A letter to the Master Clinician

In this commentary, the author writes a letter to the Master Clinician about his concerns regarding the teaching responsibilities of current faculty members during ward rounds. This short essay highlights the transition that has been noticed in medical training in the last decade

Paging Doctor Google! Heuristics vs. technology

The most dramatic development in medical decision-making technology has been the advent of the Internet. This has had an impact not only on clinicians, but has also become an important resource for patients who often approach their doctors with medical information they have obtained from the Internet.  Increasingly, medical students, residents and attending physicians have been using the Internet as a tool for diagnosing and treating disease. Internet-based resources that are available take various forms, including informational websites, online journals and textbooks, and social media.  Search engines such as Google have been increasingly used to help in making diagnoses of disease entities. Do these search methods fare better than experienced heuristic methods? In a small study, we examined the comparative role of heuristics versus the 'Google' mode of thinking. Internal medicine residents were asked to “google” key words to come up with a diagnosis. Their results were compared to experienced nephrology faculty and fellows in training using heuristics and no additional help of internet. Overall, with the aid of Google, the novices (internal medicine residents) correctly diagnosed renal diseases less often than the experts (the attendings) but with the same frequency as the intermediates (nephrology fellows).  However, in a subgroup analysis of both common diseases and rare diseases, the novices correctly diagnosed renal diseases less often than the experts but more often than the intermediates in each analysis.  The novices correctly diagnosed renal diseases with the same frequency as nephrology fellows in training

Awareness and Knowledge among Internal Medicine House-staff for Dose adjustment of Commonly Used Medications in Patients with CKD

Background: Drug dosing errors result in adverse patient outcomes and are more common in patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD). As internists treat the majority of patients with CKD, we study if Internal Medicine house-staff have awareness and knowledge about the correct dosage of commonly used medications for those with CKD. Methods: A cross-sectional survey was performed and included 341 participants. The outcomes were the awareness of whether a medication needs dose adjustment in patients with CKD and whether there was knowledge for the level of glomerular filtration rate (GFR) a medication needs to be adjusted. Results: The overall pattern for all post-graduate year (PGY) groups in all medication classes was a lack of awareness and knowledge. For awareness, there were statistically significant increased mean differences for PGY2 and PGY3 as compared to PGY1 for allergy, endocrine, gastrointestinal, and rheumatologic medication classes but not for analgesic,cardiovascular, and neuropsychotropic medication classes. For knowledge, there were statistically significant increased mean differences for PGY2 and PGY3 as compared to PGY1 for allergy, cardiovascular, endocrine, and gastrointestinal, medication classes but not for analgesic, neuropsychotropic, and rheumatologic medication classes. Conclusions: Internal Medicine house-staff across all levels of training demonstrated poor awareness and knowledge for many medication classes in CKD patients. Internal Medicine house-staff should receive more nephrology exposure and formal didactic educational training during residency to better manage complex treatment regimens and prevent medication dosing errors

Awareness and Knowledge among Internal Medicine House-staff for Dose adjustment of Commonly Used Medications in Patients with CKD

Background: Drug dosing errors result in adverse patient outcomes and are more common in patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD). As internists treat the majority of patients with CKD, we study if Internal Medicine house-staff have awareness and knowledge about the correct dosage of commonly used medications for those with CKD. Methods: A cross-sectional survey was performed and included 341 participants. The outcomes were the awareness of whether a medication needs dose adjustment in patients with CKD and whether there was knowledge for the level of glomerular filtration rate (GFR) a medication needs to be adjusted. Results: The overall pattern for all post-graduate year (PGY) groups in all medication classes was a lack of awareness and knowledge. For awareness, there were statistically significant increased mean differences for PGY2 and PGY3 as compared to PGY1 for allergy, endocrine, gastrointestinal, and rheumatologic medication classes but not for analgesic,cardiovascular, and neuropsychotropic medication classes. For knowledge, there were statistically significant increased mean differences for PGY2 and PGY3 as compared to PGY1 for allergy, cardiovascular, endocrine, and gastrointestinal, medication classes but not for analgesic, neuropsychotropic, and rheumatologic medication classes. Conclusions: Internal Medicine house-staff across all levels of training demonstrated poor awareness and knowledge for many medication classes in CKD patients. Internal Medicine house-staff should receive more nephrology exposure and formal didactic educational training during residency to better manage complex treatment regimens and prevent medication dosing errors

Why Not Nephrology? A Survey of US Internal Medicine Subspecialty Fellows

There is a decreased interest in nephrology such that the number of trainees likely will not meet the upcoming workforce demands posed by the projected number of patients with kidney disease. We conducted a survey of US internal medicine subspecialty fellows in fields other than nephrology to determine why they did not choose nephrology

Differentiating Acute Interstitial Nephritis From Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors From Other Causes

Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) have significantly improved outcomes for patients with neoplasms in advanced stages. On the other hand, ICIs have immune-related adverse events. These adverse events affect mostly other organs than the kidney, such as skin or gastrointestinal tract. The incidence of nephrotoxicity with monotherapy with any ICI is about 2%, which increases to 5% in combination therapy. Acute tubulointerstitial nephritis (AIN) is the most common pattern of kidney damage related to ICIs. Globally, without considering ICI nephrotoxicity, AIN is estimated to account for 15% to 20% of cases of acute kidney injury (AKI). This is crucial because patients who are treated with ICIs, may also be taking other drugs that potentially cause AIN, and therefore, knowing the particularities about ICI-related AIN could be helpful in clinical practice to better understand the phenotypic differences between the 2 types of AIN. In addition, several studies have now shown that being on proton pump inhibitors is a risk factor for AIN from ICI therapy

Similar Risk of Kidney Failure among Patients with Blinding Diseases Who Receive Ranibizumab, Aflibercept, and Bevacizumab:An Observational Health Data Sciences and Informatics Network Study

Purpose: To characterize the incidence of kidney failure associated with intravitreal anti-VEGF exposure; and compare the risk of kidney failure in patients treated with ranibizumab, aflibercept, or bevacizumab. Design: Retrospective cohort study across 12 databases in the Observational Health Data Sciences and Informatics (OHDSI) network. Subjects: Subjects aged ≥ 18 years with ≥ 3 monthly intravitreal anti-VEGF medications for a blinding disease (diabetic retinopathy, diabetic macular edema, exudative age-related macular degeneration, or retinal vein occlusion). Methods: The standardized incidence proportions and rates of kidney failure while on treatment with anti-VEGF were calculated. For each comparison (e.g., aflibercept versus ranibizumab), patients from each group were matched 1:1 using propensity scores. Cox proportional hazards models were used to estimate the risk of kidney failure while on treatment. A random effects meta-analysis was performed to combine each database's hazard ratio (HR) estimate into a single network-wide estimate. Main Outcome Measures: Incidence of kidney failure while on anti-VEGF treatment, and time from cohort entry to kidney failure. Results: Of the 6.1 million patients with blinding diseases, 37 189 who received ranibizumab, 39 447 aflibercept, and 163 611 bevacizumab were included; the total treatment exposure time was 161 724 person-years. The average standardized incidence proportion of kidney failure was 678 per 100 000 persons (range, 0–2389), and incidence rate 742 per 100 000 person-years (range, 0–2661). The meta-analysis HR of kidney failure comparing aflibercept with ranibizumab was 1.01 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.70–1.47; P = 0.45), ranibizumab with bevacizumab 0.95 (95% CI, 0.68–1.32; P = 0.62), and aflibercept with bevacizumab 0.95 (95% CI, 0.65–1.39; P = 0.60). Conclusions: There was no substantially different relative risk of kidney failure between those who received ranibizumab, bevacizumab, or aflibercept. Practicing ophthalmologists and nephrologists should be aware of the risk of kidney failure among patients receiving intravitreal anti-VEGF medications and that there is little empirical evidence to preferentially choose among the specific intravitreal anti-VEGF agents. Financial Disclosures: Proprietary or commercial disclosure may be found in the Footnotes and Disclosures at the end of this article.</p

Acute kidney injury in patients treated with immune checkpoint inhibitors

Background: Immune checkpoint inhibitor-associated acute kidney injury (ICPi-AKI) has emerged as an important toxicity among patients with cancer. Methods: We collected data on 429 patients with ICPi-AKI and 429 control patients who received ICPis contemporaneously but who did not develop ICPi-AKI from 30 sites in 10 countries. Multivariable logistic regression was used to identify predictors of ICPi-AKI and its recovery. A multivariable Cox model was used to estimate the effect of ICPi rechallenge versus no rechallenge on survival following ICPi-AKI. Results: ICPi-AKI occurred at a median of 16 weeks (IQR 8-32) following ICPi initiation. Lower baseline estimated glomerular filtration rate, proton pump inhibitor (PPI) use, and extrarenal immune-related adverse events (irAEs) were each associated with a higher risk of ICPi-AKI. Acute tubulointerstitial nephritis was the most common lesion on kidney biopsy (125/151 biopsied patients [82.7%]). Renal recovery occurred in 276 patients (64.3%) at a median of 7 weeks (IQR 3-10) following ICPi-AKI. Treatment with corticosteroids within 14 days following ICPi-AKI diagnosis was associated with higher odds of renal recovery (adjusted OR 2.64; 95% CI 1.58 to 4.41). Among patients treated with corticosteroids, early initiation of corticosteroids (within 3 days of ICPi-AKI) was associated with a higher odds of renal recovery compared with later initiation (more than 3 days following ICPi-AKI) (adjusted OR 2.09; 95% CI 1.16 to 3.79). Of 121 patients rechallenged, 20 (16.5%) developed recurrent ICPi-AKI. There was no difference in survival among patients rechallenged versus those not rechallenged following ICPi-AKI. Conclusions: Patients who developed ICPi-AKI were more likely to have impaired renal function at baseline, use a PPI, and have extrarenal irAEs. Two-thirds of patients had renal recovery following ICPi-AKI. Treatment with corticosteroids was associated with improved renal recovery

A letter to the Master Clinician

In this commentary, the author writes a letter to the Master Clinician about his concerns regarding the teaching responsibilities of current faculty members during ward rounds. This short essay highlights the transition that has been noticed in medical training in the last decade