Internal Medicine Physicians Research Articles

Adoption and perception of prescribable digital health applications (DiGA) and the advancing digitalization among German internal medicine physicians: a cross-sectional survey study

BackgroundTherapeutic digital health applications (DiGAs) are expected to significantly enhance access to evidence-based care. Since 2020, German physicians and psychotherapists have been able to prescribe approved DiGAs, which are reimbursed by statutory health insurance. This study investigates the usage, knowledge and perception of DiGAs as well as the growing digitalization among internal medicine physicians in Germany.MethodsA web-based survey was distributed at the 2024 annual congress of the German Society for Internal Medicine. Participants could respond by scanning a QR code or directly on a tablet.ResultsA total of 100 physicians completed the survey, with a mean age of 43.4 years. The majority were internal medicine physicians (85%). Of the respondents, 31% had already prescribed DiGAs, and 29% had tested one. Self-rated knowledge of DiGAs was low (median score 3.17/10). The main barriers identified were lack of knowledge about effective implementation (60%), lack of time for patient onboarding (27%), and concerns about patient adherence (21%). However, 92% believed that DiGAs could improve care, and 88% expressed interest in specific digital health training. The majority (64%) stated that digitalization had a positive impact on medical care and 39% of physicians expected their daily workload to decrease due to digitalization. In addition, 38% believed that the physician-patient relationship would improve as a result of digitalization.ConclusionsWhile physicians widely acknowledged the potential benefits of DiGAs, adoption and understanding remain limited. Specific training in digital health is crucial to accelerate digitalization in internal medicine.

Disparities in management of symptomatic osteoporotic vertebral compression fractures: a nationwide multidisciplinary survey

SummaryThis nationwide multidisciplinary survey found dissatisfaction among physicians with current osteoporotic vertebral compression fracture care, revealing significant disparities in diagnosis, treatment, and follow-up practices. Issues include poor communication and differing guidelines. Improving interdisciplinary collaboration and standardized care strategies is essential for better patient outcomes.PurposeThis survey aims to assess current preferred care practices for symptomatic osteoporotic vertebral compression fractures (OVCF) in the Netherlands, focusing on guideline adherence, identifying knowledge gaps, and clarifying consensus and collaboration across medical disciplines in OVCF treatment.MethodsThis cross-sectional study was conducted via Qualtrics (Provo, UT) using a self-administered online survey distributed to 238 general practitioners and physicians in orthopedics, traumatology, internal medicine, rheumatology, and geriatrics working at 51 hospitals in the Netherlands. The survey, conducted in Dutch, included 36 multiple-choice and two open questions and was accessible via an anonymous email link or QR code. General practitioners received additional questions specific to their role. Data was anonymized, stored securely, and analyzed using descriptive statistics in Microsoft Excel and SPSS (Version 24). Open-ended responses were coded and categorized. The survey was conducted prior to the publication of the updated Federation of Medical Specialists guidelines in 2024.ResultsPhysicians across various disciplines uniformly expressed dissatisfaction with current OVCF care. The survey highlighted significant disparities in diagnosis, treatment, and follow-up practices. A lack of communication between primary and secondary care providers and differing guidelines further complicate OVCF management. These issues point to considerable variation in clinical practice and gaps in interdisciplinary collaboration.ConclusionAddressing the identified issues requires fostering interdisciplinary collaboration and creating cohesive care strategies. Ensuring access to diagnostic resources in both primary and secondary care and establishing coordinated care models promises more structured and standardized treatment. These steps are crucial for enhancing patient outcomes in OVCF management.

Abortion.

Induced abortion is safe, is common, and reduces pregnancy-related maternal morbidity and mortality. Internal medicine physicians are uniquely positioned to counsel patients on their pregnancy options, assess medical risks of pregnancy in the context of comorbidities, refer for abortion care when the patient desires it, or provide abortion care themselves. Clinicians can also provide anticipatory guidance about what patients should expect if they seek abortion care.

The Organization of Academic General Internal Medicine Practice at the Top Primary Care Schools.

