Using Neurology Trainees as Standardized Patients in a Neurological Emergency Simulation Curriculum for Medical Students.

Purpose: Simulation manikins have limited ability to mimic neurological exam findings, which has historically constrained their use in neurology education. We developed a cased-based simulation curriculum in which neurology trainees acted as standardized patients (SPs) and portrayed the neurologic exam for medical students. Materials/Methods: We ran monthly simulations of two cases (acute stroke and seizure) with resident/fellow SPs. Pre-/post-session surveys assessed students' self-rated confidence in neurological clinical skills (gathering a history, performing an exam, presenting a case) and knowledge domains. Questions about students' attitudes about neurology were adapted from a validated assessment tool. Paired t-tests were performed for quantitative items. Qualitative thematic analysis identified key themes. Results: Sixty-one students participated. Post-session, students reported significantly higher self-confidence in all neurological clinical skills and knowledge domains (p < 0.002). Greater than ninety-five percent agreed the session met the learning objectives; 95% recommended it to others. Resident/fellow SPs were cited as the most effective educational component. Students appreciated evaluating acute emergencies and reported an increased interest in neurology careers. Conclusions: A case-based simulation curriculum with neurology trainees portraying the SP increased students' self-reported knowledge, skills, and confidence in managing neurological emergencies. Our intervention may improve medical student neurology education and increase interest in the field. Future research should evaluate clinical skills objectively. Supplementary Information: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s40670-024-02016-w.

Ocrelizumab in highly disabled progressive multiple sclerosis patients.

BACKGROUND: Ocrelizumab is a commonly used anti-CD20 monoclonal antibody with efficacy in the treatment of both relapsing-remitting (RRMS) and primary progressive (PPMS) multiple sclerosis. Real world use of ocrelizumab in MS patients with higher levels of motor disability requiring a walker or a wheelchair is not well characterized as these populations were excluded from initial studies. Higher levels of disability may be a barrier to treatment access. This study aimed to describe the access to, and tolerability and therapeutic outcomes of ocrelizumab in highly disabled MS patients in a real-world setting. METHODS: As part of an ongoing study of ocrelizumab treatment access, barriers, and outcomes in MS patients at the Brigham MS Center, we retrospectively reviewed all patients with an Expanded Disability Status Scale (EDSS) of 6.5 or greater at the time of ocrelizumab initiation. All patients were started on ocrelizumab by their treating providers prior to this study initiation. Patients were excluded for recent rituximab exposure, co-treatment with more than one immunosuppressant, or alternative diagnoses contributing to high EDSS. Data was collected on incidence and severity of side effects while on ocrelizumab, persistence of treatment beyond one year, and MS stabilization versus progression while on this treatment. RESULTS: Of the 1219 patients on ocrelizumab between 2017 and 2021, 113 (9.3 %) had EDSS of 6.5 or greater at the time of ocrelizumab initiation. Of the 113, 51 (45.1 %) were excluded: 6 (5.3 %) because they were duplicates or didn't receive ocrelizumab at our center, 25 (22.1 %) due to rituximab treatment in the previous year, 16 (14.2 %) due to lack of at least 1 year of follow up, and 4 (3.5 %) due to relevant comorbidities/treatment with other immunosuppressants. 62 patients were included in the final analysis. At ocrelizumab start, mean age was 62.1 +/- 8.7 years and median EDSS was 7.0 (range 6.5 to 9.5). Ocrelizumab was started in 26 of the included 62 patients (41.9 %) because of objective clinical disease worsening, in 17 (27.4 %) because of subjective worsening, in 8 (12.9 %) to prevent future progression. 32 patients (51.6 %) continued ocrelizumab throughout the study period, with average length of ocrelizumab use of 36.5 +/- 17.0 months. 29 patients (46.8 %) experienced no side effects during the study period. 29 (46.7 %) patients discontinued treatment, and of those, 9 (31.0 %) cited more than one reason for discontinuation: 17 (58.6 %) cited side effects, 12 (41.4 %) cited progression/lack of benefit, 6 (20.7 %) cited the Covid19 pandemic, and 1 (3.4 %) cited financial issues as a reason for discontinuation. Over the course of the study, 16 (25.8 %) patients had disability worsening by EDSS, 5 (8.1 %) had disability improvement, and 41 (66.1 %) remained stable, with a median end EDSS of 7.0 (range 6.5 to 9.5). Importantly, 18 patients (29.0 %) reported subjective disease stability while on ocrelizumab. CONCLUSIONS: Ocrelizumab may lead to disease stabilization in a subset of highly disabled MS patients, but possible benefits need to be carefully balanced against the incidence of adverse events in this high-risk patient population.

What Should Physicians Consider Prior to Unionizing?

Physicians considering unionization face many practical, emotional, and moral obstacles. Even some who feel that a collective bargaining unit is necessary remain concerned that patient care could suffer if physicians unionize. This article discusses unionized physicians' moral obligations to patient populations and health care systems' share in this responsibility. It argues that unionization can be done ethically as long as union actions are focused on improving patient care.