Interventions to Prevent and Reduce Burnout Among Undergraduate and Graduate Medical Education Trainees: a Systematic Review.

OBJECTIVE: The authors conducted a systematic review of the published literature to identify interventions to prevent and/or reduce burnout among medical students and residents. METHODS: The authors searched 10 databases (from the start of each through September 21, 2016) using keywords related to burnout, medical education, and prevention. Teams of two authors independently reviewed the search results to select peer-reviewed, English language articles describing educational interventions to prevent and/or reduce burnout among medical students and/or residents that were evaluated using validated burnout measures. They assessed study quality using the Medical Education Research Study Quality Instrument and the Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool. RESULTS: Fourteen studies met inclusion criteria and all used the Maslach Burnout Inventory as at least one measure of burnout. Four were single group pre-post studies, 6 non-randomized two-group studies, and 4 randomized controlled trials. None of the studies were designed specifically to target burnout prevention. In 12 studies, residents were the targeted learners. Six of the 14 studies reported statistically significant changes in burnout scores: 5 reported improvement and 1 reported worsening of burnout. Of the 5 studies that reported statistically significant benefit, 1 studied a complementary and alternative medicine elective, 1 studied the Respiratory One Meditation method, and 3 studied duty hour changes. CONCLUSIONS: This review highlights the need for rigorously designed studies in burnout prevention and reduction among residents and especially medical students.

Keeping the Patient at the Center: Teaching About Elements of Patient-Centered Care.

INTRODUCTION: There is growing interest in delivering patient-centered care in all areas of medical practice, yet acquiring the requisite attitudes, skills, and behaviors simply by observing or participating in current systems of care that employ a medical or physician-centric model is challenging. Patient centeredness involves an understanding of patients' perspectives on their illness and treatment, the impact that health and illness have on the lives of patients, and the values and goals patients have for themselves, while also encouraging patients and health care professionals to engage in a shared decision-making model of health care. That model aspires to result in increased trust between providers and patients, as well as better patient outcomes. METHODS: This 90-minute workshop utilizes three different approaches to help the learner develop patient-centered care and communication skills in a mental health setting: a video of a patient sharing her experience with the mental health system, a narrative model of appreciating patient experience (first-person memoir), and an exercise using patient-centered language in a medical record documentation. RESULTS: This workshop was presented at the American Association of Psychiatric Directors of Residency Training (AADPRT) Annual Meeting in March 2016. Approximately 21 people attended. Feedback was received from 11 participants and demonstrated a high degree of agreement (4.5 out of 5) with the following statements: the speakers met the stated educational objectives; the content was educationally useful; the information in this presentation will inform my educational practices; the presentation advanced my knowledge of the subject. DISCUSSION: While these three pedagogical exercises do not cover the entirety of the skills required for patient-centered care and communication, they do provide a useful starting point for hearing and appreciating the experience of the patient. Despite the focus on mental health settings and treatment, other medical specialties could derive useful ideas from this workshop format or adapt the materials to their own needs.

Asenapine in the treatment of older adults with bipolar disorder.

OBJECTIVE: In spite of growing numbers of older people, there are few treatment studies on late-life bipolar disorder (BD). This was a 12-week prospective, open-label trial to assess efficacy and tolerability of adjunct asenapine in non-demented older adults (≥ 60 years) with sub-optimal previous response to BD treatments. METHODS: Asenapine was initiated at 5 mg/day and titrated as tolerated. Effects on global psychopathology were measured with Clinical Global Impression, bipolar version (CGI-BP), and the Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale (BPRS). Mood polarity severity was measured with the Hamilton Depression Rating Scale, Montgomery Asberg Depression Rating Scale, and Young Mania Rating Scale. Other outcomes included the World Health Organization Disability Assessment Schedule II. RESULTS: Fifteen individuals were enrolled (mean age 68.6, SD 6.12; 53% female; 73% Caucasian, 13% African American, and 7% Asian). There were 4/15 (27%) individuals who prematurely terminated the study, whereas 11/15 (73%) completed the study. There were significant improvements from baseline on the BPRS (p < 0.05), on CGI-BP overall (p < 0.01), and on CGI-BP mania (p < 0.05) and depression (p < 0.01) subscales. The mean dose of asenapine was 11.2 (SD 6.2) mg/day. The most common reported side effects were gastrointestinal discomfort (n = 5, 33%), restlessness (n = 2, 13%), tremors (n = 2, 13%), cognitive difficulties (n = 2, 13%), and sluggishness (n = 2, 13%). CONCLUSIONS: Older people with BD had global improvements on asenapine. Most reported adverse effects were mild and transient, but adverse effects prompted drug discontinuation in just over one quarter of patients. Although risks versus benefits in older people must always be carefully considered, asenapine may be a treatment consideration for some non-demented geriatric BD patients.

Repetitive foreign body ingestion: ethical considerations.

The treatment of persons who frequently present to the healthcare system following repetitive foreign body ingestion has been addressed in the psychiatric literature. However, there has been little exploration of the ethical considerations regarding the treatment of these patients. The complexity of their medical and psychiatric presentation raises fundamental ethical questions regarding the duty to treat, patient autonomy, justice, and futility. Careful ethical analysis is particularly important in this context, since the frustration that medical professionals may feel in response may lead to false assumptions that can negatively impact patient care. A careful exploration of these questions can increase awareness and understanding, which in turn can lead to improved treatment of patients who repetitively ingest foreign bodies. Care for patients who inflict self-harm, particularly by repetitive foreign body ingestion, is not futile. The patients have a right to treatment and are entitled to resources. Efforts should be made to provide a more comprehensive treatment approach to these patients.