While prior studies have explored staffing infrastructure for primary care practices in general, little is known about the range of academic primary care practice models and supports available for academic general internists. To characterize the range of practice arrangements and expectations for attending academic physicians in general internal medicine (GIM) practices at the top 22 medical schools across the USA. Cross-sectional survey administered electronically between October 30, 2022, and December 28, 2022. Clinical leaders in GIM at the top 22 primary care medical schools, as identified by the 2023 US News and World Report Rankings. Clinical load, productivity expectations, cross-coverage, and team-based care models. Twenty-two leaders responded, representing 68% (15/22) of medical schools surveyed. The practices were mostly in urban locations (18/22, 82%) and 86% (19/22) included residents. Practices ranged from 7 to 200 PCPs and from 3 to 112 clinical FTEs. A full-time (1.0 FTE) clinical role for academic attending GIM physicians entailed a median of 9 (IQR 8, 10) weekly half-day clinic sessions, with a median panel size expectation of 1600 (IQR 1450, 1850) patients and a median yearly RVU expectation of 5200 (IQR 4161, 5891) yearly RVUs generated. Staff support was most commonly present for prescription refills and patient portal message checks. It was less commonly available for time sensitive form completion. Occasional clinical coverage for other physicians was an expectation at all practices. In this study, we characterize the organization of and supports available in academic GIM practices affiliated with the top primary care medical schools. Our findings provide comparative information for leaders of academic GIM practices seeking to enhance primary care delivery for their faculty and trainees. They also highlight areas where standardization may be beneficial across academic GIM.

Asian representation in the United States (US) oncology workforce.

152 Background: The American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) started the Diversity in Oncology initiative in 2017. Minority representation in the US oncology physician workforce was the subject of a recent series of ASCO State of the Oncology Workforce in America snapshots (1). However, Asian minority representation was not mentioned in any of these reports. Our objective was to determine the proportion of Asian workforce in various oncology specialties inclusive of physician and non-physician practitioners as well as physician trainees. Methods: We searched the web for publicly available data on Asian representation among US oncology adult (A) and pediatric (P) practitioners and trainees. Major data sources included the 2020 US Census, Association of American Medical Colleges, Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education, and professional societies. Practitioners included hematologists/oncologists (H/O), gynecologic oncologists (GYNO), radiation oncologists (RADO), surgical oncologists (SURGO), hematopathologists (HP), oncology nurse practitioners (ONP), oncology physician assistants (OPA), and oncology nurses (ON). Trainees included fellows (F) and residents (R). For reference, we obtained similar data on US population, medical students (MS), adult internal medicine residents (AIMR), gynecology residents (GYNR), pediatric residents (PR), pathology residents (PATHR), surgery residents (SURGR), nurses (RN), nurse practitioners (NP), and physician assistants (PA). For a snapshot of the oncology workforce, data from 2020-2022 were used. Whenever available, we obtained serial data for trainees over the years. Results: A snapshot of the proportions of Asians based on their professions is shown (Table). While Asians comprise only 6.2% of the US population, between 14.7% to 32.1% of physician practitioners in various oncology subspecialties are Asian. Moreover, between 17.9% to 35.3% of oncology physician trainees and 26.7% of medical students are Asian and these proportions have remained stable from 2005 to 2022. Data are unavailable for HP, SURGO, and non-physician practitioners except for OPA (7.0%) and RN (7.2%). Conclusions: Asians comprise a large segment of the US oncology workforce. While only 1 in 20 people in the US are Asians, between 1 in 3 and 1 in 5 oncology physician practitioners and trainees are Asians. Data are limited for non-physician practitioners. Asian minority representation should be highlighted and considered as an example of success in diversity. 1. JCO Oncol Pract 2020-2022. Snapshot of Asian representation among oncology trainees and practitioners in the US. Trainees 2022 A-H/O-F 35.3% AIMR 35.9% 2022 P-H/O-F 20.0% PR 22.0% 2022 RADO-R 26.4% MS 26.7% 2022 GYNO-F 17.9% GYNR 14.9% 2022 HP-F 20.0% PATHR 26.6% 2022 SURGO-F 21.2% SURGR 19.2% Practitioners 2021 A-H/O 32.1% OPA 7.0% 2021 P-H/O 20.4% RN 7.2% 2021 RADO 25.9% HP/SURGO/ONP/ON NA 2020 GYNO 14.7% US Census 6.2%

Interdisciplinary Management of Traumatic Injuries to the Kidneys and Urinary Tract Caused by Blunt Abdominopelvic Trauma.

