Objective: To promote wider recognition and further understanding of cannabinoid hyperemesis (CH). Patients and Methods: We constructed a case series, the largest to date, of patients diagnosed with CH at our institution. Inclusion criteria were determined by reviewing all PubMed indexed journals with case reports and case series on CH. The institution's electronic medical record was searched from January 1, 2005, through June 15, 2010. Patients were included if there was a history of recurrent vomiting with no other explanation for symptoms and if cannabis use preceded symptom onset. Of 1571 patients identified, 98 patients (6%) met inclusion criteria. Results: All 98 patients were younger than 50 years of age. Among the 37 patients in whom duration of cannabis use was available, most (25 [68%]) reported using cannabis for more than 2 years before symptom onset, and 71 of 75 patients (95%) in whom frequency of use was available used cannabis more than once weekly. Eighty-four patients (86%) reported abdominal pain. The effect of hot water bathing was documented in 57 patients (58%), and 52 (91%) of these patients reported relief of symptoms with hot showers or baths. Follow-up was available in only 10 patients (10%). Of those 10, 7 (70%) stopped using cannabis and 6 of these 7 (86%) noted complete resolution of their symptoms. Conclusion: Cannabinoid hyperemesis should be considered in younger patients with long-term cannabis use and recurrent nausea, vomiting, and abdominal pain. On the basis of our findings in this large series of patients, we propose major and supportive criteria for the diagnosis of CH.

Gender bias and discrimination have profound and far-reaching effects on the health care workforce, delivery of patient care, and advancement of science and are antithetical to the principles of professionalism. In the quest for gender equity, medicine, with its abundance of highly educated and qualified women, should be leading the way. The sheer number of women who comprise the majority of pediatricians in the United States suggests this specialty has a unique opportunity to stand out as progressively equitable. Indeed, there has been much progress to celebrate for women in medicine and pediatrics. However, many challenges remain, and there are areas in which progress is too slow, stalled, or even regressing. The fair treatment of women pediatricians will require enhanced and simultaneous commitment from leaders in 4 key gatekeeper groups: academic medical centers, hospitals, health care organizations, and practices; medical societies; journals; and funding agencies. In this report, we describe the 6-step equity, diversity, and inclusion cycle, which provides a strategic methodology to (1) examine equity, diversity, and inclusion data; (2) share results with stakeholders; (3) investigate causality; (4) implement strategic interventions; (5) track outcomes and adjust strategies; and (6) disseminate results. Next steps include the enforcement of a climate of transparency and accountability, with leaders prioritizing and financially supporting workforce gender equity. This scientific and data-driven approach will accelerate progress and help pave a pathway to better health care and science. Gender bias and discrimination have profound and far-reaching effects on the health care workforce, delivery of patient care, and advancement of science and are antithetical to the principles of professionalism. In the quest for gender equity, medicine, with its abundance of highly educated and qualified women, should be leading the way. Because women comprise the majority of pediatricians in the United States, pediatrics has a unique opportunity to stand out as progressively equitable. Indeed, there has been much progress to celebrate for women in medicine 1-7 and pediatrics. 3,4,7 However, many challenges remain, and there are areas in which progress is too slow, stalled, or regressing. 8-14 Moreover, women with intersectional identities (ie, simultaneously belonging to multiple underrepresented groups, including gender, race, sexual orientation, ability, age, or socioeconomic status 15) may experience heightened levels of bias and discrimination, sometimes called a "double bind." 16 Therefore, this report focuses on persistent disparities and highlights key a Executive Leadership in Academic Medicine Program,

Residents who participated in the FC demonstrated improved QI knowledge compared with the control group. Residents valued the in-class application sessions more than the online component. These findings have important implications for graduate medical education as residency training programs increasingly use FC models.

No abstract

INTRODUCTION: Endoscopy-related injury (ERI) is common in gastroenterologists (GI). The study aim was to assess the prevalence of self-reported ERI, patterns of injury, and endoscopist knowledge of preventative strategies in a nationally representative sample. METHODS: A 38-item electronic survey was sent to 15,868 American College of Gastroenterology physician members. The survey was completed by 1,698 members and was included in analyses. Descriptive, univariate, and multivariate analyses were conducted to evaluate the likelihood of ERI based on workload parameters and gender. RESULTS: ERI was reported by 75% of respondents. ERI was most common in the thumb (63.3%), neck (59%), hand/finger (56.5%), lower back (52.6%), shoulder (47%), and wrist (45%). There was no significant difference in the prevalence of ERI between men and women GI. However, women GI were significantly more likely to report upper extremity ERI while men were more likely to report lower-back pain-related ERI. Significant gender differences were noted in the reported mechanisms attributed to ERI. Most respondents did not discuss ergonomic strategies in their current practice (63%). ERI was less likely to be reported in GI who took breaks during endoscopy (P = 0.002). DISCUSSION: ERI is highly prevalent in GI physicians. Significant gender differences regarding specific sites affected by ERI and the contributing mechanisms were observed. Results strongly support institution of training in ergonomics for all GI as a strategy to prevent its impact on providers of endoscopy. JOURNAL/ajgast/04.03/00000434-202103000-00021/inline-graphic1/v/2023-07-18T070745Z/r/image-tiff