Burton, M. Caroline

Since their introduction for melanoma treatment, the use of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) has rapidly expanded. Though their impact on survival is irrefutable, these medications have been associated with autoimmune‐like adverse events related to their ability to induce the immune system. One of the most commonly affected organ systems is the gastrointestinal (GI) tract, in which manifestations range from mild diarrhea to severe colitis with intestinal perforation. Because of the increased use of ICIs, hospitalists are caring for an increasing number of patients experiencing their adverse events. We present a case‐oriented review of the GI adverse events associated with the use of ICIs to familiarize the hospitalist with their mechanism of action and potential complications and to emphasize the importance of early diagnosis and treatment to decrease morbidity and mortality.

Abstract Objectives To determine whether use of a patient portal during hospitalization is associated with improvement in hospital outcomes, 30-day readmissions, inpatient mortality, and 30-day mortality. Materials and Methods We performed a retrospective propensity score–matched study that included all adult patients admitted to Mayo Clinic Hospital in Jacksonville, Florida, from August 1, 2012, to July 31, 2014, who had signed up for a patient portal account prior to hospitalization (N = 7538). Results Out of the admitted patients with a portal account, 1566 (20.8%) accessed the portal while in the hospital. Compared to patients who did not access the portal, patients who accessed the portal were younger (58.8 years vs 62.3 years), had fewer elective admissions (54.2% vs 64.1%), were more frequently admitted to medical services (45.8% vs 35.2%), and were more likely to have liver disease (21.9% vs 12.9%) and higher disease severity scores (0.653 vs 0.456). After propensity score matching, there was no statistically significant difference between the 2 cohorts with respect to 30-day readmission (P = .13), inpatient mortality (P = .82), or 30-day mortality (P = .082). Conclusion Use of the patient portal in the inpatient setting may not improve hospital outcomes. Future research should examine the association of portal use with more immediate inpatient health outcomes such as patient experience, patient engagement, medication reconciliation, and prevention of adverse events.

Objectives This naturalistic prospective observation study examines the efficacy of electroconvulsive therapy (ECT) in treating dementia-related agitation. Methods Patients with dementia-related agitation who received ECT were compared with patients with the same condition who did not receive ECT using Cohen-Mansfield Agitation Inventory (CMAI), Neuropsychiatric Inventory (NPI)—nursing home version, and Clinical Global Impression Scale (CGI). Outcomes were compared between ECT-treated and non–ECT-treated patients. Results A total of 9 patients were included in the study. Six received ECT, and 3 did not. Patients in the ECT and non–ECT-treated groups had comparable baseline scores (CMAI, P = 0.880; NPI, P = 0.814; and CGI, P = 0.445). The CMAI, NPI, and CGI scores were lower on final assessment in both groups with no statistically significant difference (CMAI, P = 0.771; NPI, P = 0.243; and CGI, P = 0.519). Conclusions Electroconvulsive therapy should be considered as a treatment option in the management of severe treatment refractory dementia-related agitation.

Abstract Background A documented penicillin allergy is associated with increased morbidity including length of hospital stay and an increased incidence of resistant infections attributed to use of broader‐spectrum antibiotics. The aim of the systematic review was to identify whether inpatient penicillin allergy testing affected clinical outcomes during hospitalization. Methods We performed an electronic search of Ovid MEDLINE /PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, Scopus, and the Cochrane Library over the past 20 years. Inpatients having a documented penicillin allergy that underwent penicillin allergy testing were included. Results Twenty‐four studies met eligibility criteria. Study sample size was between 24 and 252 patients in exclusively inpatient cohorts. Penicillin skin testing ( PST ) with or without oral amoxicillin challenge was the main intervention described (18 studies). The population‐weighted mean for a negative PST was 95.1% [ CI 93.8‐96.1]. Inpatient penicillin allergy testing led to a change in antibiotic selection that was greater in the intensive care unit (77.97% [ CI 72.0‐83.1] vs 54.73% [ CI 51.2‐58.2], P <.01). An increased prescription of penicillin (range 9.9%‐49%) and cephalosporin (range 10.7%‐48%) antibiotics was reported. Vancomycin and fluoroquinolone use was decreased. Inpatient penicillin allergy testing was associated with decreased healthcare cost in four studies. Conclusions Inpatient penicillin allergy testing is safe and effective in ruling out penicillin allergy. The rate of negative tests is comparable to outpatient and perioperative data. Patients with a documented penicillin allergy who require penicillin should be tested during hospitalization given its benefit for individual patient outcomes and antibiotic stewardship.

Introduction: Our study assesses the utility of telemetry in identifying decompensation in patients with documented cardiopulmonary arrest. Methods: A retrospective review of inpatients who experienced a cardiopulmonary arrest from May 1, 2008, until June 30, 2014, was performed. Telemetry records 24 hours prior to and immediately preceding cardiopulmonary arrest were reviewed. Patient subanalyses based on clinical demographics were made as well as analyses of survival comparing patients with identifiable rhythm changes in telemetry to those without. Results: Of 242 patients included in the study, 75 (31.0%) and 110 (45.5%) experienced telemetry changes at the 24-hour and immediately preceding time periods, respectively. Of the telemetry changes, the majority were classified as nonmalignant (n = 50, 66.7% and n = 66, 55.5% at 24 hours prior and immediately preceding, respectively). There was no difference in telemetry changes between intensive care unit (ICU) and non-ICU patients and among patients stratified according to the American Heart Association telemetry indications. There was no difference in survival when comparing patients with telemetry changes immediately preceding and at 24 hours prior to an event (n = 30, 27.3% and n = 15, 20.0%) to those without telemetry changes during the same periods (n = 27, 20.5% and n = 42, 25.2%; P = .22 and .39). Conclusion: Telemetry has limited utility in predicting clinical decompensation in the inpatient setting.

ABSTRACTBackgroundThe panelists of the Joint National Committee recently published new recommendations for the management of hypertension. Our study aims to evaluate how current practice compares.HypothesisCurrent practice likely deviates from the recent JNC 8 panelists' recommendations.MethodsA survey was sent to cardiology providers at 3 academic medical centers: Mayo Clinic, Jacksonville, Florida; Mayo Clinic, Scottsdale, Arizona; and Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota. Providers were asked to select which blood‐pressure goal would be deemed appropriate in various cases based on individual practice in both the maintenance of patients already on therapy as well as threshold of when to initiate therapy. Comparisons with current recommendations were made, as well as geographic location and level of experience.ResultsA total of 251 survey requests were sent (May 2014), and 77 responses (30.7%) were received. Cardiologists tended not to practice according to the new guidelines, with most variation seen in patients age >60 years without comorbidities on active treatment. Providers' selection of initial pharmacologic agents in non–African American patients, African American patients, and patients with diabetes mellitus reflected congruency with guidelines.ConclusionsOur study found that clinical practice does not correlate well with the new blood‐pressure goal recommendations published by the Joint National Committee 8 panelists, particularly in patients age >60 years. Practitioners are likely to follow the recommendations in regard to pharmacologic management.