Search

Background: Inclusiveness, Support, Mutual Respect and Co‐Build are the four pillars of patient engagement according to the Strategy for Patient‐Oriented Research (SPOR). The aim of this manuscript is to describe the operationalization of these principles through the creation of a Patient Advisory Council (PAC) for the research study titled 'Re‐Purposing the Ordering of Routine laboratory Tests (RePORT)'. Methods: Researchers collaborated with the Alberta SPOR SUPPORT Unit (AbSPORU) Patient Engagement Team to create a diverse PAC. Recruitment was intentional and included multiple perspectives and experiences. PAC meetings were held monthly, and patient research partners received support to function as co‐chairs of the PAC. Patient research partners were offered training, support and tailored modalities of compensation to actively engage with the PAC. Regular member check‐ins occurred through reflexivity and a formal evaluation of PAC member engagement. Results: The PAC included between 9 and 11 patient research partners, principal investigator, research study coordinator, improvement scientist, resident physician and support members from the AbSPORU team. Twelve monthly PAC meetings were held during the first phase of the project. The PAC made course‐changing contributions to study design including study objectives, recruitment poster, interview guide and development of codes for thematic analysis. Patient research partners largely felt that their opinions were valued. Diversity in the PAC membership enhanced access to diverse patient participants. Furthermore, support for co‐chairs and patient research partner members enabled active engagement in research. In addition, a culture of mutual respect facilitated patient partner engagement, and co‐design approaches yielded rich research outputs. Conclusions: Collaboration between research teams and Patient Engagement Teams can promote effective patient engagement through a PAC. Deliberate and flexible strategies are needed to manage the PAC to create an ecology of Inclusiveness, Support, Mutual Respect, and Co‐Build for meaningful patient engagement. Patient or Public Contribution: Patient research partners were involved in the decision to write this manuscript and collaborated equitably in the conception and development of this manuscript, including providing critical feedback. Patient research partners were active members of the PAC and informed the research project design, participant recruitment strategies, data collection and analysis, and will be involved in the implementation and dissemination of results. They are currently involved in the co‐development of a patient engagement strategy using a Human‐Centered Design process. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Indiscriminate use of laboratory blood testing in hospitals contributes to patient discomfort and healthcare waste. Patient engagement in low‐value healthcare can help reduce overuse. Understanding patient experience is necessary to identify opportunities to improve patient engagement with in‐hospital laboratory testing. Objectives: To understand patient experience with the process of in‐hospital laboratory blood testing. Methods: We used a qualitative study design via semistructured interviews conducted online or over the phone. Participants were adult patients or family members/caregivers (≥18 years of age) with a recent (within 12 months of interview) experience of hospitalization in Alberta or British Columbia, Canada. We identified participants through convenience sampling and conducted interviews between May 2021 and June 2022. We analysed transcripts using thematic content analysis. Recruitment was continued until code saturation was reached. Results: We interviewed 16 participants (13 patients, 1 family member and 2 caregivers). We identified four themes from patients' experiences of in‐hospital laboratory blood testing: (i) patients need information from healthcare teams about expected blood testing processes, (ii) blood draw processes should consider patient comfort and preferences, (iii) patients want information from their healthcare teams about the rationale and frequency of blood testing and (iv) patients need information on how their testing results affect their medical care. Conclusion: Current laboratory testing processes in hospitals do not facilitate shared decision‐making and patient engagement. Patient engagement with laboratory testing in hospitals requires an empathetic healthcare team that provides clear communication regarding testing procedures, rationale and results, while considering patient preferences and offering opportunities for involvement. Patient or Public Contribution: We interviewed 16 patients and/or family members/caregivers regarding their in‐hospital laboratory blood testing experiences. Our findings show correlations between patient needs and patient recommendations to make testing processes more patient‐centred. To bring a lived‐experience lens to this study, we formed a Patient Advisory Council with 9–11 patient research partners. Our patient research partners informed the research design, co‐developed participant recruitment strategies, co‐conducted data collection and informed the data analysis. Some of our patient research partners are co‐authors of this manuscript. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background Repetitive inpatient laboratory testing contributes to waste in healthcare. We evaluated an intervention bundle combining education and multilevel social comparison feedback to safely reduce repetitive use of inpatient routine laboratory tests. Methods This non- randomised controlled preintervention post- intervention study was conducted in four adult hospitals from October 2016 to March 2018. In the medical teaching unit (MTU) of the intervention site, learners received education and aggregate social comparison feedback and attending internists received individual comparison feedback on routine laboratory test utilisation. MTUs of the remaining three sites served as control units. Number and cost of routine laboratory tests ordered per patient- day before and after the intervention was compared with the control units, adjusting for patient factors. Safety endpoints included number of critically abnormal laboratory test results, number of stat laboratory test orders, patient length of stay, transfer rate to the ICU, and 30- day readmission and mortality. Results A total of 14 000 patients were included. Preintervention and post- intervention groups were similar in age, sex, Charlson Comorbidity Index and length of stay. From the pre- intervention period to the postintervention period, significantly fewer routine laboratory tests were ordered at the intervention MTU (incidence rate ratio=0.89; 95% CI 0.79 to 1.00; p=0.048) with associated costs savings of $C68 877 (p=0.020) as compared with the control sites. The variability in the ordering pattern of internists at the intervention site also decreased post- intervention. No worsening was noted in the safety endpoints between the pre- intervention and post- intervention period at the intervention unit compared with the controls. Conclusions Combination of education and multilevel social comparison feedback significantly and safely led to cost savings through reduced use of routine laboratory tests in hospitalised patients. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Curriculum development and implementation for internal medicine point-of-care ultrasound (IM POCUS) continues to be a challenge for many residency training programs. Education indicators may provide a useful framework to support curriculum development and implementation efforts across programs in order to achieve a consistent high-quality educational experience.Objective: This study seeks to establish consensus-based recommendations for education indicators for IM POCUS training programs in Canada.Design: This consensus study uses a modified nominal group technique for voting in the initial round, followed by two additional rounds of online voting, with consensus defined as agreement by at least 80% of the participants.Participants: Participants were 22 leaders with POCUS and/or education expertise from 13 Canadian internal medicine residency programs across 7 provinces.Main Measures: Education indicators considered were those that related to aspects of the POCUS educational system, could be presented by a single statistical measure, were readily understood, could be reliably measured to provide a benchmark for measuring change, and represented a policy issue. We excluded a priori indicators with low feasibility, are impractical, or assess learner reactions. Candidate indicators were drafted by two academic internists with post-graduate training in POCUS and medical education. These indicators were reviewed by two internists with training in quality improvement prior to presentation to the expert participants.Key Results: Of the 52 candidate education indicators considered, 6 reached consensus in the first round, 12 in the second, and 4 in the third round. Only 5 indicators reached consensus to be excluded; the remaining indicators did not reach consensus.Conclusions: The Canadian Internal Medicine Ultrasound (CIMUS) group recommends 22 education indicators be used to guide and monitor internal medicine POCUS curriculum development efforts in Canada. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

BACKGROUND: Pneumocystis jirovecii (PJ), a pathogenic fungus, causes severe interstitial Pneumocystis pneumonia (PCP) among immunocompromised patients. A laboratory-developed real-time polyermase chain reaction (PCR) assay was validated for PJ detection to improve diagnosis of PCP. METHODS: Forty stored bronchoalveolar lavage (BAL) samples (20 known PJ positive [PJ+] and 20 known PJ negative [PJ-]) were initially tested using the molecular assay. Ninety-two sequentially collected BAL samples were then analyzed using an immunofluorescence assay (IFA) and secondarily tested using the PJ real-time PCR assay. Discrepant results were resolved by retesting BAL samples using another real-time PCR assay with a different target. PJ real-time PCR assay performance was compared with the existing gold standard (ie, IFA) and a modified gold standard, in which a true positive was defined as a sample that tested positive in two of three methods in a patient suspected to have PCP. RESULTS: Ninety of 132 (68%) BAL fluid samples were collected from immunocompromised patients. Thirteen of 92 (14%) BALs collected were PJ+ when tested using IFA. A total of 40 BAL samples were PJ+ in the present study including: all IFA positive samples (n=13); all referred PJ+ BAL samples (n=20); and seven additional BAL samples that were IFA negative, but positive using the modified gold standard. Compared with IFA, the PJ real-time PCR had sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative predictive values of 100%, 91%, 65% and 100%, respectively. Compared with the modified gold standard, PJ real-time PCR had a sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative predictive values of 100%. CONCLUSION: PJ real-time PCR improved detection of PJ in immunocompromised patients. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This editorial, "Internal Medicine Point of Care Ultrasound: Indicators It's Here to Stay" (DOI: 10.1007/s11606-019-05268-0), was intended to accompany "Education Indicators for Internal Medicine Point-of-Care Ultrasound: a Consensus Report from the Canadian Internal Medicine Ultrasound (CIMUS) Group". [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: To evaluate the impact of a personalised audit and feedback prescribing report (AF) and brief educational summary (ES) on empiric treatment of uncomplicated lower urinary tract infections (UTIs) by family physicians (FPs)., Design: Cluster randomised control trial., Setting: The intervention was conducted in British Columbia, Canada between 23 September 2021 and 28 March 2022., Participants: We randomised 5073 FPs into a standard AF and ES intervention arm (n=1691), an ES-only arm (n=1691) and a control arm (n=1691)., Interventions: The AF contained personalised and peer-comparison data on first-line antibiotic prescriptions for women with uncomplicated lower UTI and key therapeutic recommendations. The ES contained detailed, evidence-based UTI management recommendations, incorporated regional antibiotic resistance data and recommended nitrofurantoin as a first-line treatment., Main Outcome Measures: Nitrofurantoin as first-line pharmacological treatment for uncomplicated lower UTI, analysed using an intention-to-treat approach., Results: We identified 21 307 cases of uncomplicated lower UTI among the three trial arms during the study period. The impact of receiving both the AF and ES increased the relative probability of prescribing nitrofurantoin as first-line treatment for uncomplicated lower UTI by 28% (OR 1.28; 95% CI 1.07 to 1.52), relative to the delay arm. This translates to additional prescribing of nitrofurantoin as first-line treatment, instead of alternates, in an additional 8.7 cases of uncomplicated UTI per 100 FPs during the 6-month study period., Conclusion: AF prescribing data with educational materials can improve primary care prescribing of antibiotics for uncomplicated lower UTI., Trial Registration Number: NCT05817253., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2024. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared.