Implementation of a Night-Float Curriculum: Impact on Intern Confidence over Time.

OBJECTIVES: Formal nighttime education is becoming increasingly necessary as more internal medicine (IM) residency programs adopt night-float rotations (NFRs); however, the efficacy of an NFR curriculum throughout an academic year and which topics in an NFR curriculum increase trainee confidence are unknown. We implemented a 12-module, self-paced NFR curriculum for 76 postgraduate year-1 residents at an academic IM residency program. We evaluated the impact of this curriculum on postgraduate year-1 residents' clinical confidence, as well as longitudinal efficacy of the curriculum. METHODS: Night-float interns' (NFIs) clinical confidence regarding specific curricular topics was evaluated overall and during specific timeframes within the academic year. Pre- and post-NFR surveys using Likert scales for each topic were administered to NFIs from June 24, 2020 to March 2, 2021, representing 32 week-long NFR cycles. RESULTS: NFIs' pre- and postrotation confidence in managing clinical scenarios significantly improved for all 12 topics in the NFR curriculum. The NFR curriculum resulted most significantly in improved confidence during the first 4 months of the academic year, with 11 of 12 curricular topics reaching the threshold for statistical significance. Modules on altered mental status, hypotension, narrow-complex tachyarrhythmias, new fever, and sepsis and antibiotic escalation maintained their efficacy for the longest periods of time. CONCLUSIONS: It may be especially important to emphasize an NFR curriculum at the beginning of the academic year. IM residency programs also may wish to carefully consider that certain topics may maintain their efficacy throughout the year, whereas other topics should potentially be replaced with more complex modules as the academic year progresses.

Pursuit of "endpoint diagnoses" as a cognitive forcing strategy to avoid premature diagnostic closure.

Premature closure is often described as a significant contributor to diagnostic error. Therefore, developing strategies to mitigate premature closure could reduce diagnostic errors and improve patient care. Here we propose the novel concept of pursuit of an "endpoint diagnosis" as a cognitive forcing strategy (CFS) for avoiding premature diagnostic closure. We define an "endpoint diagnosis" as an underlying causative explanation for a patient's signs, symptoms, and laboratory and radiographic data that exhausts additional relevant diagnostic evaluation. We have observed four contexts in which the error of not pursuing an endpoint diagnosis most often occurs: (1) diagnoses that appear to result in the same treatment regardless of etiology, (2) cases that are particularly complex, (3) clinical scenarios that are vulnerable to systems errors, and (4) situations in which patients' problems are attributed to uncontrolled underlying risk factors or an exacerbation of a known condition. Additionally, we address why we believe endpoint diagnoses are not universally pursued, delineate when this approach might be particularly useful, attempt to reconcile the potential conflict between accepting diagnostic ambiguity in certain instances and pursuing endpoint diagnoses, and outline possible concerns that might arise with using this CFS, including the possibility of lengthy evaluations resulting in overdiagnosis and overtreatment. Our overarching goal is for this CFS to help clinicians in their daily clinical practice as they seek to optimize their diagnostic skill and patient care.

The Nazi Analogy Muddles Our Thinking About Physician Aid-in-Dying in the US.

What has become known in bioethics as "the Nazi analogy" likens a change's potential to precipitate moral deterioration to Nazi atrocities of the mid-20th century. This analogy has been applied in physician aid-in-dying (PAD) deliberations by those fearful that a physician's role in enabling a patient's death is too similar to Nazi physicians' roles in systematic murders during the Holocaust. This article suggests the importance of carefully distinguishing between when the Nazi analogy is aptly applied and when its use is limited to urging great caution about abuse or inequity.

Assessment of patients' and caregivers' informational and decisional needs for left ventricular assist device placement: Implications for informed consent and shared decision-making.

BACKGROUND: Several organizations have underscored the crucial need for patient-centered decision tools to enhance shared decision-making in advanced heart failure. The purpose of this study was to investigate the decision-making process and informational and decisional needs of patients and their caregivers regarding left ventricular assist device (LVAD) placement. METHODS: In-depth, structured interviews with LVAD patients, candidates and caregivers (spouse, family members) (n = 45) were conducted. We also administered a Decisional Regret Scale. RESULTS: Participants reported LVAD decision-making to be quick and reflexive (n = 30), and deferred heavily to clinicians (n = 22). They did not perceive themselves as having a real choice (n = 28). The 2 most prevalent informational domains that participants identified were lifestyle issues (23 items), followed by technical (drive-line, battery) issues (14 items). Participants easily and clearly identified their values: life extension; family; and mobility. Participants reported the need to meet other patients and caregivers before device placement (n = 31), and to have an involved caregiver (n = 28) to synthesize information. Some participants demonstrated a lack of clarity regarding transplant probability: 9 of 15 patients described themselves as on a transplant trajectory, yet 7 of these were destination therapy patients. Finally, we found that decisional regret scores were low (1.307). CONCLUSIONS: Informed consent and shared-decision making should: (a) help patients offered highly invasive technologies for life-threatening disease get past the initial "anything to avoid thinking about death" reaction and make a more informed decision; (b) clarify transplant status; and (c) focus on lifestyle and technical issues, as patients have the most informational needs in these domains.