respondents who did not regularly recommend OTC continence devices, reported barriers to doing so included a lack of training with these devices, leading to clinician discomfort (70%) and not remembering OTC devices as an option (15%). CONCLUSIONS: Given the low risk associated with patient use of these easily accessible devices, our study highlights barriers to clinician recommendation with the goal of increasing clinician awareness and consideration of OTC continence devices.

Investigating disparities in compliance of nursing pain reassessment for obstetrics and gynecology patients.

BACKGROUND: Racial and socioeconomic disparities, exacerbated during the COVID-19 pandemic and surrounding socio-political polarization, affect access to, delivery of, and patient perception of healthcare. Perioperatively, the bedside nurse carries the greatest responsibility of direct care, which includes pain reassessment, a metric tracked for compliance. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to critically assess disparities in obstetrics and gynecology perioperative care and how these have changed since March 2020 using nursing pain reassessment compliance within a quality improvement framework. STUDY DESIGN: A retrospective cohort of 76,984 pain reassessment encounters from 10,774 obstetrics and gynecology patients at a large, academic hospital from September 2017 to March 2021 was obtained from Tableau: Quality, Safety and Risk Prevention platform. Noncompliance proportions were analyzed by patient race across service lines; a sensitivity analysis was performed excluding patients who were of neither Black nor White race. Secondary outcomes included analysis by patient ethnicity, body mass index, age, language, procedure, and insurance. Additional analyses were performed by temporally stratifying patients into pre- and post-March 2020 cohorts to investigate potential pandemic and sociopolitical effects on healthcare disparities. Continuous variables were assessed with Wilcoxon rank test, categorical variables were assessed with chi-squared test, and multivariable logistic regression analyses were performed (P<.05). RESULTS: Noncompliance proportions of pain reassessment did not differ significantly between Black and White patients as an aggregate of all obstetrics and gynecology patients (8.1% vs 8.2%), but greater differences were found within the divisions of Benign Subspecialty Gynecologic Surgery (Minimally Invasive Gynecologic Surgery + Urogynecology) (14.9% vs 10.70%; P=.03) and Maternal Fetal Medicine (9.5% vs 8.3%; P=.04). Black patients admitted to Gynecologic Oncology experienced lower noncompliance proportions than White patients (5.6% vs 10.4%; P<.01). These differences persisted after adjustment for body mass index, age, insurance, timeline, procedure type, and number of nurses attending to each patient with multivariable analyses. Noncompliance proportions were higher for patients with body mass index ≥35 kg/m2 within Benign Subspecialty Gynecology (17.9% vs 10.4%; P<.01). Non-Hispanic/Latino patients (P=.03), those ≥65 years (P<.01), those with Medicare (P<.01), and those who underwent hysterectomy (P<.01) also experienced greater noncompliance proportions. Aggregate noncompliance proportions differed slightly pre- and post-March 2020; this trend was seen across all service lines except Midwifery and was significant for Benign Subspecialty Gynecology after multivariable analysis (odds ratio, 1.41; 95% confidence interval, 1.02-1.93; P=.04). Though increases in noncompliance proportions were seen for non-White patients after March 2020, this was not statistically significant. CONCLUSION: Significant race, ethnicity, age, procedure, and body mass index-based disparities were identified in the delivery of perioperative bedside care, especially for those admitted to Benign Subspecialty Gynecologic Services. Conversely, Black patients admitted to Gynecologic Oncology experienced lower levels of nursing noncompliance. This may be in part be related to the actions of a Gynecologic Oncology nurse practioner at our institution who helps coordinate care for the division's postoperative patients. Noncompliance proportions increased after March 2020 within Benign Subspecialty Gynecologic Services. Although this study was not designed to establish causation, possible contributing factors include implicit or explicit biases regarding pain experience across race, body mass index, age, or surgical indication, discrepancies in pain management across hospital units, and downstream effects of healthcare worker burnout, understaffing, increased use of travelers, or sociopolitical polarization since March 2020. This study demonstrates the need for ongoing investigation of healthcare disparities at all interfaces of patient care and provides a way forward for tangible improvement of patient-directed outcomes by utilizing an actionable metric within a quality improvement framework.

Motivation to Learn Neuroanatomy by Cadaveric Dissection is Correlated with Academic Performance.

