Faculty Bibliography

BACKGROUND: Trainees struggle with the evaluation and management of inpatient clinical ethical dilemmas. AIM: To meet their needs for both conceptual clarification and practical management, we designed a program to teach medical residents a systematic approach to resolving clinical ethical dilemmas. METHODS: We instituted monthly resident ethics educational case conferences to clarify residents' understanding of key concepts of medical ethics and to teach an 8-step systematic approach to resolving ethical dilemmas. We surveyed learners on the appropriateness, immediate utility, and potential for future usefulness of the approach. RESULTS: The vast majority of residents found the approach to be applicable and helpful with clinical decisions and interactions with patients and their family members. CONCLUSIONS: Teaching residents to use a systematic approach in understanding and resolving ethical dilemmas can facilitate their management of the ethical dilemmas that arise in clinical practice. Providing trainees with a concise structure for the thought process involved gives them confidence in their ability to address the issues directly and to act for reasons that are explicit, transparent, and reflect medical professionalism.

Discharge against medical advice (AMA), in which a patient chooses to leave the hospital before the treating physician recommends discharge, continues to be a common and vexing problem. This article reviews the prevalence, costs, predictors, and potential interventions for this clinical problem. Between 1% and 2% of all medical admissions result in an AMA discharge. Predictors of AMA discharge, based primarily on retrospective cohort studies, tended to be younger age, Medicaid or no insurance, male sex, and current or a history of substance or alcohol abuse. Interventions to reduce the rate of AMA discharges have not been systematically studied. This article offers suggestions for interventions based on studies in other areas of clinical care as well as the psychiatric AMA discharge literature. Studies for this review were identified by searching the relevant MeSH heading (discharge) and key words (against medical advice, leave, elope, hospital, and self-discharge) in PubMed databases and selecting all English-language articles from 1970 through 2008 that included data on adult medical inpatients

BACKGROUND: Although hepatitis C virus (HCV) has an estimated national prevalence of 1.8%, testing rates are lower than those recommended by guidelines, particularly in primary care. A critical step is the ability to identify patients at increased risk who should be screened. We sought to prospectively derive and validate a clinical predication tool to assist primary care providers in identifying patients who should be tested for HCV antibodies. METHODS: A total of 1000 randomly selected patients attending an inner-city primary care clinic filled out a 27-item questionnaire assessing 5 HCV risk factor domains: work, medical, exposure, personal care, and social history. Afterward, the patients underwent HCV antibody testing. Multivariable logistic regression analysis was performed to identify risk factors associated with HCV antibodies. RESULTS: There was an 8.3% (95% confidence interval, 6.7%-10.2%) prevalence of HCV antibodies. The patients who were HCV antibody positive were more likely to be male, older, and insured by Medicaid (P < or = .02). Those who had risk factors within the medical, exposure, and social history domains were more likely to be HCV antibody positive. The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve for the screening tool based on these 3 domains was 0.77. With an increasing number of positive domains, there was a higher likelihood of HCV antibody positivity. Only 2% of patients with 0 risk factors had HCV antibodies. CONCLUSIONS: A prediction tool can be used to accurately identify patients at high risk of HCV who may benefit from serologic screening. Future studies should assess whether wider use of this tool may lead to improved outcomes

OBJECTIVES: Physicians frequently express dissatisfaction about caring for patients with chronic pain and frequently report that inadequate training and concern about addiction are impediments to prescribing opioids. Elderly patients with chronic pain may be at increased risk of experiencing uncontrolled pain and this patient population is increasingly being cared for by geriatricians rather than internists. We sought to determine if there is a differential impact on internists and geriatricians of the factors that adversely affect attitudes toward opioid prescribing. METHODS: Anonymous survey of geriatric and internal medicine physicians at a large urban academic medical center about their beliefs and behaviors regarding opioid prescribing. RESULTS: One hundred thirty-two of 187 physicians completed the survey for an overall response rate of 71%. Controlling for level of training, internists were more likely to be concerned about illegal diversion (adjusted odds ratio=10.0, P=0.004), were more concerned about causing addiction (38% vs. 0%, P<0.001), and were more likely to be concerned about their inability to prescribe the correct opioid dose (adjusted odds ratio=11.1, P=0.020). DISCUSSION: Factors shown to have an adverse affect on opioid prescribing disproportionately impact on the attitudes of internists compared with geriatricians. Further research is needed to determine if there is also a differential impact on how internists care for their elderly patients with chronic pain

The National Institutes of Health and other institutions have emphasized the need to expand access to treatment of chronic hepatitis C virus infection to a larger and more diverse patient population. To begin to address this need, the divisions of General Internal Medicine and Liver Diseases of the Mount Sinai Medical Center created a program to identify patients who might benefit from hepatitis C treatment, to treat uncomplicated patients in the primary care setting, and to refer appropriate patients to liver disease specialists. Preliminary data from this program suggest that primary care-based treatment of chronic hepatitis C may offer unique advantages. The primary care setting allows special needs to be addressed and allows comprehensive services to be provided. Patients are guided through the complex pretreatment evaluation process, and non-liver-related comorbidities are managed. Our program may provide a useful model for increasing hepatitis C literacy among primary care providers and for extending treatment to a broader population of patients with hepatitis C