Faculty Bibliography

Background/UNASSIGNED:A growing body of research continues to elucidate health inequities experienced by transgender individuals and further underscores the need for medical providers to be appropriately trained to deliver care to this population. Medical education in transgender health can empower physicians to identify and change the systemic barriers to care that cause transgender health inequities as well as improve knowledge about transgender-specific care. Methods/UNASSIGNED:We conducted structured searches of five databases to identify literature related to medical education and transgender health. Of the 1272 papers reviewed, 119 papers were deemed relevant to predefined criteria, medical education, and transgender health topics. Citation tracking was conducted on the 119 papers using Scopus to identify an additional 12 relevant citations (a total of 131 papers). Searches were completed on October 15, 2017 and updated on December 11, 2017. Results/UNASSIGNED:Transgender health has yet to gain widespread curricular exposure, but efforts toward incorporating transgender health into both undergraduate and graduate medical educations are nascent. There is no consensus on the exact educational interventions that should be used to address transgender health. Barriers to increased transgender health exposure include limited curricular time, lack of topic-specific competency among faculty, and underwhelming institutional support. All published interventions proved effective in improving attitudes, knowledge, and/or skills necessary to achieve clinical competency with transgender patients. Conclusion/UNASSIGNED:Transgender populations experience health inequities in part due to the exclusion of transgender-specific health needs from medical school and residency curricula. Currently, transgender medical education is largely composed of one-time attitude and awareness-based interventions that show significant short-term improvements but suffer methodologically. Consensus in the existing literature supports educational efforts to shift toward pedagogical interventions that are longitudinally integrated and clinical skills based, and we include a series of recommendations to affirm and guide such an undertaking.

Learning Objective #1: Recognize the incidence of posterior circulation stroke after cardiac catheterization Learning Objective #2: Recognize how cognitive biases affect clinical decision making CASE: A 57 year old man with hypertension, type 2 diabetes, depression, coronary artery disease s/p PCI and 4-vessel CABG presented with nausea, vomiting, and syncope. He was found to be in complete heart block and underwent emergent pacemaker placement and cardiac catheterization with stent placement to the left circumflex artery. After catheterization, patient reported lightheadedness and cloudiness when walking. He was transferred to the medicine service with sign-out to follow up with physical therapy given "deconditioning" after his acute illness. PT sessions were limited by his hesitancy to walk beyond a few steps. Four days after downgrade, patient reported left sided visual changes. Physical exam was notable for left homon-ymous hemianopia without somatosensory deficits. A non-contrast head CT revealed a new acute to sub-acute right posterior cerebral artery infarction. He was determined to have had an embolic ischemic stroke secondary to cardiac catheterization. His lightheadedness and cloudiness were believed to be secondary to hemianopia. He was medically managed and discharged to SAR. IMPACT: This case involves a common post-catheterization complication as an unusual presentation described as lightheadedness and cloudiness. We attributed the symptoms to overall deconditioning secondary to diagnostic momentum. Furthermore, visual fields were not accurately assessed in this post-procedure patient. Our personal practice now includes exam maneuvers to evaluate posterior circulation on patients post-cardiac catheterization given the high incidence of these strokes in cardiac patients. DISCUSSION: Post-cardiac catheterization strokes are common, with most occurring within 24 hours of the procedure. Of these, approximately 25% involve the posterior circulation often leading to visual field deficits without gross somatosensory deficits. As a result, neurological deficits may often go unnoticed if visual fields are not accurately assessed. Furthermore, patients may not realize a true visual field deficit as they can compensate with neck rotation; initial descriptors may be vague such as lightheadedness or cloudiness. Our case was further complicated by cognitive biases that influenced our decision making; namely, the case was framed as overall deconditioning. As a result, we anchored to a single diagnosis and did not consider neurological deficit as an explanation for our patient's symptoms. We encourage all medical professionals to be cognizant of variability in presentation of visual field deficits and also be keen to their own cognitive biases

Background: Paper-based Early Recovery after Surgery (ERAS) path-ways have been shown to reduce length of stay, but there have been limited evaluations of electronic health record (EHR) based pathways. The objective of this study was to evaluate whether ERAS processes implemented with a novel pathway activity integrated with the EHR (E-Pathway) can reduce costs without resulting in increased 30 day readmissions. Methods: We performed a retrospective cohort study of surgical patients age>= 18 years hospitalized at an academic medical center from March 1, 2013 to August 31, 2016. The primary cohort consisted of patients admitted for elective colon surgery. We also studied a control group of patients undergoing elective procedures with similar length of stay as colon surgery (3-5 days). The E-Pathway was based on a pathway template developed by a common EHR vendor (Epic Systems, Verona, WI) with content developed by a multidisciplinary team based on ERAS principles. The E-Pathway was implemented on March 2, 2015. The primary outcome was variable costs per case. Secondary outcomes were observed to expected length of stay (O:E LOS) and 30 day readmissions to our hospital. For both groups, we performed an interrupted time series with segmented regression analysis with month being the unit of time. We used gamma regression for cost models and logistic models for the secondary outcomes. Results: We included 823 (470 and 353 in the pre-and post-intervention, respectively) colon surgery patients and 3415 (1,819 and 1,596 in the pre-and post-intervention) surgical control patients. Among the colon surgery cohort, we observed no changesin cost eitheratbaseline [-0.1% (95% CI-0.8%, 0.5%) per month] or with immediate introduction of the pathway. However, there was statistically significant (p = 0.040) decrease in costs of 1.3% (0.6% to 2.5%) per surgical encounter per month over the 18 month post intervention period. The surgical comparator group had no change in cost either at baseline or at the time of intervention and had a nonsignificant decrease in monthly costs of 0.6% (p = 0.231) post-intervention. There was statistically significant (p = 0.039) decrease in the O:E slope after the intervention of 1.49% per surgical encounter per month. The surgical comparator group had a nonsignificant (p = 0.761) increase in slope of 1.87%. For the 30 day readmission rates, there were no statistically significant changes in either the colon surgery or control groups. Conclusions: Our study is the first, to our knowledge, to report on the outcomes of a novel sophisticated E pathway integrated into an EHR. Following implementation of the E-pathway for colon surgery patients, we observed decreasing direct variable costs and O:E LOS over time. These improvements were not observed among comparable surgical patients. Consequently, as institutions continue to place increased emphasis on standardization of best practice care, E-pathways can be powerful vehicles to support those changes in the new EHR-centric care model