Sunday, September 29, 2024

UDLCO: Pathological autopsy learning outcomes in post publication/presentation peer review of Clinico pathology correlation CPC around autopsy findings in a 48 year old human with clinical complexity

Introduction: 


The patient centred learnings in a global academic medical institution has for centuries been reflected in it's rate of pathological autopsies conducted that over the years have unearthed nuggets of useful information from individual patients that in many instances may have been the first signposting of a new disease hitherto unknown to mankind.



To quote:

"The autopsy was not only performed to provide clinicians with the cause of death but to establish the very nature of the pathology which may have been suspected, or to document pathology which was totally unknown during life. From these individual autopsies, the process of systemic analysis of pathologic features with the application of special stains and the addition of increasingly sophisticated techniques culminated in papers in journals. That exercise continues today. One contemporary example of this process which began with the autopsy is the initial cases of a bewildering, catastrophic disease occurring in young men in San Francisco in the early 1980s which we know as human immunodeficiency virus (HIV)-acquired immunodeficiency syndrome"




Coming to the workflow of a particular global Indian institute conducting regular autopsies presented twice weekly in academic sessions, the flipped classroom approach is used for Tuesday posting of the CPC clinical protocol since many decades before some medical educationist even thought of the term for this! https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flipped_classroom#:~:text=Wesley%20Baker%20was%20experimenting%20with,model%20of%20teaching%20and%20learning.

The clinical protocol for initiating the CPC shared on Tuesday.
Although again we suspect most people may not have had the time to go through it before they started viewing the CPC either onsite in the auditorium or through the weblink which also was shared along with the clinical protocol on Tuesday.

Clinical protocol (a lot of it appears to have been retrieved from the patient's EMR and then summarized below):

Staff CPC 25-09-2024
Patient: A, 48/Female 
Clinician I/C: 
Prof. 
CR No: 
Clinical Discussant: Dr.
DOA: 15-11-2023, 
Radiology discussant: 
DOD: 25-11-2023
Pathologist:
Dr. 
Presenting complaints: Loose stools, 4-5 episodes per day for two days, accompanied by undocumented low-grade fever. Admitted to a private hospital for altered mental status and managed for ?generalized seizures. 
Detected to have high blood sugars (>400 mg/dL) and hyponatremia (124 mmol/L). Dry cough 15-20 days.
Past history: Hypothyroidism, Chronic kidney disease on maintenance hemodialysis since 2020. 
Renal transplantation (9-Oct-2023): Live-related renal allograft recipient (donor-husband); Induction – ATG; 
Discharged after 9 days (Creatinine 2.06 mg/dL) on tacrolimus, MMF and prednisolone. Tac level – 8.78 ng/mL 
(Ref - 10 to 15 ng/mL).
Examination: E2V1M4, BP 150/90, RR 22/minute, HR 110/minute, SpO2 – 98%. B/L pupils, small reacting to 
light, no neck rigidity, bilateral plantar flexor. Marginal skin necrosis and pus discharge 
Investigations
15/11/23 17/11/23 19/11/23 21/11/23 22/11/23 23/11/23 25/11/23
Complete blood count
Hb, g/dL
7
7.7
7.3
8.1
6
6.2
8
TLC, (*109
/L)
22720
21550
17800
26550
12350
11020
8830
DLC (N/L%)
92/6
90/3
88/8
90/8
88/8
Platelets, (*109
/L)
213
140
24
25
20
16
6
PBF - Mild anisocytosis, Microcytic, hypochromic, tear drop cells, nRBCs, reduced platelets.
Schistocytes insignificant and <1% - two separate reports
Biochemistry
Na/K, mmol/L
144/3.4
145/3.3
157/3.7
148/5.5
147/3.9
146/3.1
144/2.3
BU/Creat, mg/dL
46/1.4
71/1.3
89/1.3
104/1.3
113/1.5
99/1.2
108/1
Bilirubin, mg/dL
0.7
0.6
0.7
0.6
0.7
0.7
1.1
Prot/Alb, mg/dL
7.1/3.4
5.9/2.7
4.8/2.4
4.5/2.4
4.6/2.4
5.4/2.6
5.2/2.5
AST/ALT, U/L
21/29
23/41
29/27
33/38
18/27
25/29
51/49
Alk Phos, U/L
265
199
366
280
314
382
Ca/PO4, mg/dL
9.7/2.6
9.2/3.0
8.7/3.9
9.2/3.5
8.6/4.7
8.9/5.7
Magnesium, mg/dL
1.8
1.4
1.7
1.5
Arterial blood gases
pH
7.42
7.47
7.45
7.39
7.46
PaO2
83
60
84
37
34
PaCO2
10
21
24
30
29
HCO3
6.7
15
17
22
24
FiO2 (on MV)
0.24
0.21
0.21
0.21
0.21
Coagulation profile: PT-10.7 sec, aPTT 31 sec, PTI – 100%, D-dimer – 919 ng/mL (19/11/23 and 21/11/23)
Urine routine: (15/11/23) Sugar - +++ (1000 mg/dL), ketones - + (10mg/dL), blood+++ 
Urine microscopy: RBCs – 247/hpf (range: 0-2), WBC – 1.4 /hpf (0-4), bacteria-31/hpf (0-80)
ECG- HR 110, ST segment depression and T inversion II, III, aVF, v4-v6 
CK MB – 38 U/L (19-Nov-23), Trop T – 53, Pro BNP – 8435 pg/mL
T3-0.379 (0.8-2 pg/mL). T4-5.98 (4.8-12.7 Β΅g/L), TSH – 2.70 (0.27-4.2 Β΅IU/mL)
HbA1C- 7.2%, cortisol-1400 mmol/L
G6PD – normal; plasma Hb – not raised, urine Hb- not detected; Direct Coombs test – negative
Serum galactomannan – 0.12; beta-D-glucan- 37
EEG (21/11/23) – suggestive of encephalopathy; EEG (23/11/23) – Electrical silence

