Recent Publications by CFE Educators

Methotrexate (MTX) is a readily accessible drug, first used in 1948 and employed for a wide variety of indications since then. However, despite widespread off-label use, FDA labeling does not include approved indications for the use of MTX for many inflammatory skin diseases in pediatric patients, including morphea, psoriasis, atopic dermatitis, and alopecia areata, among others. Without published treatment guidelines, some clinicians may be hesitant to use MTX off-label, or uncomfortable prescribing MTX in this population. To address this unmet need, an expert consensus committee was convened to develop evidence- and consensus-based guidelines for use of MTX to treat pediatric inflammatory skin disease. Clinicians with experience and expertise in clinical research, drug development, and treating inflammatory skin disease in pediatric patients with MTX were recruited. Five committees were created based on major topic areas: (1) indications and contraindications, (2) dosing, (3) interactions with immunizations and medications, (4) adverse effects (potential for and management of), and (5) monitoring needs. Pertinent questions were generated and addressed by the relevant committee. The entire group participated in a modified Delphi process to establish agreement on recommendations for each question. The committee developed 46 evidence- and consensus-based recommendations, each with >70% agreement among members, across all five topics. These are presented in tables and text, along with a discussion of supporting literature, and level of evidence. These evidence- and consensus-based recommendations will support safe and effective use of MTX for the underserved population of pediatric patients who may benefit from this valuable, time-honored medication.

INTRODUCTION

Cold snare polypectomy (CSP) is strongly recommended as the optimal technique for the complete removal of small polyps. Though significant variability in polypectomy technique and quality has been established, the learning curve and impact of targeted training on CSP are unknown. Video feedback has shown promise as an effective pedagogy to improve performance among surgical trainees. We aimed to compare CSP performance between trainees who received video-based feedback and those who received conventional apprentice-based concurrent feedback. We hypothesized that video-based feedback would accelerate competence.

METHODS

We conducted a single-blinded, randomized controlled trial on competence for CSP of polyps 1 cm, comparing video-based feedback with conventional feedback. We randomly assigned deidentified consecutively recorded CSP videos to blinded raters to assess using the CSP Assessment Tool. We shared cumulative sum learning curves every 25 CSP with each trainee. The video feedback trainees also received biweekly individualized terminal feedback. Control trainees received conventional feedback during colonoscopy. The primary outcome was CSP competence. We also assessed competence across domains and change over polypectomy volume.

RESULTS

We enrolled and randomized 22 trainees, 12 to video-based feedback and 10 to conventional feedback, and evaluated 2,339 CSP. The learning curve was long; 2 trainees (16.7%) in the video feedback achieved competence, after a mean of 135 polyps, and no one in the control ( P = 0.481) achieved competence. Overall and in all steps of CSP, a higher percentage of the video feedback group met competence, increasing 3% every 20 CSP ( P = 0.0004).

DISCUSSION

Video feedback aided trainees to competence in CSP. However, the learning curve was long. Our findings strongly suggest that current training methods are not sufficient to support trainees to competency by the completion of their fellowship programs. The impact of new training methods, such as simulation-based mastery learning, should be assessed to determine whether such methods can result in achievement of competence at a faster rate; ClinicalTrials.gov : NCT03115008.

The complexity of improving health in the United States and the rising call for outcomes-based physician training present unique challenges and opportunities for both graduate medical education (GME) and health systems. GME programs have been particularly challenged to implement systems-based practice (SBP) as a core physician competency and educational outcome. Disparate definitions and educational approaches to SBP, as well as limited understanding of the complex interactions between GME trainees, programs, and their health system settings, contribute to current suboptimal educational outcomes elated to SBP. To advance SBP competence at individual, program, and institutional levels, the authors present the rationale for an integrated multilevel systems approach to assess and evaluate SBP, propose a conceptual multilevel data model that integrates health system and educational SBP performance, and explore the opportunities and challenges of using multilevel data to promote an empirically driven approach to residency education. The development, study, and adoption of multilevel analytic approaches to GME are imperative to the successful operationalization of SBP and thereby imperative to GME's social accountability in meeting societal needs for improved health. The authors call for the continued collaboration of national leaders toward producing integrated and multilevel datasets that link health systems and their GME-sponsoring institutions to evolve SBP.

This guidance updates 2021 GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation) recommendations regarding immediate allergic reactions following coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccines and addresses revaccinating individuals with first-dose allergic reactions and allergy testing to determine revaccination outcomes. Recent meta-analyses assessed the incidence of severe allergic reactions to initial COVID-19 vaccination, risk of mRNA-COVID-19 revaccination after an initial reaction, and diagnostic accuracy of COVID-19 vaccine and vaccine excipient testing in predicting reactions. GRADE methods informed rating the certainty of evidence and strength of recommendations. A modified Delphi panel consisting of experts in allergy, anaphylaxis, vaccinology, infectious diseases, emergency medicine, and primary care from Australia, Canada, Europe, Japan, South Africa, the United Kingdom, and the United States formed the recommendations. We recommend vaccination for persons without COVID-19 vaccine excipient allergy and revaccination after a prior immediate allergic reaction. We suggest against >15-minute postvaccination observation. We recommend against mRNA vaccine or excipient skin testing to predict outcomes. We suggest revaccination of persons with an immediate allergic reaction to the mRNA vaccine or excipients be performed by a person with vaccine allergy expertise in a properly equipped setting. We suggest against premedication, split-dosing, or special precautions because of a comorbid allergic history.

Prostate-specific antigen (PSA) screening for prostate cancer remains controversial because it increases overdiagnosis and overtreatment of clinically insignificant tumors. Accounting for genetic determinants of constitutive, non-cancer-related PSA variation has potential to improve screening utility. In this study, we discovered 128 genome-wide significant associations (P  5 × 10) in a multi-ancestry meta-analysis of 95,768 men and developed a PSA polygenic score (PGS) that explains 9.61% of constitutive PSA variation. We found that, in men of European ancestry, using PGS-adjusted PSA would avoid up to 31% of negative prostate biopsies but also result in 12% fewer biopsies in patients with prostate cancer, mostly with Gleason score 7 tumors. Genetically adjusted PSA was more predictive of aggressive prostate cancer (odds ratio (OR) = 3.44, P = 6.2 × 10, area under the curve (AUC) = 0.755) than unadjusted PSA (OR = 3.31, P = 1.1 × 10, AUC = 0.738) in 106 cases and 23,667 controls. Compared to a prostate cancer PGS alone (AUC = 0.712), including genetically adjusted PSA improved detection of aggressive disease (AUC = 0.786, P = 7.2 × 10). Our findings highlight the potential utility of incorporating PGS for personalized biomarkers in prostate cancer screening.