Federico di Montefeltro's hyperkyphosis: a visual-historical case report

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Introduction</p> <p>The literature contains several publications describing the use of visual arts to develop observational skills in medical students. Portraits of individuals of the Italian Renaissance can be used to enhance these skills and stimulate the development of differential diagnoses in medical students. The Duke of Urbino, Federico di Montefeltro (1422–1482), lost his right eye and nasal bridge during a jousting accident in 1450. Consequently, almost every profile of him in existence today depicts his face in a left lateral view. Although some authors have described the Duke's missing nasal bridge, none have described his prominent thoracic hyperkyphosis, which is clearly discernible in two paintings by Piero della Francesca. The purpose of this report is to describe the Duke's hyperkyphosis, develop relevant differential diagnoses, and suggest a possible etiology of the convexity.</p> <p>Case presentation</p> <p>We have examined two paintings of the Duke by Piero della Francesca – the diptych, <it>The Duke and Duchess of Urbino </it>(1465), and the <it>Madonna of the Egg </it>(1472). A MEDLINE search revealed 2 articles that were relevant to this study. This search was complemented by a search of the collection at the library of Seton Hall University, and the first author's experience studying at the University of Urbino. The historical data obtained from these searches were incorporated with the visual analysis to formulate a plausible etiology of the Duke's thoracic hyperkyphosis.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>Differential diagnoses of the Duke's thoracic hyperkyphosis include Scheuermann disease, osteoporosis, and trauma-related spinal changes. Based on the available evidence, the Duke's thoracic hyperkyphosis could have been caused by repetitive trauma to the spine due to numerous hours on horseback with heavy armor. The role that osteoporosis played in the development of the hyperkyphosis is unclear, as is whether the Duke had the convexity during childhood. The hyperkyphosis as a stylistic variant by Piero della Francesca is unlikely. This report is an example of a teaching strategy that can be used to enhance the observational skills of medical students in evidence-based medical education.</p

Humanities for medical students? A qualitative study of a medical humanities curriculum in a medical school program

BACKGROUND: Today, there is a trend towards establishing the medical humanities as a component of medical education. However, medical humanities programs that exist within the context of a medical school can be problematic. The aim of this study was to explore problems that can arise with the establishment of a medical humanities curriculum in a medical school program. METHODS: Our theoretical approach in this study is informed by derridean deconstruction and by post-structuralist analysis. We examined the ideology of the Humanities and Medicine program at Lund University, Sweden, the practical implementation of the program, and how ideology and practice corresponded. Examination of the ideology driving the humanities and medicine program was based on a critical reading of all available written material concerning the Humanities and Medicine project. The practice of the program was examined by means of a participatory observation study of one course, and by in-depth interviews with five students who participated in the course. Data was analysed using a hermeneutic editing approach. RESULTS: The ideological language used to describe the program calls it an interdisciplinary learning environment but at the same time shows that the conditions of the program are established by the medical faculty's agenda. In practice, the "humanities" are constructed, defined and used within a medical frame of reference. Medical students have interesting discussions, acquire concepts and enjoy the program. But they come away lacking theoretical structure to understand what they have learned. There is no place for humanities students in the program. CONCLUSION: A challenge facing cross-disciplinary programs is creating an environment where the disciplines have equal standing and contribution

Consultant psychiatrists’ experiences of and attitudes towards shared decision making in antipsychotic prescribing, a qualitative study