Purpose: Blunt abdominopelvic trauma frequently results in injuries to the urinary organs, especially in polytrauma. The urotrauma is rarely an acute life-threatening event; however, it may lead to severe complications. Methods: This review addresses the under-representation of urological trauma management in interdisciplinary medical training and its impact on patient outcomes. It compiles evidence-based recommendations and guidelines from multiple specialties, focusing on common challenges in managing these injuries. The resource is tailored for primary care physicians in radiology, trauma surgery, internal medicine, urology, and nephrology. Results: Urinary tract injuries can occur even if the patient's condition initially appears normal. An exclusion diagnosis is obligatory by contrast medium tomography of the entire urinary tract and, if suspected, an additional uroendoscopic examination. Interventional therapy by catheterisation of the urinary tract is often required. Urosurgical treatment is not commonly needed, but when there is a demand, it must be administered via an interdisciplinary approach with visceral and trauma surgery. Over 90% of life-threatening kidney injuries (usually up to grade 4-5 AAST) are presently treated by interventional radiologists. Acute kidney injury (AKI) as a complication in trauma patients may complicate clinical management and often worsens the outcome. The incidence of trauma-associated AKI in patients admitted to an intensive care unit is high. Conclusions: Patients suffering from blunt abdominopelvic trauma should ideally be referred to certified trauma centres with subspecialised or fully specialised care provided by visceral/vascular surgery, trauma surgery, interventional radiology, urology, and nephrology. This recommendation is based on the complex nature of most damage patterns.

Quality Indicators for Pain in Adults: A Review of Performance Measures by the American College of Physicians.

Pain is a debilitating symptom generally caused by injuries or various conditions. It can be acute, subacute, or chronic and can have a significant impact on a patient's quality of life. The goal of managing pain is to relieve or reduce suffering and improve patient functioning. Several performance measures that address the treatment of pain are used in payment, public reporting, or accountability programs. The American College of Physicians (ACP) embraces performance measurement as a means to improve quality of care. ACP believes that a performance measure must be methodologically sound and evidence-based to be considered for inclusion in payment, accountability, or reporting programs. However, a plethora of performance measures that provide minimal or no value to patient care have inundated physicians, practices, and systems with the burden of collecting and reporting data. ACP's Performance Measurement Committee (PMC) reviews performance measures using a validated process to recognize high-quality performance measures, address gaps and areas for improvement in performance measures, and help reduce reporting burden. There is a need for a higher standard for a performance measure when reputation and reimbursement are on the line. This paper aims to present a review of current performance measures for pain to inform physicians, payers, and policymakers in their selection and use of performance measures. The PMC reviewed 6 performance measures for pain relevant to internal medicine physicians, of which 3 were considered valid at their intended levels of attribution ("Use of Imaging for Low Back Pain," "Use of Opioids at High Dosage in Persons Without Cancer," and "Use of Opioids From Multiple Providers in Persons Without Cancer"). This paper also proposes a performance measure concept to address a quality-of-care gap based on the current clinical guideline from ACP and the American Academy of Family Physicians, "Nonpharmacologic and Pharmacologic Management of Acute Pain From Non-low Back, Musculoskeletal Injuries in Adults."

The effect of management of older patients with heart failure by general physicians on mortality and hospitalization rates: a retrospective cohort study

BackgroundThe prevalence of heart failure is increasing owing to the aging of the population, resulting in growing medical costs and an increasing number of patients with multimorbidity. The optimal management of heart failure by general physicians in addition to internal medicine physicians, such as cardiologists, is essential, although the specifics are unclear. In this study, we aimed to determine the differences in heart failure management outcomes among older patients between those managed by general physicians and those managed by internal medicine physicians, especially in terms of hospitalization and mortality rates.MethodsThis was a retrospective cohort study of patients with heart failure who visited a community hospital in Japan. Patients with heart failure were selected based on International Classification of Diseases codes from electronic medical record data over 9 years, from September 2015 to August 2023. The independent variables were whether a general physician treated the patient; the primary outcome was death; the secondary outcome was hospitalization; and the covariates were patient background, including comorbidities. Multiple logistic regression analysis was used to evaluate the association between being managed by a general physician and death and hospitalization, after adjusting for confounding factors.ResultsA total of 1032 patients with heart failure were identified, with a mean age of 82.4 years, and 48.9% were men. Patients treated by general physicians were older, were more likely to have dementia and were more likely to need care than those treated by internal medicine physicians. Being treated by a general physician was significantly negatively associated with death (odds ratio [OR], 0.62) and hospitalization (OR, 0.73).ConclusionsIn Japan, where medical specialties are increasingly differentiated, the comprehensive management of older patients with heart failure and multiple comorbidities by general physicians may reduce hospitalization and mortality rates. Appropriate education of general physicians and an increase in their numbers may prove essential for the successful management of patients with heart failure in aging communities.

