G. Michael Harper

What training is needed in the fourth year of medical school? Views of residency program directors.

Purpose To identify common struggles of interns, determine residency program directors’ (PDs’) views of the competencies to be gained in the fourth year of medical school, and apply this information to formulate goals of curricular reform and student advising. Method In 2007, semistructured interviews were conducted with 30 PDs in the 10 most common specialty choices of students at the University of California, San Francisco, School of Medicine to assess the PDs’ priorities for knowledge, skills, and attitudes to be acquired in the fourth year. Interviews were coded to identify major themes. Results Common struggles of interns were lack of self-reflection and improvement, poor organizational skills, underdeveloped professionalism, and lack of medical knowledge. The Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education competencies of patient care, practice-based learning and improvement, interpersonal and communication skills, and professionalism were deemed fundamental to fourth-year students’ development. Rotations recommended across specialties were a subinternship in a student’s future field and in internal medicine (IM), rotations in an IM subspecialty, critical care, and emergency and ambulatory medicine. PDs encouraged minimizing additional time spent in the student’s future field. Suggested coursework included an intensively coached transitional subinternship and courses to improve students’ medical knowledge. Conclusions PDs deemed the fourth year to have a critical role in the curriculum. There was consensus about expected fourth-year competencies and the common clinical experiences that best prepare students for residency training. These findings support using the fourth year to transition students to graduate medical training and highlight areas for curricular innovation.

Characteristics and Impact of Drug Detailing for Gabapentin

Background Sales visits by pharmaceutical representatives (“drug detailing”) are common, but little is known about the content of these visits or about the impact of visit characteristics on prescribing behavior. In this study, we evaluated the content and impact of detail visits for gabapentin by analyzing market research forms completed by physicians after receiving a detail visit for this drug. Methods and Findings Market research forms that describe detail visits for gabapentin became available through litigation that alleged that gabapentin was promoted for “off-label” uses. Forms were available for 97 physicians reporting on 116 detail visits between 1995 and 1999. Three-quarters of recorded visits (91/116) occurred in 1996. Two-thirds of visits (72/107) were 5 minutes or less in duration, 65% (73/113) were rated of high informational value, and 39% (42/107) were accompanied by the delivery or promise of samples. During the period of this study, gabapentin was approved by the US Food and Drug Administration only for the adjunctive treatment of partial seizures, but in 38% of visits (44/115) the “main message” of the visit involved at least one off-label use. After receiving the detail visit, 46% (50/108) of physicians reported the intention to increase their prescribing or recommending of gabapentin in the future. In multivariable analysis, intent to increase future use or recommendation of gabapentin was associated with receiving the detail in a small group (versus one-on-one) setting and with low or absent baseline use of the drug, but not with other factors such as visit duration, discussion of “on-label” versus “off-label” content, and the perceived informational value of the presentation. Conclusions Detail visits for gabapentin were of high perceived informational value and often involved messages about unapproved uses. Despite their short duration, detail visits were frequently followed by physician intentions to increase their future recommending or prescribing of the drug.

Pruritus in the Older Patient: A Clinical Review

IMPORTANCE Pruritus is a common problem among elderly people and, when severe, causes as much discomfort as chronic pain. Little evidence supports pruritus treatment, limiting therapeutic possibilities and resulting in challenging management problems. OBJECTIVES To present the evidence on the etiology, diagnosis, and treatment of pruritus in the elderly and, using the best available evidence, provide an approach for generalist physicians caring for older patients with pruritus. EVIDENCE REVIEW PubMed and EMBASE databases were searched (1946-August 2013).The Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews and the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality Systematic Review Data Repository were also searched from their inception to August 2013. References from retrieved articles were evaluated. FINDINGS More than 50% of elderly patients have xerosis (dry skin). Xerosis treatment should be included in the initial therapy for pruritus in all elderly patients. Calcium channel blockers and hydrochlorothiazide are important causes of pruritic skin eruptions in older patients. Neuropathic pruritus is infrequently considered but may cause localized itching (especially in the genital area) and generalized truncal pruritus (especially in patients with diabetes mellitus). Certain skin conditions are more common in elderly patients, including scabies, bullous pemphigoid, transient acantholytic dermatosis, and mycosis fungoides, and should be considered in elderly patients with pruritus. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE It is important to evaluate elderly patients for dermatological, systemic, and neurological etiologies of itch. A simple-to-apply diagnostic and therapeutic algorithm can be used. Xerosis, drug reactions, and neuropathy should be considered when evaluating pruritus.

