Search

This study compared the effects of a conventional approach and a progressive approach to discrete trial teaching when teaching tact relations to 12 children diagnosed with autism spectrum disorder (ASD). The conventional approach was informed by best practice guidelines for teaching receptive and expressive language (Green "Focus on Autism and Other Developmental Disabilities," 16(2), 72-85, 2001; Grow & Leblanc "Behavior Analysis in Practice," 6(1), 56-75, 2013) and other relevant research (e.g., Graff & Karsten "Behavior Analysis in Practice," 5(2), 37-48, 2012; León & Rosales "Journal of Behavioral Education," 27(1), 81-100, 2018; Majdalany et al. "Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis," 47(3), 657-662, 2014). The progressive approach was informed by guidelines outlined by Leaf, Cihon, Leaf, et al. "International Electronic Journal of Elementary Education," 9(2), 361-372, (2016a) and Leaf, Leaf, McEachin, et al. "Journal of Autism & Developmental Disorders," 46(2), 720-731, (2016c). In this study, highly vocal-verbal participants diagnosed with ASD were randomly assigned to the conventional or progressive condition and received 20 sessions of intervention. Following intervention, statistical analysis was used to evaluate and compare the effects of each condition. Although both were effective in teaching the participants tact relations, there was a statistically significant difference in the number of tact relations learned in the progressive condition when compared to the conventional condition.

Background The Infectious Diseases Society of America (IDSA) developed the Core Antimicrobial Stewardship (AS) Curriculum to meet the increasing demand for infectious diseases (ID) providers with AS expertise. Notable diversity in implementation approaches has been observed among ID fellowship programs using the curriculum. We sought to describe individual approaches and develop a curriculum implementation roadmap. Methods We surveyed ID fellowship programs that had previously implemented the IDSA Core AS curriculum. The survey included questions regarding program characteristics, curriculum participants and presentation format, resources and barriers, and implementation strategies. Commonly reported program features were summarized in the context of the self-reported implementation strategies. Implementation guides were developed based on the most common characteristics observed. Results Of 159 programs that had purchased the curriculum, 37 responded, and 34 (21%) were included in the analysis. The curriculum was primarily taught by AS physicians (85%) and AS pharmacists (47%). The most common conference structure was a longitudinal conference series (32%), and eLearning was the most common presentation format. Limited AS faculty time (76%) and limited first-year fellow availability (62%) were frequently reported as barriers, and dedicated AS curricular time was a resource available to most programs (67%); implementation guides were created for these 3 program features. Conclusions Programs reported a variety of implementation barriers and resources, with several common themes emerging, allowing for the development of tailored curriculum planners for 3 commonly observed program characteristics. This work will equip fellowship programs with curriculum implementation strategies and guide future enhancements of the IDSA Core and Advanced AS curricula. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Holmium laser enucleation of the prostate (HoLEP) is routinely performed with a 24F, 26F, or a 28F scope. Proponents of the larger scopes propose that a bigger sheath size allows for superior flow and visibility leading to a more efficient operation and better hemostasis. Those utilizing the smaller scopes suggest that the smaller sheath is less traumatic, resulting in lower stricture rates and temporary incontinence. We sought to compare outcomes of ambulatory HoLEP using the 24F and 28F laser scope. Materials and Methods: From May 2022 to March 2023, we randomized patients undergoing HoLEP (<200 cm3 in size) 1:1 to either a 24F or 28F scope. The primary outcome was differences in surgical duration between groups (minutes). Secondary outcomes included surgeon scope evaluation and postoperative patient results. Results: There was no difference in patient characteristics in those randomized to 28F (n = 76) vs 24F (n = 76) (p > 0.05) scopes. Procedural duration and efficiencies were not different between groups (all p > 0.05). The 28F scope was associated with improved surgeon-graded irrigation flow and visibility (p < 0.001). Patients treated with the 28F scope were more likely to achieve effective same-day trial of void (SDTOV) (28F 94.3% vs 24F 82.1%, p = 0.048) and have a shorter length of stay (LOS) (28F 7.0 vs 24F 11.9 hours, p = 0.014), however, rates of same-day discharge (SDD) were not statistically different (28F 87.8% vs 24F 78.4%, p = 0.126). There was no difference between the cohorts in rates of 90-day emergency room presentations, re-admissions, complications, or functional ouctomes (p > 0.05). Conclusions: We identified no clear advantage of scope size with regard to intraoperative or postoperative outcomes at 3-month follow-up due to scope size. However, if SDD is part of your postoperative pathway, the 28F scope may shorten LOS and increase rates of effective SDTOV. Clinicaltrials.gov: NCT05308017. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Intradetrusor onabotulinumtoxinA (OTA) injection is a well-established treatment option for refractory overactive bladder; however, its use at the time of holmium laser enucleation of the prostate (HoLEP) for men with bladder outlet obstruction (BOO) and severe storage symptoms has not been previously reported. Materials and Methods: We retrospectively identified men with BOO and severe storage symptoms who underwent treatment with 200 U of intradetrusor OTA (Botox®) at the time of HoLEP. Patients were propensity score matched to a cohort of HoLEP-only patients based on age, Michigan Incontinence Symptom Index (M-ISI) score, preoperative urinary retention, urge incontinence, and prostate size. Perioperative, postoperative, and patient-reported outcomes were examined between groups. Results: We identified 82 men who underwent HoLEP, including 41 patients in the OTA group and 41 patients in the control group. There was no difference in operative times (59 minutes OTA vs 55 minutes control, p = 0.2), rates of same-day trial of void (TOV) (92% OTA vs 94% control, p = 0.7), or rates of same-day discharge (88% OTA vs 85% control, p = 0.6) between groups. There was no difference in temporary postoperative urinary retention (7% OTA vs 2% control, p = 0.3) between groups. Patients who received OTA injections had a significant reduction in their incontinence scores at 3-month follow-up (M-ISI −8, interquartile range [IQR]: −13 to 0, p < 0.001), whereas control patients did not (M-ISI −5, IQR: −8 to −1, p = 0.2). There was no difference in rates of 90-day complications between groups (OTA 10% vs control 5%, p = 0.7). Conclusions: Intradetrusor OTA at the time of HoLEP is safe and is associated with improved urinary incontinence scores and AUA Symptom Score. Rates of same-day discharge and same-day TOV after HoLEP were not affected by OTA. These findings support the role of OTA as an adjunct to surgical intervention in men with incontinence in the presence of BOO. