Safety considerations: breastfeeding after transplant.

Organ transplant is an effective treatment for end-stage organ failure. For women, restoration of organ function can restore fertility and the ability to successfully carry a pregnancy. Posttransplant pregnancies have been reported among recipients of all types of solid organ transplants via case and center reports plus registry data. Stable graft function is dependent on prevention of rejection, currently accomplished by using maintenance immunosuppressant medications, to which the fetus is exposed in utero. Common among neonatal outcomes in transplant recipients are preterm and low-birth-weight infants. Emotional, nutritional, and immunologic benefits of breastfeeding have been well-documented and could be valuable for these newborns. Concern must be directed at the effects of the child's exposure to immunosuppressive agents excreted into the breast milk. Breastfeeding could be considered in transplant recipients if it can be shown that the level of exposure does not result in risks to the newborn, immediately and throughout childhood. Despite concerns of health care professionals, some recipients have chosen to breastfeed. Breastfeeding after transplant must be approached with consideration of many issues, and the potential risks require further study. This review focuses on benefits of breastfeeding, common immunosuppressive agents used in organ transplant recipients, a summary of the reports of women who have breastfed their infants while on immunosuppressive therapy and the published studies on breastfeeding and immunosuppressive agents. Recommendations are provided to guide health care professionals to help mothers receiving immunosuppressive agents to make informed choices about breastfeeding their infants.

Are medical students being taught invasive skills using simulation?

INTRODUCTION: Basic invasive procedural skills are traditionally taught during clerkships. Using simulation to teach invasive skills provides students the opportunity to practice in a structured environment without risking patient safety. We surveyed incoming interns at Thomas Jefferson University Hospital to assess the prevalence of simulation training for invasive and semi-invasive procedural skills during medical school. METHODS: From 2008 to 2010, we surveyed 357 incoming interns at Thomas Jefferson University Hospital. The questionnaire asked incoming interns if they received formal instruction or procedural training with or without a simulation component for 34 procedures during medical school. Interns indicated their number of attempts and successes for each procedure in clinical care. RESULTS: All 357 incoming interns completed the survey. Experience in 28 procedures is reported in this article. For all but three basic procedures, more than 75% of interns received formal didactic instruction. Only 3 advanced procedures were formally taught to most interns. The prevalence of simulation training for the basic and advanced procedures was 46% and 23%, respectively. For the basic procedures, the average number of attempts and successes was 6.5 (range, 0-13.9) and 6.2 (range, 0-13.4), respectively. For the advanced procedures, the average number of attempts and successes was 1.5 (range, 0-4.8) and 1.3 (range, 0-4.7), respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Although most medical students receive formal instruction in basic procedures, fewer receive formal instruction in advanced procedures. The use of simulation to complement this training occurs less often. Simulation training should be increased in undergraduate medical education and integrated into graduate medical education.