Richard Blinkhorn

Spread of strain W, a highly drug-resistant strain of Mycobacterium tuberculosis, across the United States.

Strain W, a highly drug-resistant strain of Mycobacterium tuberculosis, was responsible for large nosocomial outbreaks in New York in the early 1990s. To describe the spread of strain W outside New York, we reviewed data from epidemiologic investigations, national tuberculosis surveillance, regional DNA fingerprint laboratories, and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Mycobacteriology Laboratory to identify potential cases of tuberculosis due to strain W. From January 1992 through February 1997, 23 cases were diagnosed in nine states and Puerto Rico; 8 were exposed to strain W in New York before their diagnosis; 4 of the 23 transmitted disease to 10 others. Eighty-six contacts of the 23 cases are presumed to be infected with strain W; 11 completed alternative preventive therapy. Strain W tuberculosis cases will occur throughout the United States as persons infected in New York move elsewhere. To help track and contain this strain, health departments should notify the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention of cases of tuberculosis resistant to isoniazid, rifampin, streptomycin, and kanamycin.

Successful Treatment of Disseminated Mycobacterium chelonae Infection with Linezolid

We describe a 57-year-old man with steroid-dependent myasthenia gravis and progressive ulcerating leg nodules due to clarithromycin-resistant Mycobacterium chelonae. The patient was successfully treated with linezolid.

Hindsight bias: An impediment to accurate probability estimation in clinicopathologic conferences

Although clinicopathologic conferences (CPCs) have been valued for teaching differential diagnosis, their instructional value may be compromised by hindsight bias. This bias occurs when those who know the actual diagnosis overestimate the likelihood that they would have been able to predict the correct diagnosis had they been asked to do so beforehand. Evidence for the presence of the hindsight bias was sought among 160 physicians and trainees attending four CPCs. Before the correct diagnosis was announced, half of the conference audience estimated the probability that each of five possible diagnoses was correct (foresight subjects). After the correct diagnosis was announced the remaining (hindsight) subjects estimated the probability they would have assigned to each of the five possible diagnoses had they been making the initial differential diagnosis. Only 30% of the foresight subjects ranked the correct diagnosis as first, versus 50% of the hindsight subjects (p < 0.02). Although less experienced physicians consistently demonstrated the hindsight bias, more experienced physicians succumbed only on easier cases. Key words: clinicopathologic conferences; hindsight bias; cognitive bias; debiasing techniques. (Med Decis Making 8:259-264, 1988)