What Is a Geriatrician? American Geriatrics Society and Association of Directors of Geriatric Academic Programs End-of-Training Entrustable Professional Activities for Geriatric Medicine

Entrustable professional activities (EPAs) describe the core work that constitutes a disciplines specific expertise and provide the framework for faculty to perform meaningful assessment of geriatric fellows. This article describes the collaborative process of developing the end‐of‐training American Geriatrics Society (AGS) and Association of Directors of Geriatric Academic Programs (ADGAP) EPAs for Geriatric Medicine (AGS/ADGAP EPAs). The geriatrics EPAs describes a geriatricians fundamental expertise and how geriatricians differ from general internists and family practitioners who care for older adults.

The ‘worthy’ patient: rethinking the ‘hidden curriculum’ in medical education

This paper examines how physicians determine the quality and quantity of time to devote to each patient, and how these decisions are taught to physicians-in-training as part of the ‘hidden curriculum’ in medical education. The notion of moral economy is used to analyze how judgments of patient worth come to guide and influence interactions among physicians and physicians-in-training and patients, and how these interactions impact medical care. However, this paper also questions the notion of the hidden curriculum as a static or reified concept. Instead, the paper uses participant narratives to show how physicians-in-training are not simply passive recipients of the hidden curriculum but also actively resist judging patients based on perceptions of worth, even as they learn to operate within a moral economy of care.

American Geriatrics Society/Association of Directors of Geriatric Academic Programs curricular milestones for graduating geriatric fellows.

This article describes the curricular milestones for geriatric fellows and the process used to develop them. The curricular milestones were developed to determine what every graduating geriatric fellow should be able to demonstrate to ensure that they will be able to practice effectively and safely in all care settings and with different older adult populations. Three major domains were identified: Caring for the Elderly Patient, Systems‐Based Care for Elder Patients, and Geriatric Syndromes. Six hundred thirty‐five geriatricians each reviewed and commented on one domain. These geriatricians represented important stakeholder groups: geriatric fellowship program directors; Association of Directors of Geriatric Academic Programs (ADGAP) members, who are primarily geriatric program and fellowship directors; the American Geriatrics Society (AGS) and ADGAP Education Committee; the AGS Teachers Section; Geriatric Academic Career Award awardees; and through the American Board of Internal Medicine and the American Board of Family Medicine, board‐certified geriatricians who spend more than 50% of their time in clinical practice. The AGS and ADGAP boards approved the final set of 76 Geriatric Curricular Milestones, which were posted on the Portal of Geriatric Online Education in December 2012. These curricular milestones are intended to assist geriatric fellowship directors as they develop curricula and assessments to inform program director reporting to the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education in the Next Accreditation System, which begins in July 2014.

Is it time for comprehensive geriatric assessment to move beyond primary care? The case for targeting medical sub-specialty practice

Comprehensive geriatric assessment (CGA) as a consultative service for older adults with complex medical and psychosocial challenges has existed for decades. However, studies have often showed inconsistent acceptance and implementation of geriatric recommendations by primary care providers (PCPs) raising doubts about the overall benefits of CGA in this setting. Press and colleagues investigated the patient- and provider-related factors that affect recommendation implementation, and like previous studies, they too found similarly low rates of implementation. In this commentary, we acknowledge the perennial challenges that exist to improving the acceptance of CGA in primary care practice, and we suggest an alternative target: medical sub-specialty practice. By highlighting three medical sub-specialty fields (oncology, nephrology, and cardiology), which have demonstrated that CGA can be incorporated into their respective clinical practices, we argue that CGA may prove to have greater impact in these settings than in primary care. We also propose initial research steps that could further delineate the trends, outcomes, and next steps for such consultations.