The Impact of Artificial Intelligence on Internal Medicine Physicians: A Survey of Procedural and Non-procedural Specialties.

Artificial intelligence (AI) is increasingly being integrated into various aspects of healthcare, including internal medicine. However, the impact of AI on physicians across different internal medicine specialties remains unclear. This study assesses AI's adoption, utilization, and perceived impact among procedural and non-procedural internal medicine physicians. A comprehensive survey questionnaire was designed to cover current AI use, perceived impact on diagnostic accuracy, treatment decisions, patient outcomes, challenges, ethical concerns, and future expectations. The survey was distributed to a diverse sample of internal medicine physicians across various specialties, including procedural (e.g., interventional cardiology, gastroenterology) and non-procedural (e.g., endocrinology, rheumatology) fields.Responses were analyzed using descriptive statistics, chi-square tests, t-tests, and logistic regression. The survey received responses from 22 internal medicine physicians, with 64% (n=14) representing procedural specialties and 36% (n=8) representing non-procedural specialties. Sixty-eight percent (n=15) of respondents reported using AI tools in their practice, with higher adoption rates among procedural specialties (n=11,79%) compared to non-procedural specialties (n=4, 50%). Surveyed physicians reported that AI improved diagnostic accuracy (n=12, 80%), treatment decisions (n=10, 67%), and patient outcomes (n=13, 87%). However, 55% (n=12) of respondents expressed concerns about the interpretability and transparency of AI algorithms. Non-procedural specialists were more likely to perceive AI as a threat to their job security (n=3, 38%) than procedural specialists (n=3, 21%). The most common challenges to AI adoption were lack of training (n=16, 73%), cost (n=13, 59%), and data privacy concerns (n=11, 50%). This study assesses the perceived impact of AI on internal medicine physicians, highlighting the differences between procedural and non-procedural specialties. The findings underscore the need for specialty-specific considerations in developing and implementing AI tools. While AI can potentially improve diagnostic accuracy, treatment decisions, and patient outcomes, addressing challenges such as lack of training, cost, and data privacy concerns is crucial for widespread adoption. Moreover, the study emphasizes the importance of ensuring the interpretability and transparency of AI algorithms to foster trust among physicians. As AI continues to evolve, it is essential to engage internal medicine physicians across specialties in the development process to create AI tools that effectively complement their expertise and improve patient care. Further research should focus on developing best practices for AI integration in internal medicine and evaluating the long-term impact on patient outcomes and healthcare systems.

A delayed diagnosis of hyperthyroidism in a patient with persistent vomiting in the presence of Chiari type 1 malformation.

To present and discuss an uncommon clinical presentation of hyperthyroidism in a female patient with Chiari type 1 malformation. We explore how her medical history influenced the diagnostic process and ultimately contributed to the delayed diagnosis. In this case study, we discuss an unusual presentation of hyperthyroidism in a 35-year-old female with Chiari type 1 malformation. Initially experiencing headaches, tremors, and dizziness, the patient consulted multiple specialists without a clear diagnosis. Later, she developed recurrent vomiting unrelated to food intake, significant weight loss (12 kg), and muscle weakness, leading to her hospitalization. After six months of clinical evaluation with several specialists (neurologists, neurosurgeons, and gastroenterologists), she was,finally, diagnosed with hyperthyroidism by an Internal Medicine physician in another private clinic. Treatment with thiamazole and propranolol led to the improvement of symptoms progressively. This caseemphasizes the vital role of clinical reasoning, crucial problem-solving, and decision-making processes while addressing cognitive biases in medical specialization. Besides, it highlights the need for internist evaluation in outpatient care to ensure comprehensive assessment and prompt specialist referrals if needed. This case accentuates the importance of internist evaluation for comprehensive care and timely specialist referrals. Recognizing unusual presentations, like thyrotoxic vomiting, and addressing cognitive biases, such as confirmation and anchor biases, are crucial for accurate and prompt diagnosis. This approach enhances diagnostic accuracy, minimizing unnecessary tests and costs, and alleviates patient suffering.

Flying Colors.

Philip Alexander, MD, is a native Texan, retired physician, and accomplished musician and artist. After 41 years as an internal medicine physician, Dr. Phil retired from his practice in College Station in 2016. A lifelong musician and former music professor, he often performs as an oboe soloist for the Brazos Valley Symphony Orchestra. He began exploring visual art in 1980, evolving from pencil sketches-including an official White House portrait of President Ronald Reagan-to the computer-generated drawings featured in this journal. His images, which first appeared in this journal in the spring of 2012, are his own original creations. If you would like to see your art published in the Methodist DeBakey Cardiovascular Journal, submit your creation online at journal.houstonmethodist.org as a "Humanities" entry.

Oropouche virus infection: What internal medicine physicians should know

Not required for Clinical Insight

Surgical Management of Iatrogenic Mercury Poisoning From Subcutaneous Injection Into the Arm.

Mercury, an element with threats of severe toxic insult to humans and no biological function, has a surprisingly extensive record of human exposure. Regardless of hesitancies toward its harmfulness, it has been historically identified with an almost supernatural power to provide protection from evil and sickness, give good fortune, lend aid in athletic undertakings, or even allow one to achieve immortality. Mercury poisoning is an iatrogenic disease even today as people attempt to achieve these effects through volitional injections into their body by practitioners. Although an uncommon practice in the United States, awareness of patient presentation after volitional injections of elemental mercury is necessary for appropriate treatment of these patients. We aim to increase awareness of the cultural practice of subcutaneous injections of mercury, as it is uncommonly seen in the United States, to contribute a broader understanding to the patient's medical presentation and describe an approach and the impact of medical and surgical intervention. In this report, we describe a rare case of elemental mercury poisoning secondary to volitional subcutaneous injection to the arm. Initial management of care through chelation therapy and monitoring of renal and serum mercury levels in addition to symptoms of systemic spread was overseen by an internal medicine physician and poison control. Surgical intervention via full-thickness excision of the visible mercury to the right arm followed by local flap and skin grafting reconstruction was performed. Mercury poisoning from intentional subcutaneous administration is an uncommon patient presentation in the United States; however, knowledge of management of this rare condition is important for effective management of iatrogenic mercury toxicity.

Attitudes and barriers to lipoprotein(a) testing: A survey of providers at the University of Pennsylvania Health System

Guidelines recommend checking lipoprotein(a) [Lp(a)] levels in patients at high-risk for cardiovascular disease, with more recent recommendations advocating for universal screening in all adults. A brief electronic survey was distributed to select groups of University of Pennsylvania Health System (UPHS) providers, including Internal Medicine and Cardiology physicians and advance practice providers, to understand the current attitudes and barriers to testing for Lp(a). Of the 126 survey respondents, only 31 % answered that they test for Lp(a) regularly in their practice. Presence of ASCVD and a family history of ASCVD were the most common reasons for testing. Most survey respondents (69 %) replied that they do not currently check Lp(a) levels in patients. The most common reasons provided included lack of familiarity with Lp(a), insurance/ billing concerns, lack of clinical trial outcomes data, and lack of available pharmaceutical interventions. Results from ongoing clinical trials of novel Lp(a)-lowering therapies, if successful, may address provider hesitation toward Lp(a)-testing, but there remains a large gap to fill in awareness of Lp(a).

Perceptions of the Impact of Artificial Intelligence among Internal Medicine Physicians as a Step in Social Responsibility Implementation: A Cross-Sectional Study.

Artificial Intelligence (AI) has emerged as an essential tool in healthcare for optimizing healthcare delivery and improving patient outcomes. This study is motivated by using AI in healthcare as a step for social responsibility implementation. The research aimed to investigate the attitudes of healthcare professionals on this issue, and it assessed physicians' opinions regarding their perceptions of AI and their intention to use and implement AI tools in their activity. An electronic survey was proposed during February-June 2024 to a sample of healthcare professionals (309 were admitted into the study, 62 males and 247 females, with a mean age of 42). The results of the survey highlighted both groups' excellent perceptions of AI and the low perceived knowledge of AI, which arises from more technical questions. The use of AI in healthcare represents a step for social responsibility implementation; it is an unstoppable process, and stakeholders should take into consideration investing more in monitoring and training activities.

Management of Acute Coronary Syndromes in Older People: Comprehensive Review and Multidisciplinary Practice-Based Recommendations.