Background: Shared decision making represents a clinical consultation model where both clinician and service user are conceptualised as experts; information is shared bilaterally and joint treatment decisions are reached. Little previous research has been conducted to assess experience of this model in psychiatric practice. The current project therefore sought to explore the attitudes and experiences of consultant psychiatrists relating to shared decision making in the prescribing of antipsychotic medications. Methods: A qualitative research design allowed the experiences and beliefs of participants in relation to shared decision making to be elicited. Purposive sampling was used to recruit participants from a range of clinical backgrounds and with varying length of clinical experience. A semi-structured interview schedule was utilised and was adapted in subsequent interviews to reflect emergent themes. Data analysis was completed in parallel with interviews in order to guide interview topics and to inform recruitment. A directed analysis method was utilised for interview analysis with themes identified being fitted to a framework identified from the research literature as applicable to the practice of shared decision making. Examples of themes contradictory to, or not adequately explained by, the framework were sought. Results: A total of 26 consultant psychiatrists were interviewed. Participants expressed support for the shared decision making model, but also acknowledged that it was necessary to be flexible as the clinical situation dictated. A number of potential barriers to the process were perceived however: The commonest barrier was the clinician's beliefs regarding the service users' insight into their mental disorder, presented in some cases as an absolute barrier to shared decision making. In addition factors external to the clinician - service user relationship were identified as impacting on the decision making process, including; environmental factors, financial constraints as well as societal perceptions of mental disorder in general and antipsychotic medication in particular. Conclusions: This project has allowed identification of potential barriers to shared decision making in psychiatric practice. Further work is necessary to observe the decision making process in clinical practice and also to identify means in which the identified barriers, in particular 'lack of insight', may be more effectively managed. © 2014 Shepherd et al.; licensee BioMed Central Ltd

Measuring empathy in pediatrics: validation of the Visual CARE measure

Background: Empathy is a key element of “Patient and Family Centered Care”, a clinical approach recommended by the American Academy of Pediatrics. However, there is a lack of validated tools to evaluate paediatrician empathy. This study aimed to validate the Visual CARE Measure, a patient rated questionnaire measuring physician empathy, in the setting of a Pediatric Emergency Department (ED). Methods: The empathy of physicians working in the Pediatric ED of the University Hospital of Udine, Italy, was assessed using an Italian translation of the Visual Care Measure. This test has three versions suited to different age groups: the 5Q questionnaire was administered to children aged 7–11, the 10Q version to those older than 11, and the 10Q–Parent questionnaire to parents of children younger than 7. The internal reliability, homogeneity and construct validity of the 5Q and 10Q/10Q–Parent versions of the Visual Care Measure, were separately assessed. The influence of family background on the rating of physician empathy and satisfaction with the clinical encounter was also evaluated. Results: Seven physicians and 416 children and their parents were included in the study. Internal consistency measured by Cronbach’s alpha was 0.95 for the 10Q/10Q–Parent versions and 0.88 for the 5Q version. The item-total correlation was &gt; 0.75 for each item. An exploratory factor analysis showed that all the items load onto the first factor. Physicians’ empathy scores correlated with patients’ satisfaction for both the 10Q and 10Q–Parent questionnaires (Spearman’s rho = 0.7189; p &lt; 0.001) and for the 5Q questionnaire (Spearman’s rho = 0.5968; p &lt; 0,001). Trust in the consulting physician was lower among immigrant parents (OR 0.43. 95% CI 0.20–0.93). Conclusions: The Visual Care Measure is a reliable second-person test of physician empathy in the setting of a Pediatric Emergency Room. More studies are needed to evaluate the reliability of this instrument in other pediatric settings distinct from the Emergency Room and to further evaluate its utility in measuring the impact of communication and empathy training programmes for healthcare professionals working in pediatrics

Quantifying Physician Teaching Productivity Using Clinical Relative Value Units

OBJECTIVE: To design and test a customizable system for calculating physician teaching productivity based on clinical relative value units (RVUs). SETTING/PARTICIPANTS: A 550-bed community teaching hospital with 11 part-time faculty general internists. DESIGN: Academic year 1997–98 educational activities were analyzed with an RVU-based system using teaching value multipliers (TVMs). The TVM is the ratio of the value of a unit of time spent teaching to the equivalent time spent in clinical practice. We assigned TVMs to teaching tasks based on their educational value and complexity. The RVUs of a teaching activity would be equal to its TVM multiplied by its duration and by the regional median clinical RVU production rate. MEASUREMENTS: The faculty members' total annual RVUs for teaching were calculated and compared with the RVUs they would have earned had they spent the same proportion of time in clinical practice. MAIN RESULTS: For the same proportion of time, the faculty physicians would have generated 29,806 RVUs through teaching or 27,137 RVUs through clinical practice (Absolute difference = 2,669 RVUs; Relative excess = 9.8%). CONCLUSIONS: We describe an easily customizable method of quantifying physician teaching productivity in terms of clinical RVUs. This system allows equitable recognition of physician efforts in both the educational and clinical arenas