National Institutes of Health State-of-the-Science Conference statement: Diagnosis and Management of Ductal Carcinoma In Situ September 22-24, 2009.

OBJECTIVE: To provide health-care providers, patients, and the general public with a responsible assessment of currently available data on the diagnosis and management of ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS). PARTICIPANTS: A non-Department of Health and Human Services, nonadvocate, 14-member panel representing the fields of oncology, radiology, surgery (general and reconstructive), pathology, radiation oncology, internal medicine, epidemiology, biostatistics, nursing, obstetrics and gynecology, preventative medicine and population health, and social work. In addition, 22 experts from pertinent fields presented data to the panel and conference audience. EVIDENCE: Presentations by experts and a systematic review of the literature prepared by the Minnesota Evidence-based Practice Center, through the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality. Scientific evidence was given precedence over anecdotal experience. CONFERENCE PROCESS: The panel drafted its statement based on scientific evidence presented in open forum and on published scientific literature. The draft statement was presented on the final day of the conference and circulated to the audience for comment. The panel released a revised statement later that day at http://consensus.nih.gov. This statement is an independent report of the panel and is not a policy statement of the National Institutes of Health or the Federal Government. CONCLUSIONS: Clearly, the diagnosis and management of DCIS is highly complex with many unanswered questions, including the fundamental natural history of untreated disease. Because of the noninvasive nature of DCIS, coupled with its favorable prognosis, strong consideration should be given to elimination of the use of the anxiety-producing term "carcinoma" from the description of DCIS. The outcomes in women treated with available therapies are excellent. Thus, the primary question for future research must focus on the accurate identification of patient subsets diagnosed with DCIS, including those persons who may be managed with less therapeutic intervention without sacrificing the excellent outcomes presently achieved. Essential in this quest will be the development and validation of accurate risk stratification methods based on a comprehensive understanding of the clinical, pathological, and biological factors associated with DCIS.

NIH state-of-the-science conference statement: diagnosis and management of ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS).

OBJECTIVE: To provide health care providers, patients, and the general public with a responsible assessment of currently available data on the diagnosis and management of ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS). PARTICIPANTS: An non-DHHS, nonadvocate 14-member panel representing the fields of fields of oncology, radiology, surgery (general and reconstructive), pathology, radiation oncology, internal medicine, epidemiology, biostatistics, nursing, obstetrics and gynecology, preventative medicine and population health, and social work. In addition, 22 experts from pertinent fields presented data to the panel and conference audience. EVIDENCE: Presentations by experts and a systematic review of the literature prepared by the Minnesota Evidence-based Practice Center, through the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality. Scientific evidence was given precedence over anecdotal experience. CONFERENCE PROCESS: The panel drafted its statement based on scientific evidence presented in open forum and on published scientific literature. The draft statement was presented on the final day of the conference and circulated to the audience for comment. The panel released a revised statement later that day at http://consensus.nih.gov. This statement is an independent report of the panel and is not a policy statement of the NIH or the Federal Government. CONCLUSIONS: The diagnosis and management of DCIS is highly complex with many unanswered questions, including the fundamental natural history of untreated disease. Because of the noninvasive nature of DCIS, coupled with its favorable prognosis, strong consideration should be given to remove the anxiety-producing term "carcinoma" from the description of DCIS. The outcomes in women treated with available therapies are excellent. Thus, the primary question for future research must focus on the accurate identification of patient subsets diagnosed with DCIS, including those persons who may be managed with less therapeutic intervention without sacrificing the excellent outcomes presently achieved. Essential in this quest will be the development and validation of accurate risk stratification methods based on a comprehensive understanding of the clinical, radiological, pathological, and biological factors associated with DCIS.

Is routine postoperative chest x-ray necessary after fluoroscopic-guided subclavian central venous port placement?

BACKGROUND: Two uncommon but serious complications after subclavian central venous port (SCVP) placement are pneumothorax (PNX) and malposition of the catheter. Chest x-rays (CXR) are commonly obtained after SCVP placement to identify these complications, but their use is controversial. STUDY DESIGN: We performed a retrospective review of SCVP placements to establish the incidence of PNX or catheter malposition identified exclusively by postprocedure CXR. RESULTS: Between July 1, 2001, and June 30, 2006, 205 patients underwent elective SCVP placement. Although 4 patients (2%) sustained a PNX, none was identified by routine postprocedure CXR. Postprocedure clinical symptoms (3 to 72 hours later) prompted repeat CXR, which identified the PNX. Five patients (2.4%) had catheter malposition recognized by intraoperative fluoroscopy and corrected intraoperatively. No malpositioned catheters were identified on postprocedure CXR. CONCLUSIONS: In our study, incidence of PNX after SCVP placement was low, and PNX was not detected by intraoperative fluoroscopy or by routine postprocedure CXR. We conclude that the practice of routine postprocedure CXR after SCVP placement is not necessary and should be replaced with diagnostic chest radiography only if symptoms develop.

What is an hour-lecture worth?

BACKGROUND: Although there are many ways to convey knowledge, attitudes, and techniques when teaching residents and students, the most optimal method (lecture, online lecture, online tutorial, simulator practice, and so on) is yet to be determined. METHODS: This study was designed to be a prospective analysis of change in resident behavior, and the model chosen was resident compliance with alcohol screening during admissions to the trauma service. Baseline values were determined the month before the educational "intervention," which was planned to be a 1-hour lecture during Grand Rounds on the importance of screening for alcohol disuse syndromes. After the "intervention," results were analyzed at 3 points in time: during the first month after the lecture and then at 3 and 12 months. RESULTS: Resident compliance with alcohol usage screening rose from 53% at baseline to 80% at 1 year. CONCLUSIONS: This straightforward model of utility of a lecture showed a significant change in resident behavior.

Mutual expectation compacts: a means to link practice culture and vision.

We describe the development of a mutual expectation compact in an academic department of surgery as a means of reinforcing the department's vision document and promoting cultural change. The compact makes explicit those implicit agreements that exist between a physician and his or her practice. It strengthens the relationship by avoiding the misunderstandings that can arise when agreements are implicit.

Mission statements and vision documents in medical practices.

Thoughtful, carefully constructed mission statements and vision documents serve both to signal the purpose of a medical practice to the public and other professional colleagues, and to keep the practice's providers focused on its key purposes. Practice culture is the primary driver ofmission and vision. We clarify the differences between mission statements and vision documents, and offer guidelines to aid in constructing them.

Making a vision document tangible using "vision-tactics-metrics" tables.

We describe a method of making a vision document tangible by attaching specific tactics and metrics to the key elements of the vision. We report on the development and early use of a "vision-tactics-metrics" table in a department of surgery. Use of the table centered the vision in the daily life of the department and its faculty, and facilitated cultural change.

Assessing the competencies in general surgery residency training.

BACKGROUND: Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) competencies have increased the focus on education. A 1-year study of observational assessments was conducted. METHODS: "Point of Observation" evaluations were completed by faculty for postgraduate year (PGY) I and II surgery residents. Resident procedures and patient office visits were rated in 9 categories, using a Likert scale. Interns were expected to perform at a novice level (0-30%) and PGY II residents at an advanced level, with improvements expected. RESULTS: PGY I and II residents showed overall improved scores (12% and 6%, respectively) over 1 year. Intern improvements in 9 categories were linear, ranging from 0% to 48%. PGY II resident scores were more variable, with improvements noted in 6 categories ranging from 10% to 30%. Three categories declined in scores, ranging from 2% to 18%. CONCLUSIONS: Competencies bring emphasis to education and measurable outcomes. Early efforts have proven valuable in identifying curriculum and learning needs.