Although diabetes mellitus (DM) and pancreatic cancer (PC) are intricately linked, a comprehensive review addressing the impact of DM on PC prognosis and surgical outcomes is lacking. PubMed search was performed (1980-2012) using keywords "pancreatic cancer", "diabetes mellitus", "glucose intolerance", "pancreatic resection", "prognosis", and "post-operative outcomes". The search results were analyzed to determine the strength of association between DM and PC and to assess the impact of DM on PC prognosis and postoperative outcomes. Thirty-one studies involving 38,777 patients were identified. Patients with non-insulin-dependent DM have 1.5-2 fold increased relative risk of developing PC. Non-insulin-dependent DM is identified in 25.7% of patients with PC compared to 10.4% age-matched controls (95% confidence interval, 1.5-4.7; P < 0.0001). Patients with PC are more likely to have a diagnosis of new-onset DM than age-matched controls (14.7% vs 2.7%; P < 0.0001). Patients with PC with DM have a significantly lower overall survival than those without DM (14.4 vs 21.7 months; P < 0.001). The presence of DM significantly increases overall postoperative complication rates (45.6% vs 35.6%; P < 0.008). Patients with new-onset non-insulin-dependent DM are at a higher risk of developing PC and have a worse long-term survival and a higher rate of postoperative complications.

There is mounting evidence that communication and hand-off failures are a root cause of two-thirds of sentinel events in hospitals. Several studies have shown that non-standardized hand-offs have yielded poor patient outcomes and adverse events. At Stony Brook University Hospital, there were numerous reported adverse events related to poor hand-off during the transfer of patient responsibility from one resident caregiver to the next. A resident-conducted root cause analysis identified lack of a standardized hand-off process and formal training on safe and efficient hand-off among caregivers as key contributing factors.This quality improvement project used the PDSA methodology to test the use of a standardized method, the IPASS mnemonic, and compare it to our conventional hand-off method in our internal medicine residency program. The main goals of this study were to test the feasibility and effectiveness of a standardized I- PASS hand-off and to create a robust sustainability model that includes 1) integration of I-PASS handoff in the Electronic Medical Record (EMR), 2) direct observation of the hand-off process by faculty and senior residents, and 3) surveillance and reporting of hand-off compliance scores.Compared to hand-off with a conventional method, the use of the I-PASS method resulted in significantly fewer reported adverse events (χ2=4.8, df=1, p=0.04). I-PASS was successfully integrated into our EMR system and residents were mandated to use this as the sole method of hand-off. An EMR audit conducted six months after implementation revealed poor compliance, which ultimately led to the creation of a sustainability model that improved overall compliance from 60% to 100%.

No abstract

Excellent adherence to disease-modifying antirheumatic drug therapy and management is likely due to targeting clinical remission. Assessment of disease activity and functional status not only rose each year, but also is higher compared with similar studies. This may be due to an increased awareness of QIs and the utility of objective measures of disease activity. Deficient documentation of prognosis may be due to a lack of awareness of its importance. Suboptimal tuberculosis screening may be an artifact of poor documentation. We propose interventions to improve adherence.

Background: Osteoporotic fragility fracture is a burgeoning health epidemic that is associated with high rates of disability, morbidity, and mortality. Based on NHANES data, approximately 10 million Americans are affected by this disease. Areas of Uncertainty: Successful secondary fracture prevention measures are often limited by the under-diagnosis of osteoporosis after fragility fractures because of lack of patient and physician awareness of the disease, lack of follow-up, and medical nonadherence. Therapeutic Advances: Current guidelines recommend the use of Bisphosphonate as the first-line therapy for secondary fracture prevention. Compared with placebo, randomized controlled trials have demonstrated a significant reduction in vertebral and nonvertebral fractures using Alendronate, Risedronate, Ibandronate, and Zoledronic acid. All but Ibandronate showed a significant reduction in hip fractures as well (all trials with P < 0.05). Denosumab is an option in patients with impaired renal function or who are unresponsive to other therapies. It significantly decreases the risk of new vertebral fracture [hazard ratio (HR) = 0.32, 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.26–0.41], hip fracture (HR = 0.60, 95% CI, 0.37–0.97) and nonvertebral fracture (HR = 0.80; 95% CI, 0.67–0.95) without an increased in adverse events. Hormonal therapy has been shown to be effective but should be used in the lowest effective dose to minimize the risk of coronary heart disease, stroke, and venous thromboembolism. Selective estrogen replacement modulators, calcitonin, and parathyroid hormone analog are other alternatives described in this article. In addition to current therapies, emerging therapies under investigation such as Abaloparatide, a parathyroid receptor ligand, and Romosozumab, a monoclonal anti-sclerotin antibody both showed a reduction in new morphometric vertebral fractures compared with placebo (0.58% vs. 4.22%, relative risk = 0.14, 95% CI, 0.05–0.39 and 0.5 vs. 1.8%, relative risk = 0.27, 95% CI, 0.16–0.47, respectively). In this article, we summarize advances in current therapeutic agents used for secondary fracture prevention and provide insight into potential therapies that hold promise in the future of osteoporosis. Conclusion: Secondary prevention of fragility fractures through care coordination and initiation of various pharmacologic agents is crucial in the elderly population. Careful risk assessment and stratification should be performed before the initiation of pharmacologic treatment to optimize disease management.