Faculty Bibliography

During 2014-2016, the largest outbreak of Ebola virus disease (EVD) in history occurred in West Africa. The New York City Department of Health and Mental Hygiene (DOHMH) worked with health care providers to prepare for persons under investigation (PUIs) for EVD in New York City. From July 1, 2014, through December 29, 2015, we classified as a PUI a person with EVD-compatible signs or symptoms and an epidemiologic risk factor within 21 days before illness onset. Of 112 persons who met PUI criteria, 74 (66%) sought medical care and 49 (44%) were hospitalized. The remaining 38 (34%) were isolated at home with daily contact by DOHMH staff members. Thirty-two (29%) PUIs received a diagnosis of malaria. Of 10 PUIs tested, 1 received a diagnosis of EVD. Home isolation minimized unnecessary hospitalization. This case study highlights the importance of developing competency among clinical and public health staff managing persons suspected to be infected with a high-consequence pathogen.

The concept of a pulmonary embolism response team (PERT) is multidisciplinary, with the hope that it may positively impact patient care, hospital efficiency, and outcomes in the treatment of patients with intermediate and high risk pulmonary embolism (PE). Clinical characteristics of a baseline population of patients presenting with submassive and massive PE to URMC between 2014 and 2016 were examined (n = 159). We compared this baseline population before implementation of a PERT to a similar population of patients at 3-month periods, and then as a group at 18 months after PERT implementation (n = 146). Outcomes include management strategies and efficiency of the emergency department (ED) in diagnosing, treating, and dispositioning patients. Before PERT, patients with submassive and massive PE were managed fairly conservatively: heparin alone (85%), or additional advanced therapies (15%). Following PERT, submassive and massive PE were managed as follows: heparin alone (68%), or additional advanced therapies (32%). Efficiency of the ED in managing high risk PE significantly improved after PERT compared with before PERT; where triage to diagnosis time was reduced (384 vs. 212 min, 45% decrease, p = 0.0001), diagnosis to heparin time was reduced (182 vs. 76 min, 58% decrease, p = 0.0001), and the time from triage to disposition was reduced (392 vs. 290 min, 26% decrease, p < 0.0001). Our analysis showed that following PERT implementation, patients with intermediate and high risk acute PE received more aggressive and advanced treatment modalities and received significantly expedited care in the ED.

OBJECTIVE:To characterize the prevalence of tobacco, alcohol, and drug use and the acceptability of screening in university health centers. PARTICIPANTS/METHODS:Five hundred and two consecutively recruited students presenting for primary care visits in February and August, 2015, in two health centers. METHODS:Participants completed anonymous substance use questionnaires in the waiting area, and had the option of sharing results with their medical provider. We examined screening rates, prevalence, and predictors of sharing results. RESULTS:Past-year use was 31.5% for tobacco, 67.1% for alcohol (>4 drinks/day), 38.6% for illicit drugs, and 9.2% for prescription drugs (nonmedical use). A minority (43.8%) shared screening results. Sharing was lowest among those with moderate-high risk use of tobacco (OR =0.37, 95% CI 0.20-0.69), alcohol (OR =0.48, 95% CI 0.25-0.90), or illicit drugs (OR =0.38, 95% CI 0.20-0.73). CONCLUSIONS:Screening can be integrated into university health services, but students with active substance use may be uncomfortable discussing it with medical providers.

BACKGROUND:Working with influenza-like illness (ILI) is pervasive throughout health care. We assessed knowledge, attitudes, and practices regarding ILI presenteeism of both postgraduate trainees and program leaders. METHODS:This survey study was conducted at the Montefiore Medical Center, Albert Einstein College of Medicine, a large academic center in the Bronx, New York. Internal medicine and subspecialty house staff and program directors completed an anonymous electronic survey between April 23 and June 15, 2018. RESULTS:A total of 197 of 400 (49%) house staff and 23 of 39 (59%) program leaders participated; 107 (54%) trainees and 6 (26%) program leaders self-reported ILI presenteeism in the past 12 months. More than 90% of trainees and program leaders reported that ILI presenteeism places others at risk. Only 9% of program leaders accurately estimated trainee ILI presenteeism prevalence. Both cited "not wanting to burden colleagues" as the top reason for ILI presenteeism. Twenty-six (24%) trainees practiced ILI presenteeism on critical care units. The majority reported that they would provide patient care with upper respiratory symptoms without fever. Most trainees incorrectly answered influenza knowledge questions. CONCLUSIONS:ILI presenteeism prevalence is high within training programs at our medical center. Program leaders can model best practices, enforce nonpunitive sick-leave policies, and ensure infection prevention competencies are met annually.