PAL and TG care coordination interventions were associated with lower rates of 30-day readmission. Our findings underscore the importance of determining the appropriate intervention for the hardest-to-reach patients, who are also at the highest risk of being readmitted.

BACKGROUND: Pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) for HIV is effective, yet many providers continue to lack knowledge and comfort in providing this intervention. It remains unclear whether internal medicine (IM) residents receive appropriate training in PrEP care and if this affects their future practices. OBJECTIVE: We sought to evaluate the relationship between current IM residents' prior PrEP training and knowledge, comfort, and practice regarding the provision of PrEP. DESIGN AND PARTICIPANTS: We created an online survey to assess IM residents' knowledge, attitudes, and behaviors related to PrEP. The survey was distributed among five IM programs across the USA. KEY RESULTS: We had a 35% response rate. Of 229 respondents, 96% (n = 220) had heard of PrEP but only 25% (n = 51) had received prior training and 11% (n = 24) had prescribed PrEP. Compared with those without, those with prior training reported good to excellent knowledge scores regarding PrEP (80% versus 33%, p < 0.001), more frequent prescribing (28% versus 7%, p = 0.001), and higher comfort levels with evaluating risk for HIV, educating patients, and monitoring aspects of PrEP (75% versus 26%, 56% versus 16%, and 47% versus 8%, respectively; all p values < 0.0001). While only 25% (n = 51) had received prior training, 75% (n = 103) of respondents reported that training all providers at their continuity clinic sites would improve implementation. CONCLUSIONS: We found that prior training was associated with higher levels of self-reported PrEP knowledge, comfort, and prescribing behaviors. Given the significant need for PrEP, IM residents should be trained to achieve adequate knowledge and comfort levels to prescribe it. This study demonstrates that providing appropriate PrEP training for IM residents may lead to an increase in the pool of graduating IM residents prescribing PrEP.KEY WORDS: HIV pre-exposure prophylaxis; resident education.

ObjectiveHospitalized patients placed in isolation due to a carrier state or infection with resistant or highly communicable organisms report higher rates of anxiety and loneliness and have fewer physician encounters, room entries, and vital sign records. We hypothesized that isolation status might adversely impact patient experience as reported through Hospital Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems (HCAHPS) surveys, particularly regarding communication.DesignRetrospective analysis of HCAHPS survey results over 5 years.SettingA 1,165-bed, tertiary-care, academic medical center.PatientsPatients on any type of isolation for at least 50% of their stay were the exposure group. Those never in isolation served as controls.MethodsMultivariable logistic regression, adjusting for age, race, gender, payer, severity of illness, length of stay and clinical service were used to examine associations between isolation status and “top-box” experience scores. Dose response to increasing percentage of days in isolation was also analyzed.ResultsPatients in isolation reported worse experience, primarily with staff responsiveness (help toileting 63% vs 51%; adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 0.77; P = .0009) and overall care (rate hospital 80% vs 73%; aOR, 0.78; P < .0001), but they reported similar experience in other domains. No dose-response effect was observed.ConclusionIsolated patients do not report adverse experience for most aspects of provider communication regarded to be among the most important elements for safety and quality of care. However, patients in isolation had worse experiences with staff responsiveness for time-sensitive needs. The absence of a dose-response effect suggests that isolation status may be a marker for other factors, such as illness severity. Regardless, hospitals should emphasize timely staff response for this population.