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background Antimicrobial stewardship (AS) programs are required by Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services and should ideally have infectious diseases (ID) physician involvement; however, only 50% of ID fellowship programs have formal AS curricula. The Infectious Diseases Society of America (IDSA) formed a workgroup to develop a core AS curriculum for ID fellows. Here we study its impact. Methods ID program directors and fellows in 56 fellowship programs were surveyed regarding the content and effectiveness of their AS training before and after implementation of the IDSA curriculum. Fellows' knowledge was assessed using multiple-choice questions. Fellows completing their first year of fellowship were surveyed before curriculum implementation ("pre-curriculum") and compared to first-year fellows who complete the curriculum the following year ("post-curriculum"). Results Forty-nine (88%) program directors and 105 (67%) fellows completed the pre-curriculum surveys; 35 (64%) program directors and 79 (50%) fellows completed the post-curriculum surveys. Prior to IDSA curriculum implementation, only 51% of programs had a "formal" curriculum. After implementation, satisfaction with AS training increased among program directors (16% to 68%) and fellows (51% to 68%). Fellows' confidence increased in 7/10 AS content areas. Knowledge scores improved from a mean of 4.6 to 5.1 correct answers of 9 questions (P  = .028). The major hurdle to curriculum implementation was time, both for formal teaching and for e-learning. Conclusions Effective AS training is a critical component of ID fellowship training. The IDSA Core AS Curriculum can enhance AS training, increase fellow confidence, and improve overall satisfaction of fellows and program directors. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) changed the practice of medicine in America. During the March 2020 lockdown, elective cases were canceled to conserve hospital beds/resources resulting in financial losses for health systems and delayed surgical care. Ambulatory percutaneous nephrolithotomy (aPCNL) has been shown to be safe and could be a strategy to ensure patients receive care that has been delayed, conserve hospital resources, and maximize cost-effectiveness. We aimed to compare the safety and cost-effectiveness of patients undergoing aPCNL against standard PCNL (sPCNL). Materials and Methods: Ninty-eight patients underwent PCNL at Indiana University Methodist Hospital, a tertiary referral center, by three expert surgeons from January 2020 to September 2020. The primary outcome of the study was to compare the 30-day rates of emergency department (ED) visits, readmissions, and complications between sPCNL and aPCNL. Secondary outcomes included cost analysis and stone-free rates (SFRs). Propensity score matching was performed to ensure the groups were balanced. Statistical analyses were performed using SAS 9.4 using independent t-tests for continuous variables and chi-square analyses for categorical variables. Results: Ninety-eight patients underwent PCNL during the study period (sPCNL = 75 and aPCNL = 23). After propensity score matching, 42 patients were available for comparison (sPCNL = 19 and aPCNL = 23). We found no difference in 30-day ED visits, readmissions, or complications between the two groups. aPCNL resulted in cost savings of $5327 ± 442 per case. SFRs were higher for aPCNL compared with sPCNL. Conclusions: aPCNL appears safe to perform and does not have a higher rate of ED visits or readmissions compared with sPCNL. aPCNL may also be cost-effective compared with sPCNL. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Although holmium laser enucleation of the prostate (HoLEP) is a highly effective surgery, there is a variable recovery period where patients may experience hematuria, dysuria, or urinary incontinence (UI). Despite preoperative consultation, there is a paucity of literature examining the effectiveness of physician-patient communication in preparing the patient for the postoperative recovery period. We sought to examine recovery expectations as a patient-reported outcome (PRO) metric for HoLEP. Methods: With institutional review board approval, we queried our electronic medical record and retrospective clinical registry to identify 50 consecutive patients that underwent HoLEP from November 2019 to March 2020 by two endourologists. Patients were provided questionnaires via Twistle© ≥6 months postoperatively. Patient demographics and perioperative course was examined in the context of responses. Our primary objective was determining whether patients felt they had a reasonable understanding of the recovery process. Results: We observed a 92% (46/50) response rate, with an average patient age of 69.4 years (range 55-88). Overall, 91.3% (42/46) felt they had a reasonable understanding of the recovery. Additionally, 97.8% (45/46) were aware of temporary UI, with 87% having ≥1 episodes of UI after catheter removal. We found 47.8% (22/46) of patients expected UI to resolve within 30 days, while 8.6% expected >90 days of UI. All patients were aware of the risk of hematuria, with 93.5% (43/46) expecting resolution within 30 days (<7 days: 47.8%; 7-14 days: 28.3%; 15-30 days: 17.4%). Conclusions: Although surgical technique continues to improve HoLEP, ensuring adequate physician-patient communication to optimize expectations is crucial. We report patient understanding of HoLEP recovery and areas for future improvement. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]