Faculty Bibliography

Besides amyloid deposition, white matter (WM) changes are involved in the early pathogenesis of Alzheimer's Disease (AD), including inflammation, demyelination and axonal loss. Using simultaneous PET and MRI, we investigated differences in WM microstructural integrity, measured with Diffusion Kurtosis Imaging (DKI), with respect to beta amyloid (Aa) deposition as measured with18F-Florbetapir PET. DKI is a clinically feasible diffusion MRI method that extends beyond Diffusion Tensor Imaging and probes non-Gaussian diffusion properties of nervous tissue, and allows for quantifying the microstructural index for the axonal water fraction (AWF), a specific marker for axonal degeneration and demyelination. Methods: 34 subjects were scanned on a 3T integrated PET-MRI system (Siemens Biograph mMR, VB20). 18FFlorbetapir (9 mCi, Eli Lilly) was injected intravenously and a static 20-minute PET image was reconstructed starting at 40 min post-injection using a UTE-based attenuation map. An anatomical MP-RAGE was acquired for cortical and sub-cortical segmentation using Freesurfer. Hippocampal volume was normalized to the estimated total intracranial volume. The standardized uptake values (SUV) in 5 cortical regions known for pathological uptake of Florbetapir (anterior and posterior cingulate, medial orbito-frontal, parietal and temporal), normalized to the cerebellum, yielded mean cortical relative SUV (SUVr). DKI provided parametric maps for the radial diffusivity (RD), radial kurtosis (RK), and the AWF. Using a lower and higher mean SUVr threshold of 1.0 and 1.1, age- and gender-controlled subjects were categorized into Aa negative (Aa-) (n = 13, 5 females, age = 69.8 +/- 5.1 yrs), Aa intermediate (Aai) (n = 13, 8 females, age = 68.9 +/- 4.8 yrs), or Aa positive (Aa+) (n = 8, 4 females, age = 70.6 +/- 5.3 yrs). Using Tract-Based Spatial Statistics (TBSS), skeletonized voxel-wise analysis was performed to identify areas of differences in the diffusion metrics while covarying for age. Separately, WM regions of interests (ROIs) were automatically segmented using atlas registration over which mean values were extracted. Analysis of covariance covarying for age was used to compare diffusion metrics and hippocampal volume among groups. Results: See figure. Results from both TBSS and ROI analysis demonstrated changes in the fornix and the genu of the corpus callosum. Between the Aa- and Aai groups, RD decreased while RK and AWF increased. Conversely, between the Aai and Aa+ groups, RD increased RD while RK and AWF decreased. A trend towards significantly higher hippocampal volume in the Aai group was observed. Conclusions: We report changes in RD, RK and AWF in opposite directions between Aa- and Aa~, and between Aa~ and Aa+, respectively, suggesting that different mechanisms affect the microstructure during different stages of AD. Early on, mechanisms including microglial activation may restrict diffusion, resulting in the observed decrease in RD and increase in RK and AWF. Later on, neurodegenerative effects such as demyelination and axonal loss may outweigh inflammation, resulting in the observed increase in RD and decrease in RK and AWF. [IMAGE PRESENTED]

To identify research priorities and appropriate resources and to establish the infrastructure required to address the emergency care of patients with cancer, the National Institutes of Health's National Cancer Institute and the Office of Emergency Care Research sponsored a one-day workshop, "Cancer and Emergency Medicine: Setting the Research Agenda," in March 2015 in Bethesda, MD. Participants included leading researchers and clinicians in the fields of oncology, emergency medicine, and palliative care, and representatives from the National Institutes of Health. Attendees were charged with identifying research opportunities and priorities to advance the understanding of the emergency care of cancer patients. Recommendations were made in 4 areas: the collection of epidemiologic data, care of the patient with febrile neutropenia, acute events such as dyspnea, and palliative care in the emergency department setting.

A 6-year-old otherwise healthy girl is brought to the emergency department (ED) by her parents after waking up at 3 a.m. saying that her tummy hurts. She had not eaten dinner the evening before because of stomach pain, but seemed better after being given acetaminophen and falling asleep in her bed. She has not vomited and has had no diarrhea, though when asked where she hurts she points to her periumbilical region. On examination, she is interactive and appears well, has normal vital signs, and is afebrile. She is mildly tender in the periumbilical region and right lower quadrant without guarding or rebound tenderness and otherwise has a normal examination. The clinician communicates her concern for appendicitis with the parents and patient and orders ibuprofen and a focused right lower quadrant ultrasound. Approximately 1 hour later, imaging results are available and indicate that the appendix was not visualized. The patient is re-examined. She says she feels better, her abdominal pain is nearly gone, and there is only mild residual tenderness to deep palpation in the periumbilical region and both lower quadrants

