Adherence to immune suppressants and follow-up care regimen is important in achieving optimal long-term outcomes after organ transplantation. To identify patients most at risk for non-adherence, this cross-sectional, descriptive study explores the prevalence and correlates of non-adherence to immune-suppressant therapy among liver recipients. Anonymous questionnaires mailed consisted of the domains: (i) adherence barriers to immune suppressants, (ii) immune suppressants knowledge, (iii) demographics, (iv) social support, (v) medical co-morbidities, and (vi) healthcare locus of control and other beliefs. Overall response was 49% (281/572). Data analyzed for those transplanted within 10 yr of study reveal 50% (119/237) recipients or 9.2/100 person years reporting non-adherence. Non-adherence was reported highest in the 2-5 yr post-transplant phase (69/123, 56%). The highest immune-suppressant non-adherence rates were in recipients who are: divorced (26/34, 76%, p=0.0093), have a history of substance or alcohol use (42/69, 61%, p=0.0354), have mental health needs (50/84, 60%, p=0.0336), those who missed clinic appointments (25/30, 83%, p<0.0001), and did not maintain medication logs (71/122, 58%, p=0.0168). Respondents who were non-adherent with physician appointments were more than four and a half times as likely (OR 4.7, 95% CI 1.5-14.7, p=0.008) to be non-adherent with immune suppressants. In conclusion, half of our respondents report non-adherence to immune suppressants. Factors identified may assist clinicians to gauge patients' non-adherence risk and target resources.

EDI-PCC patients are young, likely secondary to traumatic and critical, sudden events. In-hospital mortality rate for EDI-PCC patients is very high (most die early and in the ED setting), signifying a trend for ED clinicians to request PC consults in those who are imminently dying. PC consult teams called to the ED should expect to provide high-priority, time-sensitive services and anticipate a high level of bereavement/emotional support for distraught and unprepared families, with major discussions around end-of-life care.

We identify two main ED physician-perceived barriers to PC provision: lack of access to medical records and lack of 24/7 availability of PC team. ED physicians may not use the same criteria to initiate PC consultation as used in traditional inpatient PC trigger models. Outlining ED-specific triggers may help streamline the palliative consultation process.

Simulation and OSCE format have emerged as modalities of choice both to teach surgery residents how to deliver difficult news and to assess achievement of this competency. There is a gap in the literature regarding teaching and assessing surgery resident communication skills in delivering difficult news after unexpected events in the trauma and operating room settings.

BackgroundAn increasing number of students rank Emergency Medicine (EM) as a top specialty choice, requiring medical schools to provide adequate exposure to EM. The Core Entrustable Professional Activities (EPAs) for Entering Residency by the Association of American Medical Colleges combined with the Milestone Project for EM residency training has attempted to standardize the undergraduate and graduate medical education goals. However, it remains unclear as to how the EPAs correlate to the milestones, and who owns the process of ensuring that an entering EM resident has competency at a certain minimum level. Recent trends establishing specialty-specific boot camps prepare students for residency and address the variability of skills of students coming from different medical schools.ObjectiveOur project’s goal was therefore to perform a needs assessment to inform the design of an EM boot camp curriculum. Toward this goal, we 1) mapped the core EPAs for graduating medical students to the EM residency Level 1 milestones in order to identify the possible gaps/needs and 2) conducted a pilot procedure workshop that was designed to address some of the identified gaps/needs in procedural skills.MethodsIn order to inform the curriculum of an EM boot camp, we used a systematic approach to 1) identify gaps between the EPAs and EM milestones (Level 1) and 2) determine what essential and supplemental competencies/skills an incoming EM resident should ideally possess. We then piloted a 1-day, three-station advanced ABCs procedure workshop based on the identified needs. A pre-workshop test and survey assessed knowledge, preparedness, confidence, and perceived competence. A post-workshop survey evaluated the program, and a posttest combined with psychomotor skills test using three simulation cases assessed students’ skills.ResultsStudents (n=9) reported increased confidence in the following procedures: intubation (1.5–2.1), thoracostomy (1.1–1.9), and central venous catheterization (1.3–2) (a three-point Likert-type scale, with 1= not yet confident/able to perform with supervision to 3= confident/able to perform without supervision). Psychomotor skills testing showed on average, 26% of students required verbal prompting with performance errors, 48% with minor performance errors, and 26% worked independently without performance errors. All participants reported: 1) increased knowledge and confidence in covered topics and 2) overall satisfaction with simulation experience.ConclusionMapping the Core EPAs for Entering Residency to the EM milestones at Level 1 identifies educational gaps for graduating medical students seeking a career in EM. Educators designing EM boot camps for medical students should consider these identified gaps, procedures, and clinical conditions during the development of a core standardized curriculum.