No abstract

Implementation of the handoff program was associated with reductions in medical errors and in preventable adverse events and with improvements in communication, without a negative effect on workflow. (Funded by the Office of the Assistant Secretary for Planning and Evaluation, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, and others.).

A B S T R A C T PurposeChemotherapy with alternating vincristine-doxorubicin-cyclophosphamide and ifosfamide-etoposide cycles and primary tumor treatment with surgery and/or radiation therapy constitute the usual approach to localized Ewing sarcoma in North America. We tested whether chemotherapy intensification through interval compression could improve outcome. Patients and MethodsThis was a prospective, randomized controlled trial for patients younger than 50 years old with newly diagnosed localized extradural Ewing sarcoma. Patients assigned to standard and intensified treatment were to begin chemotherapy cycles every 21 and 14 days, respectively, provided an absolute neutrophil count greater than 750 ϫ 10 6 /L and a platelet count greater than 75 ϫ 10 9 /L. Patients received vincristine (2 mg/m 2 ), doxorubicin (75 mg/m 2 ), and cyclophosphamide (1.2 g/m 2 ) alternating with ifosfamide (9 g/m 2 ) and etoposide (500 mg/m 2 ) for 14 cycles, with filgrastim (5 mg/kg per day; maximum, 300 mg) between cycles. Primary tumor treatment (surgery, radiation, or both) was to begin at week 13 (after four cycles in the standard arm and six cycles in the intensified arm). The primary end point was event-free survival (EFS). The study is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (identifier: NCT00006734). ResultsFive hundred eighty-seven patients were enrolled and randomly assigned, and 568 patients were eligible, with 284 patients in each regimen. For all cycles, the median cycle interval for standard treatment was 21 days (mean, 22.45 days); for intensified treatment, the median interval was 15 days (mean, 17.29 days). EFS at a median of 5 years was 65% in the standard arm and 73% in the intensified arm (P ϭ .048). The toxicity of the regimens was similar. ConclusionFor localized Ewing sarcoma, chemotherapy administered every 2 weeks is more effective than chemotherapy administered every 3 weeks, with no increase in toxicity.

BACKGROUND: Ewing sarcoma can arise in either bone or soft tissue. The purpose of this study was to investigate whether patient characteristics, treatment strategies, and outcomes differ between skeletal Ewing sarcoma and extraskeletal Ewing sarcoma (EES). METHODS: Patients <40 years of age with Ewing sarcoma or peripheral primitive neuroectodermal tumor reported to the United States Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results Program database from 1973 to 2007 were evaluated based on skeletal (n ¼ 1519) versus extraskeletal (n ¼ 683) site of origin. Patient characteristics were compared using Fisher exact tests. Overall survival was estimated via the Kaplan-Meier method and compared using log-rank tests and Cox proportional hazard models. RESULTS: Patients with EES had a higher mean age (19.5 vs 16.3 years; P < .001) and were less likely to be male (53.4% vs 63.3%; P < .001) or white (84.8% vs 92.5%; P < .001) compared with patients with skeletal tumors. Extraskeletal tumors were more likely to arise in axial locations (72.9% vs 54.2%; P ¼ .001) but were less likely to arise specifically in the pelvis (19.8% vs 26.6%; P < .001). Metastatic status or tumor size did not differ by group. Five-year overall survival was superior for localized EES compared with localized skeletal tumors (69.7% vs 62.6%; P ¼ .02). The hazard ratio for death in patients with localized skeletal tumors compared with localized EES was 2.36 (95% confidence interval, 1.61-3.44) beyond 24 months from initial diagnosis. CONCLUSIONS: Patient characteristics and outcomes differ among patients with EES compared with patients with skeletal Ewing sarcoma. These findings may have important implications for patient care. Cancer 2011;117:3027-

Most medical faculty receive little or no training about how to be effective teachers, even when they assume major educational leadership roles. To identify the competencies required of an effective teacher in medical education, the authors developed a comprehensive conceptual model. After conducting a literature search, the authors met at a two-day conference (2006) with 16 medical and nonmedical educators from 10 different U.S. and Canadian organizations and developed an initial draft of the "Teaching as a Competency" conceptual model. Conference participants used the physician competencies (from the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education [ACGME]) and the roles (from the Royal College's Canadian Medical Education Directives for Specialists [CanMEDS]) to define critical skills for medical educators. The authors then refined this initial framework through national/regional conference presentations (2007, 2008), an additional literature review, and expert input. Four core values grounded this framework: learner engagement, learner-centeredness, adaptability, and self-reflection. The authors identified six core competencies, based on the ACGME competencies framework: medical (or content) knowledge; learner- centeredness; interpersonal and communication skills; professionalism and role modeling; practice-based reflection; and systems-based practice. They also included four specialized competencies for educators with additional programmatic roles: program design/implementation, evaluation/scholarship, leadership, and mentorship. The authors then cross-referenced the competencies with educator roles, drawing from CanMEDS, to recognize role-specific skills. The authors have explored their framework's strengths, limitations, and applications, which include targeted faculty development, evaluation, and resource allocation. The Teaching as a Competency framework promotes a culture of effective teaching and learning.

