COVID-19, Moral Conflict, Distress, and Dying Alone.

COVID-19 has truly affected most of the world over the past many months, perhaps more than any other event in recent history. In the wake of this pandemic are patients, family members, and various types of care providers, all of whom share different levels of moral distress. Moral conflict occurs in disputes when individuals or groups have differences over, or are unable to translate to each other, deeply held beliefs, knowledge, and values. Such conflicts can seriously affect healthcare providers and cause distress during disastrous situations such as pandemics when medical and human resources are stretched to the point of exhaustion. In the current pandemic, most hospitals and healthcare institutions in the United States have not allowed visitors to come to the hospitals to see their family or loved ones, even when the patient is dying. The moral conflict and moral distress (being constrained from doing what you think is right) among care providers when they see their patients dying alone can be unbearable and lead to ongoing grief and sadness. This paper will explore the concepts of moral distress and conflict among hospital staff and how a system-wide provider wellness programme can make a difference in healing and health.

Competency Evaluations in the Next Accreditation System: Contributing to Guidelines and Implications.

UNLABELLED: CONSTRUCT: This study examines validity evidence of end-of-rotation evaluation scores used to measure competencies and milestones as part of the Next Accreditation System (NAS) of the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME). BACKGROUND: Since the implementation of the milestones, end-of-rotation evaluations have surfaced as a potentially useful assessment method. However, validity evidence on the use of rotation evaluation scores as part of the NAS has not been studied. This article examines validity evidence for end-of-rotation evaluations that can contribute to developing guidelines that support the NAS. APPROACH: Data from 2,701 end-of-rotation evaluations measuring 21 out of 22 Internal Medicine milestones for 142 residents were analyzed (July 2013-June 2014). Descriptive statistics were used to measure the distribution of ratings by evaluators (faculty, n = 116; fellows, n = 59; peer-residents, n = 131), by postgraduate years. Generalizability analysis and higher order confirmatory factor analysis were used to examine the internal structure of ratings. Psychometric implications for combining evaluation scores using composite score reliability were examined. RESULTS: Milestone ratings were significantly higher for each subsequent year of training (15/21 milestones). Faculty evaluators had greater variability in ratings across milestones, compared to fellows and residents; faculty ratings were generally correlated with milestone ratings from fellows (r = .45) and residents (r = .25), but lower correlations were found for Professionalism and Interpersonal and Communication Skills. The Φ-coefficient was .71, indicating good reliability. Internal structure supported a 6-factor solution, corresponding to the hierarchical relationship between the milestones and the 6 core competencies. Evaluation scores corresponding to Patient Care, Medical Knowledge, and Practice-Based Learning and Improvement had higher correlations to milestones reported to the ACGME. Mean evaluation ratings predicted problem residents (odds ratio = 5.82, p < .001). CONCLUSIONS: Guidelines for rotation evaluations proposed in this study provide useful solutions that can help program directors make decisions on resident progress and contribute to assessment systems in graduate medical education.

Implementation of an interprofessional educational model.

Despite literature that supports the benefits of interprofessional collaboration among healthcare practitioners, such as better patient outcomes and more efficient use of resources, many education programs continue to educate in silos, leading to a lack of awareness of the role of other disciplines. The nurse practitioner role, as example, requires positive collaboration with other healthcare providers, including physicians. The authors describe the development, implementation, and evaluation of an innovative interprofessional clinical educational model that was integrated into a nurse practitioner curriculum, as well as lessons learned during the first 2 years this program has been in place.

A comparison of vancomycin and metronidazole for the treatment of Clostridium difficile-associated diarrhea, stratified by disease severity.

BACKGROUND: The incidence and severity of Clostridium difficile-associated diarrhea (CDAD) has been increasing, and there have been recent reports of metronidazole treatment failure. Metronidazole is still commonly used as first-line treatment for CDAD but has never been compared with vancomycin in a prospective, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial. We conducted such a trial, stratifying patients according to disease severity, to investigate whether one agent was superior for treating either mild or severe disease. METHODS: From October 1994 through June 2002, patients with CDAD were stratified according to whether they had mild or severe disease based on clinical criteria and were randomly assigned to receive oral metronidazole (250 mg 4 times per day) or oral vancomycin (125 mg 4 times per day) for 10 days. Both groups received an oral placebo in addition to the study drug. Patients were followed up for 21 days to assess cure, treatment failure, relapse, or intolerance. RESULTS: One hundred seventy-two patients were enrolled, and 150 of these patients successfully completed the trial. Among the patients with mild CDAD, treatment with metronidazole or vancomycin resulted in clinical cure in 90% and 98% of the patients, respectively (P=.36). Among the patients with severe CDAD, treatment with metronidazole or vancomycin resulted in clinical cure in 76% and 97% of the patients, respectively (P=.02). Clinical symptoms recurred in 15% of the patients treated with metronidazole and 14% of those treated with vancomycin. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings suggest that metronidazole and vancomycin are equally effective for the treatment of mild CDAD, but vancomycin is superior for treating patients with severe CDAD.