Measuring patient perceptions of surgeon communication performance in the treatment of thyroid nodules and thyroid cancer using the communication assessment tool

BackgroundThyroid surgeons are offering their patients less aggressive diagnostic and therapeutic management strategies for thyroid nodules and low-risk thyroid cancer in an effort to decrease overdiagnosis and overtreatment of indolent disease. Explaining the rationale for less aggressive management plans requires physicians to be effective communicators. We aimed to assess the communication skills of thyroid surgeons with the Makoul Communication Assessment Tool and to identify risk factors for poor communication.MethodsNew adult patients with thyroid nodules or thyroid cancer presenting to a single tertiary-referral endocrine surgery clinic were enrolled from July 2018 through December 2019. Patients were administered the Communication Assessment Tool immediately after their clinical encounter. Outlier communication scores were identified, and clinical characteristics were compared between outlier and nonoutlier groups.ResultsA total of 107 patients completed the Communication Assessment Tool. Mean (standard deviation) total and top box scores were 67 (6) and 86% (29%), respectively. Twenty-five patients (23%) were in the low-outlier group, defined by a total score below 67.5/70 or top box score below 82.25%. Other race and non-Hispanic patients (versus white race) were more likely low outliers (odds ratio 3.58, P = .048). The lowest scoring Communication Assessment Tool item overall was “the doctor encouraged me to ask questions” (78.5% top box).ConclusionWe found communication to be perceived as excellent in the majority of patients; however, an opportunity for improvement was identified in 29% of participants. Significant differences in race and ethnicity between low outlier and nonoutlier communication score patients were observed, which warrants additional investigation. These findings support the utility of the Communication Assessment Tool in studying the effectiveness of communication improvement initiatives.     

Liposomal Bupivacaine Versus Bupivacaine/Epinephrine Intercostal Nerve Block as Part of an Enhanced Recovery After Thoracic Surgery (ERATS) Care Pathway for Robotic Thoracic Surgery

ObjectivesTo examine how postoperative pain control after robotic thoracoscopic surgery varies with liposomal bupivacaine (LipoB) versus 0.5% bupivacaine/1:200,000 epinephrine (Bupi/Epi) intercostal nerve blocks within the context of an enhanced recovery after thoracic surgery (ERATS) protocol.DesignA retrospective analysis of a prospectively maintained database of patients undergoing robotic thoracoscopic procedures between September 1, 2018 and October 31, 2019 was conducted.SettingUniversity of Miami, single-institutional.ParticipantsPatients.InterventionsTwo hundred fifty-two patients had either LipoB intercostal nerve blocks (n = 129) or Bupi/Epi intercostal nerve blocks (n = 123) when undergoing robotic thoracic surgery.Measurements and Main ResultsComparative analysis of patient-reported pain levels, in-hospital and post-discharge opioid requirements, 90-day operative complications, length of hospital stay, and hospital costs was performed. Data were stratified to either anatomic lung resection or pulmonary wedge resection/mediastinal-pleural procedures. Bupi/Epi patients reported significantly more acute postoperative pain than LipoB patients, which correlated with higher in-hospital and post-discharge opioid requirements. There were no differences in postoperative complications, length of hospital stay, or hospital costs between the two groups.ConclusionsAs part of an ERATS protocol, infiltration of intercostal spaces and surgical wounds with LipoB for robotic thoracoscopic procedures afforded better postoperative subjective pain control and decreased opioid requirements without an increase in hospital costs as compared with use of Bupi/Epi.     

Immunogenicity,safety and reactogenicity of ROTAVAC® in healthy infants aged 6–8 weeks in Vietnam

BackgroundROTAVAC® is derived from human 116E rotavirus (RV) neonatal strain. In this study, we evaluated the immunogenicity, safety and reactogenicity of ROTAVAC® in Vietnam.MethodWe conducted a phase IV clinical trial in healthy infants aged 6–8 weeks using the complete regimen of ROTAVAC® with three doses. Serum anti-RV IgA was measured by enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay to assess the geometric mean concentration in infants who received the complete regimen of the vaccine.ResultsA total of 360 participants were enrolled in this clinical trial. The mean age ± standard deviation at enrollment was 6.9 ± 0.6 weeks. The anti-RV IgA titer was 4.01 ± 3.74 mg/ml pre-vaccination and substantially increased to 29.27 ± 80.64 mg/ml post-vaccination. The value of logIgA significantly increased (p = 0.003) from 0.28 ± 0.79 to 1.03 ± 0.54. The proportion of participants with equal to and greater than 3-fold and 4-fold shifts in pre- to post-vaccination antibody titer (IgA) were 55.4% and 48.3%, respectively. No adverse events or serious adverse events were recorded immediately within 30 min after the administration of each dose. The most common adverse events within 14 days after each visit were fever, unusual crying and irritability. Other adverse events occurred at a low rate, and no case of intussusception was noted.ConclusionsThe complete regimen of ROTAVAC® demonstrated an immunological response with clinically acceptable safety profile. Post-completion of this study, ROTAVAC® is now a WHO-prequalified vaccine and available in Vietnam.