Background Feedback in physician graduate medical education is not clearly defined. Some parties may view questioning as a form of feedback, others the conversations over lunch, some the comments in the operating room (OR), and still others the written evaluation at planned meetings. The lack of clarity in defining what constitutes feedback is concerning when this is considered a fundamental means of education to enhance practices and care for patients. If residents do not recognize they are receiving feedback, or the response to feedback is met with opposition, then feedback as an educational device can be limited. For this manuscript, feedback is defined as written or verbal comments regarding medical knowledge, performance, technique, or patient care. Objective This study attempts to identify barriers to feedback by identifying attitudes toward feedback processes through a questionnaire. Methods Ten questions were provided to residents at a single institution representing, emergency medicine, family medicine, internal medicine, neurology, and neurosurgery during the 2017-2018 academic year. Response was voluntary and the study was granted exemption by local institutional review board since no identifying information was collected to link responses to specific residents. Questions were formulated to identify how positive or negative a resident felt toward specific aspects of feedback. Results Of the possible 84 resident respondents, 40 residents participated reflecting a response of approximately 48%. Questionnaires revealed that 22.5% of respondents found feedback to be a stressful event. Sixty-seven point five percent (67.5%) of resident respondents associated the prompt that they are about to receive feedback as concerning. Only 2.5% of residents identified a meeting with the program director as a sign that the resident may be doing well. Appointments for feedback were viewed as a positive event in 12.5% of respondents. Ninety-five percent (95%) of residents do not feel that all feedback will affect their permanent record. Ten percent (10%) of residents identified receiving feedback as a positive event. Ninety-five percent (95%) of residents indicated that they have actively tried to change behavior or practices based on feedback. Forty percent (40%) of residents found themselves censoring “negative” feedback. Conclusions Barriers to feedback include the inability to present sensitive subjects in a constructive manner and superficial relationships between the evaluator and resident physician. Research directed at addressing these barriers could lead to improved use of feedback as an educational tool.
Background Nosocomial EVD-related ventriculitis is a major complication and a significant cause of morbidity and mortality in critically ill neurological patients. Questions remain about best management of EVDs. The purpose of this study is to compare our incidence of ventriculitis to studies using different catheters and/or antibiotic coverage schemes and determine whether c-EVD with prolonged antibiotics given for the duration of drain placement is inferior to ac-EVD with pp-abx or ac-EVD with prolonged antibiotics for prevention of ventriculitis. Methods A retrospective chart review of all patients who had EVDs placed from January 2010 through December 2015 at home institution was performed. Statistical analysis was performed using Fisher's exact test to compare incidence of ventriculitis identified in other studies with that of home institution. Results The study included 107 patients, 66 (61.7%) males and 41 (38.3%) females. Average age was 56 years ranging from 18 to 95 years. Average length of drain placement was 7.8 days ranging from 2 to 23 days. Average length of drain placement in infected drains was 13.3 days ranging from 11 to 15 days. There were 3 cases with positive CSF cultures (Staphylococcus haemolyticus and Staphylococcus epidermidis x 2). There were 2 cases with a CSF having a positive gram stain but failed to yield any bacterial growth on culture and did not meet predefined criteria. Conclusions The c-EVD with prolonged antibiotics given for the duration of drain placement is not inferior to ac-EVD with pp-abx or ac-EVD with prolonged antibiotics for prevention of ventriculitis. The c-EVD with prolonged antibiotics is superior to c-EVD with pp-abx and conventional EVD without antibiotics for prevention of ventriculitis. Selection should include considerations for antibiotic stewardship and cost effectiveness. Future studies should also utilize clinical and CSF profile criteria in addition to positive CSF cultures for identifying ventriculitis to prevent line colonization from classification as ventriculitis in analysis.
The objective of this pilot study was to determine if there is a correlation between the proposed physical testing protocol and low back pain. The proposed physical testing protocol is an attempt to assess muscular asymmetry in the anterior-posterior plane and the lateral plane. Methods A total of 96 volunteers were recruited from Touro University after obtaining IRB approval. Volunteers were initially provided a questionnaire regarding demographics and back pain. After ensuring participants satisfied the inclusion criteria, a physical test protocol was performed. After data compilation, odds ratios as well and linear regression models were generated to assess for correlation with back pain. Results A total of 96 participants were recruited. The odds ratio for asymmetric anterior-posterior balance in relation to back pain is 3.00 with a 95% confidence interval 1.26-7.12. The odds ratio for total ability to tolerate asymmetric loads greater than 50% of ideal body weight is 0.44 with a 95% confidence interval 0.11-1.77. The linear regression coefficient of anterior-posterior balance greater than 25% of ideal body weight in relation to level of pain is 1.96. Conclusions Increased muscular asymmetry in the sagittal plane and lateral plane showed a trend toward increased levels of low back pain; however, there is a weak correlation. This is a correlation and not an association. Future studies to assess the relationship between muscular balance and low back pain are needed to determine if therapy can be targeted to improve muscular sagittal balance, which can improve symmetry and back pain.
Background: Postoperative pain control in craniotomies poses multiple challenges. Pain must be addressed, but the use of medications must be weighed against risks. Craniotomies risk neurologic injury and so postoperative examinations are critical. Medications used to address pain can alter the neurological examination or cause bleeding leading to misdiagnosis of complications.Objective: Determine if there is a significant difference in postoperative pain from emergent craniotomies vs. non-emergent craniotomiesMethods: A retrospective review included 102 cases performed from 2010-2016; pain scores were compared on post-operative days one, two, and three between emergent and non-emergent craniotomies.Results: Pain scores for emergent cases on post-operative days one through three were 5.1 (standard deviation (SD)=2.9), 5.9 (SD=2.1), 4.7 (SD=3.0) respectively. Pain scores for non-emergent cases on post-operative days one through three were 5.7 (SD=2.6), 4.8 (SD=2.8), and 4.6 (SD=3.0) respectively. A one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) was conducted to compare pain scores between groups for each post-operative day. On post-operative day, one there was no significant difference between the groups [F(1,100)=0.49, p=0.485]. On post-operative day two, there was no significant difference between the groups [F(1,100)=2.17, p=0.143]. On post-operative day three, there was no significant difference between the groups [F(1,98)=0.002, p=0.957].Conclusion: There is no significant difference in the level of pain on postoperative days one through three between emergent and non-emergent craniotomy patients.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.