No abstract

BACKGROUND: Over the past decade, nearly half of internal medicine residencies have implemented block clinic scheduling; however, the effects on residency-related outcomes are unknown. The authors systematically reviewed the impact of block versus traditional ambulatory scheduling on residency-related outcomes, including (1) resident satisfaction, (2) resident-perceived conflict between inpatient and outpatient responsibilities, (3) ambulatory training time, (4) continuity of care, (5) patient satisfaction, and (6) patient health outcomes. METHOD: The authors reviewed the following databases: Ovid MEDLINE, Ovid MEDLINE InProcess, EBSCO CINAHL, EBSCO ERIC, and the Cochrane Library from inception through March 2017 and included studies of residency programs comparing block to traditional scheduling with at least one outcome of interest. Two authors independently extracted data on setting, participants, schedule design, and the outcomes of interest. RESULTS: Of 8139 studies, 11 studies of fair to moderate methodologic quality were included in the final analysis. Overall, block scheduling was associated with marked improvements in resident satisfaction (n = 7 studies, effect size range − 0.3 to + 0.9), resident-perceived conflict between inpatient and outpatient responsibilities (n = 5, effect size range + 0.3 to + 2.6), and available ambulatory training time (n = 5). Larger improvements occurred in programs implementing short (1 week) ambulatory blocks. However, block scheduling may result in worse physician continuity (n = 4). Block scheduling had inconsistent effects on patient continuity (n = 4), satisfaction (n = 3), and health outcomes (n = 3). DISCUSSION: Although block scheduling improves resident satisfaction, conflict between inpatient and outpatient responsibilities, and ambulatory training time, there may be important tradeoffs with worse care continuity.

In heart failure (HF) patients, remote monitoring using implantable devices may be used to predict and reduce HF exacerbations and mortality. Data from randomized controlled trials (RCTs) was assessed to determine the effectiveness of implantable remote monitoring on the improvement of outcomes in HF patients. A systematic review and meta-analysis of RCTs testing remote monitoring versus standard of care for management of HF patients was performed. Primary endpoints were all-cause mortality and a composite of cardiovascular (CV) and HF hospitalizations. Rate ratios (RRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) were calculated. A secondary analysis tested for heterogeneity of treatment effect (HTE) comparing right ventricular/pulmonary pressure monitoring versus impedance-based monitoring on hospitalization. A regression analysis was performed using the mean follow-up time as the moderator on each primary endpoint. Eleven RCTs (n = 6196) were identified with a mean follow-up of 21.9 months. The mean age and reported ejection fraction were 64.1 years and 27.7%, respectively. Remote monitoring did not reduce mortality (RR 0.89 [95% CI 0.77, 1.03]) or the composite of CV and HF hospitalizations (RR 0.98 [0.81, 1.19]). Subgroup analysis found significant HTE for hospitalizations between those studies that used right ventricular/pulmonary pressure monitoring versus impedance-based monitoring (I 2 = 87.1%, chi 2 = 7.75, p = 0.005). Regression analysis found no relationship between the log rate ratio of remote monitoring's effect on mortality, CV hospitalization or HF hospitalization, and mean follow-up time. Compared to standard of care, remote monitoring using implantable devices did not reduce mortality, CV, or HF hospitalizations. However, right ventricular/pulmonary pressure monitoring may reduce HF hospitalizations, which will need to be explored in future studies. Keywords Heart failure • Remote monitoring • Implantable devices • Systematic review • Meta-analysis • Randomized controlled trials Abbreviations HF Heart failure CV Cardiovascular RCT Randomized controlled trial CRT-D Cardiac resynchronization therapy defibrillator ICD Implantable cardioverter-defibrillator Highlights • Standard of care in heart failure outpatient monitoring is centered on patient-reported symptoms. • New methods of monitoring physiologic markers with implantable devices such as cardiac resynchronization therapy device and pulmonary artery pressure sensors have been developed. • Several randomized controlled trials (RCTs) have been conducted examining whether use of remote monitoring has an effect on mortality and hospitalizations. • This systematic review and meta-analysis examined 11 RCTs and showed no significant effect with implantable remote monitoring on mortality, heart failure (HF) hospitalizations, or cardiovascular hospitalizations when compared to standard of care. • A decrease in HF hospitalizations was observed in RCTs using implantable continuous cardiac/pulmonary artery pressure monitoring compared to thoracic impedance-based m...

For older veterans hospitalized with pneumonia, a concurrent diagnosis of major depressive disorder, and especially untreated depression, was associated with higher mortality. This highlights that untreated major depressive disorder is an independent risk factor for mortality for patients with pneumonia.

No abstract