The Society for Academic Emergency Medicine (SAEM) consensus conference provided many platforms for patient advocates to share their experiences and demonstrate the powerful contribution they have to offer to the decision-making process. One such platform was the presentation of a film 'The Faces of Medical Error: From Tears to Transparency' shared by Patty and David Skolnik. In this article the Skolniks build on their story shared at the SAEM consensus conference and the panel discussion. They provide further insight drawn from nine years of experiences as advocates for patient safety, including their reflections on working with, training and educating medical professionals, lawmakers, and consumers in shared decision-making and informed consent

As part of the 2016 Academic Emergency Medicine consensus conference, 'Shared Decision Making in the Emergency Department: Development of a Policy-Relevant Patient-Centered Research Agenda,' a panel of representatives from the Office of Emergency Care Research, the Patient Centered Outcomes Research Institute, the American Heart Association, the John A. Hartford Foundation, and the Emergency Care Coordination Center were assembled to discuss funding opportunities for future research in this field. This article summarizes their discussion of funding priorities and examples of successfully funded projects related to shared decision making in emergency medicine

For many people the Emergency Department (ED) is the first point of access to healthcare for acute needs, and a recurring location for many with chronic healthcare needs. While the ED is well placed to identify unmet needs it can also be a net that people slip through when faced with uncoordinated and expensive healthcare challenges. Thus the ED has a responsibility to set patients on a safe and meaningful care trajectory which can only be done in consultation and partnership with the patients themselves. The purpose of this article is to present crucial aspects of patient engagement that are essential for future research to foster an environment of co-learning and respect that encourages ongoing involvement by patients, families, and staff

BACKGROUND: Little is known about the optimal use of shared decision making (SDM) to guide palliative and end-of-life decisions in the emergency department (ED). OBJECTIVE: To convene a working group to develop a set of research questions that, when answered, will substantially advance the ability of clinicians to use SDM to guide palliative and end-of-life care decisions in the ED. METHODS: Participants were identified based on expertise in emergency, palliative, or geriatrics care, policy, or patient-advocacy and spanned physician, nursing, social work, legal, and patient perspectives. Input from the group was elicited using a time-staggered Delphi process including three teleconferences, an open platform for asynchronous input, and an in-person meeting to obtain a final round of input from all members and to identify and resolve or describe areas of disagreement. CONCLUSION: Key research questions identified by the group related to which ED patients are likely to benefit from palliative care, what interventions can most effectively promote palliative care in the ED, what outcomes are most appropriate to assess the impact of these interventions, what is the potential for initiating advance care planning in the ED to help patients define long-term goals of care, and what policies influence palliative and end-of-life care decision making in the ED. Answers to these questions have the potential to substantially improve the quality of care for ED patients with advanced illness

Although the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act and other laws have promoted the use of shared decision making (SDM) in recent years, few specific policies have addressed the opportunities and challenges of utilizing SDM in the emergency department (ED). Policies relating to physician payment, quality measurement, and medical-legal risks each present unique challenges to adoption of SDM in the ED. This article summarizes findings from a health policy breakout session of the 2016 Academic Emergency Medicine consensus conference 'Shared Decision Making in the Emergency Department: Development of a Policy-Relevant, Patient-Centered Research Agenda.' The objectives were to (1) describe federal and state policies that influence utilization or assessment of SDM; (2) identify policies and policy-focused knowledge gaps that serve as barriers to adoption of emergency department SDM; and (3) to define a consensus-based, policy-focused research agenda to support adoption of SDM in emergency care

The emergency department (ED) occupies a unique position within the healthcare system, serving as a safety net for vulnerable patients, regardless of their race, ethnicity, religion, country of origin, sexual orientation, socioeconomic status, or medical diagnosis. Shared decision making (SDM) presents special challenges when used with vulnerable population groups. The differing circumstances, needs, and perspectives of vulnerable groups invoke issues of provider bias, disrespect, judgmental attitudes, and lack of cultural competence, as well as patient mistrust and the consequences of their social and economic disenfranchisement. A research agenda that includes community-engaged approaches, mixed-methods studies, and cost-effectiveness analyses is proposed to address the following questions: 1) What are the best processes/formats for SDM among racial, ethnic, cultural, religious, linguistic, social, or otherwise vulnerable groups who experience disadvantage in the healthcare system? 2) What organizational or systemic changes are needed to support SDM in the ED whenever appropriate? 3) What competencies are needed to enable emergency providers to consider patients' situation/context in an unbiased way? 4) How do we teach these competencies to students and residents? 5) How do we cultivate these competencies in practicing emergency physicians, nurses, and other clinical providers who lack them? The authors also identify the importance of using accurate, group-specific data to inform risk estimates for SDM decision aids for vulnerable populations and the need for increased ED-based care coordination and transitional care management capabilities to create additional care options that align with the needs and preferences of vulnerable populations.