Managing health care for older adults aged 75 years and older can pose unique challenges stemming from age-related physiological differences and comorbidities, along with elevated risk of delirium, frailty, disability, and polypharmacy. This review is aimed at providing a comprehensive analysis of the management of acute coronary syndromes (ACS) in older patients, a demographic substantially underrepresented in major clinical trials. Because older patients often exhibit atypical ACS symptoms, a nuanced diagnostic and risk stratification approach is necessary. We aim to address diagnostic challenges for older populations and highlight the diminished sensitivity of traditional symptoms with age, and the importance of biomarkers and imaging techniques tailored for older patients. Additionally, we review the efficacy and safety of pharmacological agents for ACS management in older people, emphasizing the need for a personalized and shared decision-making approach to treatment. This review also explores revascularization strategies, considering the implications of invasive procedures in older people, and weighing the potential benefits against the heightened procedural risks, particularly with surgical revascularization techniques. We explore the perioperative management of older patients experiencing myocardial infarction in the setting of noncardiac surgeries, including preoperative risk stratification and postoperative care considerations. Furthermore, we highlight the critical role of a multidisciplinary approach involving cardiologists, geriatricians, general and internal medicine physicians, primary care physicians, and allied health, to ensure a holistic care pathway in this patient cohort.

Is ChatGPT a Reliable Source of Patient Information on Asthma?

ChatGPT (OpenAI, San Francisco, CA, USA) is a novel artificial intelligence (AI) application that is used by millions of people, and the numbers are growing by the day. Because it has the potential to be a source of patient information, the study aimed to evaluate the ability of ChatGPT to answer frequently asked questions (FAQs) about asthma with consistent reliability, acceptability, and easy readability. We collected 30 FAQs about asthma from the Global Initiative for Asthma website. ChatGPT was asked each question twice, by two different users, to assess for consistency. The responses were evaluated by five board-certified internal medicine physicians for reliability and acceptability. The consistency of responses was determined by the differences in evaluation between the two answers to the same question. The readability of all responses was measured using the Flesch Reading Ease Scale (FRES), the Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level (FKGL), and the Simple Measure of Gobbledygook (SMOG). Sixty responses were collected for evaluation. Fifty-six (93.33%) of the responses were of good reliability. The average rating of the responses was 3.65 out of 4 total points. 78.3% (n=47) of the responses were found acceptable by the evaluators to be the only answer for an asthmatic patient. Only two (6.67%) of the 30 questions had inconsistent answers. The average readability of all responses was determined to be 33.50±14.37 on the FRES, 12.79±2.89 on the FKGL, and 13.47±2.38 on the SMOG. Compared to online websites, we found that ChatGPT can be a reliable and acceptable source of information for asthma patients in terms of information quality. However, all responses were of difficult readability, and none followed the recommended readability levels. Therefore, the readability of this AI application requires improvement to be more suitable for patients.

Factors Affecting Breast Cancer Screening in Ukraine

PURPOSE Breast cancer early detection in Ukraine and other low and middle-income countries (LMICs) often includes opportunistic screening. Evaluation of factors that affect screening is key to improving early detection. METHODS An online survey for primary care physicians (PCPs) was distributed through PCP-focused social media in Ukraine. Data were analyzed using descriptive statistics. RESULTS 435 PCPs from all regions of Ukraine completed the survey, including 389 (89.4%) women, 375 (86.2%) family medicine, 60 (13.8%) internal medicine physicians. 349 (80.2%) referred women for screening mammography. 252 (57.9%) conducted screening clinical breast exams (CBE), while 135 (31.0%) referred patients to mammalogists or 133 (30.6%) to gynecologists for CBE. Within one's practice, mammography was available for 81 (18.6%), mammalogists for 39 (9.0%), and gynecologists for 133 (30.3%). Breast cancer screening was prompted by MOH Order 504 for 281 (64%), family history 266 (61%), patient pathway guidelines 94 (21.6%), availability of subspecialists 78 (17.9%), and patient request 132 (30%). Reasons for not conducting CBE screening included insufficient experience 88 (20.2%), patients declining CBE 63 (14.5%), lack of time 59 (13.6%). Reasons for not conducting mammography screening included patients declining (11.7%) and absence of mammography (6.4%).). 350 (80.5%) were familiar with the Ministry of Health (MOH) Order 504, which describes eligibility criteria for breast cancer screening, and 291 (66.9%) used it to guide their screening practice. Others used US or European recommendations (62 (14.3%) and 115 (26.4%), respectively), and institution-specific patient pathways 117 (26.9%). Barriers to breast cancer screening included insufficient PCP training (53%) and experience (40%) and insufficient mammography availability (33%). Strategies for increasing breast cancer screening included improving collaboration between PCPs and oncologists 175 (40.2%), educational materials for patients 169 (38.9%), PCP education/training 168 (38.6%), automatic electronic health record reminders 150 (34.5%). CONCLUSION We identified important barriers and facilitators of breast cancer screening from the point of view of PCPs in Ukraine. Our results were limited by online convenience sampling.

