Objectives Patients with diabetes are at particularly high risk for adverse outcomes after hospitalization. The goals of this study were to design, implement, and evaluate a multipronged transitional care intervention among hospitalized patients with diabetes. Methods We randomly assigned inpatients likely to be discharged home on insulin to an intensive transitional care intervention or usual care. The primary outcome was 90-day postdischarge insulin adherence, using prescription refill information to calculate a medication possession ratio. Unadjusted analyses were conducted using Wilcoxon rank sum; adjusted analyses used multivariable linear regression and weighted propensity scoring methods, with general estimating equations to account for clustering by admitting physician. Results One hundred eighty patients participated. The mean (SD) medication possession ratio to all insulin types was 84.5% (22.6) among intervention and 76.4% (25.1) among usual care patients (difference = 8.1, 95% confidence interval = −1.0 to 17.2, P = 0.06), with a smaller difference for adherence to all medications (86.3% versus 82.0%). A1c levels decreased in both groups but was larger in the intervention arm (1.09 and 0.11, respectively) (difference = −0.98, 95% confidence interval = −2.03 to −0.07, P = 0.04). Differences between study arms were not significant for rates of hypoglycemic episodes, 30-day readmissions, or emergency department visits. In adjusted/clustered analyses, the difference in A1c reduction remained statistically significant, whereas differences in all other outcomes remained nonsignificant. Conclusions The intervention was associated with improvements in glycemic control, with nonsignificant trends toward greater medication adherence. Further research is needed to optimize and successfully implement interventions to improve patient safety and health outcomes during care transitions.

No abstract

No abstract

Based on the largest cohort of clinically staged T2N0 gastric adenocarcinoma, there was no OS benefit derived from NAC compared to surgery alone. For select patients with reliable preoperative staging, NAC may be omitted.

Minimally invasive esophagectomy (MIE) is becoming more widespread with a documented improvement in postoperative morbidity based on level I evidence. However, there is a lack of consensus regarding the optimal MIE approach, conventional thoracoscopy/laparoscopy vs robotics as well as the ideal anastomotic technique. All patients who underwent MIE via an Ivor Lewis approach with a side-to-side stapled anastomosis were included. The thoracoscopy-laparoscopy (TL) group was compared to the robotic group with respect to perioperative outcomes using the entire cohorts and after 1:1 propensity score matching. Comparisons were made using the Mann–Whitney U and Fisher’s exact tests. Between July 2013 and November 2020, 72 TL and 67 robotic Ivor Lewis MIE were performed. After comparing the two unadjusted cohorts and 51 propensity matched pairs, there was a decrease in Clavien-Dindo Grade 2 or above complications in the robotic vs TL group (59.7% vs 41.8% [P = 0.042], (62.7% vs 39.2% [P = 0.029]), respectively. In both analyses, there was a reduction in hospital length of stay (median of 8 vs 7 days, P < 0.001) and a trend toward less anastomotic leaks in the robotic group (Unadjusted: 12.5 vs 3% [P = 0.057], Propensity-matched analysis: 13.7% vs 3.9% [P = 0.16]), respectively. A clinically significant decrease in overall morbidity, cardiac complications and hospital length of stay was observed in the robotic Ivor Lewis cohort when compared with the TL group at a high volume MIE program. Side-to-side stapled thoracic anastomoses utilizing a robotic platform provides the best outcomes in this single institution experience.