Leadership for All: An Internal Medicine Residency Leadership Development Program.

BACKGROUND: Developing effective leadership skills in physicians is critical for safe patient care. Few residency-based models of leadership training exist. OBJECTIVE: We evaluated residents' readiness to engage in leadership training, feasibility of implementing training for all residents, and residents' acceptance of training. METHODS: In its fourth year, the Leadership Development Program (LDP) consists of twelve 90-minute modules (eg, Team Decision Making and Bias, Leadership Styles, Authentic Leadership) targeting all categorical postgraduate year (PGY) 1 residents. Modules are taught during regularly scheduled educational time. Focus group surveys and discussions, as well as annual surveys of PGY-1s assessed residents' readiness to engage in training. LDP feasibility was assessed by considering sustainability of program structures and faculty retention, and resident acceptance of training was assessed by measuring attendance, with the attendance goal of 8 of 12 modules. RESULTS: Residents thought leadership training would be valuable if content remained applicable to daily work, and PGY-1 residents expressed high levels of interest in training. The LDP is part of the core educational programming for PGY-1 residents. Except for 2 modules, faculty presenters have remained consistent. During academic year 2014-2015, 45% (13 of 29) of categorical residents participated in at least 8 of 12 modules, and 72% (21 of 29) participated in at least 7 of 12. To date, 125 categorical residents have participated in training. CONCLUSIONS: Residents appeared ready to engage in leadership training, and the LDP was feasible to implement. The attendance goal was not met, but attendance was sufficient to justify program continuation.

Continuity Clinic Model and Diabetic Outcomes in Internal Medicine Residencies: Findings of the Educational Innovations Project Ambulatory Collaborative.

BACKGROUND: Efforts to improve diabetes care in residency programs are ongoing and in the midst of continuity clinic redesign at many institutions. While there appears to be a link between resident continuity and improvement in glycemic control for diabetic patients, it is uncertain whether clinic structure affects quality measures and patient outcomes. METHODS: This multi-institutional, cross-sectional study included 12 internal medicine programs. Three outcomes (glycemic control, blood pressure control, and achievement of target low-density lipoprotein [LDL]) and 2 process measures (A1C and LDL measurement) were reported for diabetic patients. Traditional, block, and combination clinic models were compared using analysis of covariance (ANCOVA). Analysis was adjusted for continuity, utilization, workload, and panel size. RESULTS: No significant differences were found in glycemic control across clinic models (P = .06). The percentage of diabetic patients with LDL < 100 mg/dL was 60% in block, compared to 54.9% and 55% in traditional and combination models (P = .006). The percentage of diabetic patients with blood pressure < 130/80 mmHg was 48.4% in block, compared to 36.7% and 36.9% in other models (P < .001). The percentage of diabetic patients with HbA1C measured was 92.1% in block compared to 75.2% and 82.1% in other models (P < .001). Also, the percentage of diabetic patients with LDL measured was significantly different across all groups, with 91.2% in traditional, 70.4% in combination, and 83.3% in block model programs (P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: While high scores on diabetic quality measures are achievable in any clinic model, the block model design was associated with better performance.

Effects of metformin and rosiglitazone in HIV-infected patients with hyperinsulinemia and elevated waist/hip ratio.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the effects of metformin and rosiglitazone, alone or in combination, on fat distribution, insulin sensitivity, and lipids in HIV-infected patients with insulin resistance and changes in fat distribution. METHODS: A total of 105 subjects were randomly assigned to receive metformin (500 mg twice a day increasing to 1000 mg twice a day after 2 weeks) with rosiglitazone placebo (Met/P, N = 26); rosiglitazone (4 mg/day) with metformin placebo (Rosi/P, N = 27); rosiglitazone (4 mg/day) plus metformin (500 mg twice a day increasing to 1000 mg twice a day after 2 weeks; Met/Rosi, N = 25); or dual placebo (P/P, N = 27) for 16 weeks. Efficacy assessments included oral glucose tolerance testing, abdominal computed tomography, whole-body dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry, and the measurement of fasting lipids and other biochemical indices. Safety was monitored throughout. Intent-to-treat analyses were performed using non-parametric methods. RESULTS: The median insulin area under the curve (AUC) decreased significantly compared with baseline in both groups randomly assigned to rosiglitazone (Rosi/P -25.7 microIU/ml, P = 0.012; Met/Rosi -17.7 microIU/ml, P = 0.002); and tended to decrease in the Met/P group (-11.1 microIU/ml, P = 0.058). The change in AUC with combination therapy was significant compared with placebo (P = 0.032). No treatment was associated with significant changes in visceral or subcutaneous abdominal fat. Leg fat increased in subjects on Rosi/P compared with placebo (+4.8 versus -8.3%, P = 0.034). Rosiglitazone, but not metformin, increased adiponectin but also increased LDL-cholesterol and decreased HDL-cholesterol. Gastrointestinal effects occurred frequently in subjects on metformin. CONCLUSION: Both treatments improved insulin sensitivity, but neither reduced visceral fat. Rosiglitazone may increase subcutaneous fat in some individuals.

Glucose metabolism, lipid, and body fat changes in antiretroviral-naive subjects randomized to nelfinavir or efavirenz plus dual nucleosides.

OBJECTIVE: To determine if particular components of antiretroviral drug regimens are associated with greater insulin resistance, dyslipidemia, and peripheral lipoatrophy. METHODS: Metabolic and body composition variables were measured prospectively over 64 weeks in 334 antiretroviral-naive, HIV-infected subjects who were randomized to receive nelfinavir, efavirenz, or both, combined with zidovudine/lamivudine or didanosine/stavudine in a factorial design, multicenter trial. Subjects assigned to efavirenz (n = 110) were compared with those assigned to nelfinavir (n = 99); subjects assigned to zidovudine/lamivudine (n = 154) were compared with those assigned to didanosine/stavudine (n = 180). A subset of 157 subjects had serial dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DEXA) scans. RESULTS: Lipid measures increased in all groups. Greater increases in high density lipoprotein (HDL) cholesterol occurred with efavirenz than with nelfinavir. Greater increases in total cholesterol, non-HDL cholesterol and HDL cholesterol occurred with stavudine and didanosine than with zidovudine/lamivudine. There were no differences in insulin resistance in the comparisons. After initial increases in the first 16 weeks, median limb fat decreased. Greater changes in percentage changes in limb fat occurred with didanosine/stavudine (-16.8%) than with zidovudine/lamivudine (+4.0%; P < 0.001 for overall change from baseline) and with nelfinavir (-13.1%) compared with efavirenz (+1.8%; P = 0.003). CONCLUSIONS: Over 64 weeks, all regimens were associated with increases in lipids but insulin resistance did not differ between groups. Regimens containing didanosine/stavudine and regimens containing nelfinavir were associated with greater loss of limb fat.

Impact of trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole prophylaxis on etiology and susceptibilities of pathogens causing human immunodeficiency virus-associated bacteremia.

The impact of chronic prophylactic administration of trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole (SXT) on the ecology and the antimicrobial susceptibilities of bloodstream pathogens in human immunodeficiency virus (HIV)-infected patients was studied using a retrospective chart review. Eighty-nine patients with advanced HIV infection developed 124 episodes of bacteremia with 156 pathogenic isolates. Staphylococcus aureus and Enterobacteriaceae tended to be less common among patients receiving SXT. Isolates from patients receiving SXT were likelier (75%) to be resistant to 20 microg of SXT/ml than those from patients not receiving SXT (33%) (P < 0.001).