Physicians' perceptions and awareness of adverse effects of proton pump inhibitors and impact on prescribing patterns.

Background: Heightened scrutiny surrounds the inappropriate use of proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) due to concerns regarding potential serious adverse effects (AEs). Understanding the impact of these AEs on real-world practice is crucial. This study aimed to assess physicians' perceptions, experiences, awareness, and beliefs regarding published data on potential AEs associated with PPIs. Additionally, it sought to determine alterations in PPI prescribing patterns resulting from these AEs, explore attitudes towards PPI use, and ascertain recommendations for PPI use in clinical scenarios with varying levels of risk for upper gastrointestinal bleeding (UGIB). Method: A quantitative, cross-sectional study utilized a self-administered questionnaire, inviting 282 physicians from 55 primary healthcare centers and 334 internal medicine physicians from seven governmental hospitals to participate. Results: With a response rate of 87.8% (541/616), 74% (95% CI: 70.2-77.7) of respondents were somewhat or very familiar with published data on PPI AEs. Among the familiar, 69.5% (CI: 65.2-73.5) had somewhat or very much changed their PPI prescribing patterns. General concerns about AEs when prescribing PPIs were reported by 62% (CI: 56.7-65.1). Respondents displayed awareness of a median (IQR) of 15 (9) different AEs associated with long-term PPI use, including osteoporosis or osteopenia (90.2%), hypomagnesemia (81.5%), vitamin B12 deficiency (80.6%), and bone fracture (80.0%). Respondents believed that PPIs elevate the risk for a median (IQR) of 7 (6) different AEs, with osteoporosis or osteopenia (81.8%) being the most common, followed by hypomagnesemia (67.1%), and vitamin B12 deficiency (62.3%). The most common strategies for PPI de-escalation were PPI discontinuation (61%) and using PPI on-demand/as-needed (57.9%). The majority (87.4%) agreed or strongly agreed that PPI overuse is prevalent in Kuwait and 78.2% emphasized the necessity for large-scale education on rational PPI use for medical staff and the public. In the UGIB prevention scenarios, 43.6% recommended appropriately the PPI discontinuation in the minimal-risk scenario, while 56% recommended appropriately the PPI continuation in the high-risk scenario. Associations and comparative analyses revealed predictors influencing physicians' practices and attitudes toward PPI usage. Conclusion: These findings lay the foundation for future research and targeted interventions aimed at optimizing PPI prescribing practices and ensuring patient safety.

Using large language model to guide patients to create efficient and comprehensive clinical care message.

This study aims to investigate the feasibility of using Large Language Models (LLMs) to engage with patients at the time they are drafting a question to their healthcare providers, and generate pertinent follow-up questions that the patient can answer before sending their message, with the goal of ensuring that their healthcare provider receives all the information they need to safely and accurately answer the patient's question, eliminating back-and-forth messaging, and the associated delays and frustrations. We collected a dataset of patient messages sent between January 1, 2022 to March 7, 2023 at Vanderbilt University Medical Center. Two internal medicine physicians identified 7 common scenarios. We used 3 LLMs to generate follow-up questions: (1) Comprehensive LLM Artificial Intelligence Responder (CLAIR): a locally fine-tuned LLM, (2) GPT4 with a simple prompt, and (3) GPT4 with a complex prompt. Five physicians rated them with the actual follow-ups written by healthcare providers on clarity, completeness, conciseness, and utility. For five scenarios, our CLAIR model had the best performance. The GPT4 model received higher scores for utility and completeness but lower scores for clarity and conciseness. CLAIR generated follow-up questions with similar clarity and conciseness as the actual follow-ups written by healthcare providers, with higher utility than healthcare providers and GPT4, and lower completeness than GPT4, but better than healthcare providers. LLMs can generate follow-up patient messages designed to clarify a medical question that compares favorably to those generated by healthcare providers.