ObjectiveTo determine whether medical errors, family experience, and communication processes improved after implementation of an intervention to standardize the structure of healthcare provider-family communication on family centered rounds.DesignProspective, multicenter before and after intervention study.SettingPediatric inpatient units in seven North American hospitals, 17 December 2014 to 3 January 2017.ParticipantsAll patients admitted to study units (3106 admissions, 13171 patient days); 2148 parents or caregivers, 435 nurses, 203 medical students, and 586 residents.InterventionFamilies, nurses, and physicians coproduced an intervention to standardize healthcare provider-family communication on ward rounds (“family centered rounds”), which included structured, high reliability communication on bedside rounds emphasizing health literacy, family engagement, and bidirectional communication; structured, written real-time summaries of rounds; a formal training programme for healthcare providers; and strategies to support teamwork, implementation, and process improvement.Main outcome measuresMedical errors (primary outcome), including harmful errors (preventable adverse events) and non-harmful errors, modeled using Poisson regression and generalized estimating equations clustered by site; family experience; and communication processes (eg, family engagement on rounds). Errors were measured via an established systematic surveillance methodology including family safety reporting.ResultsThe overall rate of medical errors (per 1000 patient days) was unchanged (41.2 (95% confidence interval 31.2 to 54.5) pre-intervention v 35.8 (26.9 to 47.7) post-intervention, P=0.21), but harmful errors (preventable adverse events) decreased by 37.9% (20.7 (15.3 to 28.1) v 12.9 (8.9 to 18.6), P=0.01) post-intervention. Non-preventable adverse events also decreased (12.6 (8.9 to 17.9) v 5.2 (3.1 to 8.8), P=0.003). Top box (eg, “excellent”) ratings for six of 25 components of family reported experience improved; none worsened. Family centered rounds occurred more frequently (72.2% (53.5% to 85.4%) v 82.8% (64.9% to 92.6%), P=0.02). Family engagement 55.6% (32.9% to 76.2%) v 66.7% (43.0% to 84.1%), P=0.04) and nurse engagement (20.4% (7.0% to 46.6%) v 35.5% (17.0% to 59.6%), P=0.03) on rounds improved. Families expressing concerns at the start of rounds (18.2% (5.6% to 45.3%) v 37.7% (17.6% to 63.3%), P=0.03) and reading back plans (4.7% (0.7% to 25.2%) v 26.5% (12.7% to 7.3%), P=0.02) increased. Trainee teaching and the duration of rounds did not change significantly.ConclusionsAlthough overall errors were unchanged, harmful medical errors decreased and family experience and communication processes improved after implementation of a structured communication intervention for family centered rounds coproduced by families, nurses, and physicians. Family centered care processes may improve safety and quality of care without negatively impacting teaching or duration of rounds.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov NCT02320175.

Our data provide preliminary evidence that concept mapping assessment reflects expected differences and change in the conceptual framework of resident physicians. Concept mapping assessment and standardized testing may measure different cognitive domains. JAMA. 2000;284:1105-1110

Patient handoffs are a key source of communication failures and adverse events in hospitals. Despite Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education requirements for residency training programs to provide formal handoff skills training and to monitor handoffs, well-established curricula and validated skills assessment tools are lacking. Developing a handoff curriculum is challenging because of the need for standardized processes and faculty development, cultural resistance to change, and diverse institution- and unit-level factors. In this article, the authors apply a logic model to describe the process they used from June 2010 to February 2014 to develop, implement, and disseminate an innovative, comprehensive handoff curriculum in pediatric residency training programs as a fundamental component of the multicenter Initiative for Innovation in Pediatric Education-Pediatric Research in Inpatient Settings Accelerating Safe Sign-outs (I-PASS) Study. They describe resources, activities, and outputs, and report preliminary learner outcomes using data from resident and faculty evaluations of the I-PASS Handoff Curriculum: 96% of residents and 97% of faculty agreed or strongly agreed that the curriculum promoted acquisition of relevant skills for patient care activities. They also share lessons learned that could be of value to others seeking to adopt a structured handoff curriculum or to develop large-scale curricular innovations that involve redesigning firmly established processes. These lessons include the importance of approaching curricular implementation as a transformational change effort, assembling a diverse team of junior and senior faculty to provide opportunities for mentoring and professional development, and linking the educational intervention with the direct measurement of patient outcomes.