Implementing educational activities, such as a wet lab with cadaveric brain dissection, is known to have a direct impact on medical students' motivation. These activities demonstrate the clinical relevance of concepts taught in the classroom setting. The correlation between motivation and academic performance is not clear. First year medical students participated in wet lab activities. The wet lab included cadaveric dissection of the surface and internal anatomy of the brain, as well as discussions facilitated by the neuroscience faculty and clinicians. Discussions were centered around the clinical relevance of the neuroanatomical features dissected during the wet laboratory activities. Following completion of the laboratory activities, students completed a survey, which was used to assess the students' motivation for learning neuroanatomy based on the Attention, Relevance, Confidence, Satisfaction (ARCS) model of motivation. These results were then correlated with performance on a laboratory examination that tested three-dimensional and cross-sectional knowledge of neuroanatomy and practical skills including the use of imaging techniques. The total mean score of motivation was generally high for all categories of ARCS model of motivation (4.26/5) and was highest for Relevance (4.46/5). When these results were correlated with students' performance on the lab examination, a positive correlation between students' motivation and lab examination scores was found (R2 = 0.877). Implementation of the neuroanatomy cadaveric dissection lab led to increased student motivation, which was positively correlated with students' academic performance. Clin. Anat. 32:128-135, 2019. © 2019 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

The Loss in Expectation of Life due to Early-Onset Mild Cognitive Impairment and Early-Onset Dementia in Norway.

INTRODUCTION: Whether patients with early-onset dementia have poorer or improved survival compared with those with a late onset largely depends on the survival measure. Survival estimates for early-onset mild cognitive impairment (MCI) diagnosis are particularly scarce. We aimed to estimate life expectancy (LE) in patients with early-onset dementia or early MCI, and loss in expectation of life (LEL) for these groups. Comparisons were made with the general Norwegian population and a subgroup of patients with late-onset dementia. METHODS: Early onset was defined as receiving a diagnosis of MCI or dementia before age 65 years. LE and LEL were predicted using flexible parametric survival models. Our study population was comprised of newly diagnosed (incident) cases (n = 4,906), aged 50-90 years at the time of diagnosis (672 were diagnosed before age 65 years, of which 291 were diagnosed with dementia), in the Norwegian register of persons assessed for cognitive symptoms (NorCog) between 2009 and 2017, and patients were followed up for mortality or censorship until January 2018. RESULTS: Among the early-onset patients, 8 and 23% died during follow-up, in the MCI and dementia groups, respectively. Both early-onset MCI and especially early-onset dementia were associated with lower LE than in the general Norwegian population; LE for 60-year-old women in 2016 was 26 years in the general population, 20 years in MCI patients, and 7 years in dementia patients. The corresponding LE at 80 years was 10, 6, and 5 years. Thus, LEL were particularly pronounced for patients with early dementia. The diagnosis-specific LE pattern in men was similar to that in women. DISCUSSION: Early-onset MCI was associated with substantial life years lost (5-6 years), but the loss was particularly pronounced for those with early-onset dementia, reducing the expected life length by 2 decades.

Subtotal cholecystectomy for the hostile gallbladder: failure to control the cystic duct results in significant morbidity.

BACKGROUND: Outcomes following the inability to control the cystic duct due to a hostile triangle of Calot during cholecystectomy remain unknown. The purpose of this study was to analyze the safety and efficacy of subtotal cholecystectomy, with attention to the necessity for secondary interventions. METHODS: Sixteen thousand five hundred ninety six cholecystectomies from January 2002 to August 2014 were reviewed, identifying patients managed with subtotal cholecystectomy, defined as the inability to isolate/transect the cystic duct. After propensity matching, we investigated surgical indications, perioperative outcomes, and the necessity for secondary ERCP, percutaneous drainage, and completion cholecystectomy. RESULTS: 65 (0.39%) patients underwent subtotal cholecystectomy; 54 (83.1%) began laparoscopically, of which 30 (55.6%) required conversion to laparotomy. Subtotal cholecystectomy, performed more frequently for acute cholecystitis (70.8% vs 34.6%), was associated with extended hospitalizations (4 d vs 2 d) and frequent surgical site infections (20% vs 4.6%). 25 (38.5%) subtotal cholecystectomy patients required ≥1 secondary intervention, and compared to standard cholecystectomy, underwent higher rates postoperative ERCP (30.8% vs 5.4%), percutaneous drainage (9.2% vs 1.5%), and completion cholecystectomy (6.2% vs 0%) [all P < 0.05]. DISCUSSION: Subtotal cholecystectomy fails to control the cystic duct, resulting in significant morbidity. Most do not require completion cholecystectomy; however, patients demand close observation and, frequently, secondary interventions.