The Characteristics and Effectiveness of Interventions for Frequent Emergency Department Utilizing Patients With Chronic Noncancer Pain: A Systematic Review.

BACKGROUND: Patients with chronic noncancer pain (CNCP) present unique challenges to emergency department (ED) care providers and administrators. Their conditions lead to frequent ED visits for pain relief and symptom management and are often poorly addressed with costly, low-yield care. A systematic review has not been performed to inform the management of frequent ED utilizing patients with CNCP. Therefore, we synthesized the available evidence on interventional strategies to improve care-associated outcomes for this patient group. METHODS: We searched Medline, EMBASE, CINAHL, CENTRAL, SCOPUS, and Web of Science from database inception to June 2018 for eligible interventional studies aimed at reducing frequent ED utilization among adult patients with CNCP. Articles were assessed in duplicate in accordance with methodologic recommendations from the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions. Outcomes of interest were the frequency of subsequent ED visits, type and amount of opioids administered in the ED and prescribed at discharge, and costs. Methodologic quality was assessed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias in Non-Randomized Studies of Interventions and Risk of Bias tools for nonrandomized and randomized studies, respectively. RESULTS: Thirteen studies including 1,679 patients met the inclusion criteria. Identified interventions implemented pain policies (n = 4), individualized care plans (n = 5), ED care coordination (n = 2), chronic pain management pathways (n = 1), and behavioral health interventions (n = 1). All of the studies reported a decrease in ED visit frequency following their respective interventions. These reductions were especially pronounced in studies whose interventions were focused around individualized care plans and primary care involvement. Interventions implementing opioid restriction and pain management policies were largely successful in reducing the amounts of opioid medications administered and prescribed in the ED. CONCLUSIONS: Multifaceted interventions, especially those employing individualized care plans, can successfully reduce subsequent ED visits, ED opioid administration and prescription, and care-associated costs for frequent ED utilizing patients with CNCP.

Time for Lifestyle Medicine to Take Injury Prevention Seriously.

Over 2 decades ago, the United States National Academy of Sciences described injuries as "the most under-recognized major public health problem facing the nation." Our progress since then has been limited. Injuries still account for nearly 1 out of every 10 deaths in the world, and the global burden of injury is projected to increase over the next decade, predominately in low- and middle-income countries. Despite this, injury prevention receives scant attention from legislators, the education system, and, most strikingly, the health care system. The lifestyle medicine community, however, is beginning to focus on injury prevention and will play an increasing role in helping control the burden of injury. Lifestyle medicine practitioners are in a tremendous position to promote injury prevention. Physical activity and positive lifestyle changes can be accompanied with an increased focus on preventing injury. Lifestyle medicine can prevent injuries by supporting legislation, advancing medical advocacy, providing community education, and linking clinical care with injury prevention.

Personal values influencing career path in academic medicine: Perspectives of selected Canadian trainees.

To pursue research, education, and health policy in one's career, broadly defined as academic medicine, is one of the most important decisions of a trainee doctor's career. Despite this, there is scant literature on which factors influence trainees' choices towards clinical work or academic research. As the MD/PhD is a relatively young training path compared to the traditional PhD (Doctor of Philosophy) and MD (Doctor of Medicine) programs, it prompts the question: at the crossroads of a career, what sways the individual to select an MD, PhD, or MD/PhD program? This is a valuable question to be answered for trainees who are considering multiple career paths, for educators who want to guide undifferentiated students, and for policy makers who develop and coordinate research programs. "Intellectual stimulation" is the most consistently identified personal value which draws trainees to academic medicine. Mentorship is linked strongly to success in the field. Conversely, long training periods, a lack of autonomy, and financial considerations are deterrents from a career in academic medicine. Insight into the decision-making process is provided by recent trainees in these respective fields, as well as experienced academic clinicians.