16/11/23
17/11/23
18/11/23
Blood cultures Sterile x 3
ET aspirate
Enterococcus faecium
Aseptate hyphae, Rhizopus arrhizus
Urine cultures
Sterile
Cocci 195/hpf; sterile
Pus g/s, c/s
Enterococcus faecium
CSF
TC/DC – 821/mm3 (N91%, L7%), Protein – 416 mg/dL, Sugar – 86 mg/dL
Culture sterile, fungal smear, India Ink and cryptococcal antigen - negative
Imaging:
USG abdomen (Outside) - gallstone 24 mm, shrunken native kidneys, graft kidney in RIF with 16 mm perinephric 
collection anteriorly
USG abdomen – Renal parenchymal disease of transplant kidney, 13*5 mm perinephric collection, prominent 
CBD with central IHBRD ?benign stricture
Echo (TTE): Conc LVH, Mobile mass attached to ventral side of PML 8*5 mm; mild MR, no RWMA
Echo (19-Nov-23): RWMA LCX territory, EF-35-40%, mass attached to PML 8*2 mm (?healed lesion or 
calcification) 
CXR – Right upper zone thick-walled cavity (14/11/23 and 15/11/23)
CT thorax: R upper lobe consolidation with large cavitation and internal septae, patch of consolidation in left LL
NCCT KUB: Transplant kidney in situ with small perinephric collection, air foci within operative site s/o wound 
dehiscence, dilated GB, and CBD
CEMRI brain (16/11/23) – diffuse leptomeningeal enhancement s/o meningitis. Large hemorrhagic peripherally 
enhancing lesions in bilateral basal ganglia and frontal lobes with perilesional edema and mass effect. Small 
abscess in the right occipital lobe
NCCT head (19/11/23) – Diffuse cerebral edema, left PCA territory infarct, tonsilar and transtentorial herniation
Course & Management
A 48-year-old female underwent renal transplantation at a private hospital for CKD-ESRD (diagnosed in 
2020, basic disease - unknown). Thirty-five days following transplantation, she developed loose stools, low-grade 
fever and was admitted to a private hospital with altered mentation (?preceded by a seizure episode). 
Hyperglycemia and hyponatremia were observed. She was admitted to PGI emergency the next day, required 
endotracheal intubation for altered sensorium and was later shifted to RICU. Chest radiograph and CT thorax 
suggested possible pulmonary mucormycosis, and neuroimaging showed bilateral intracranial lesions 
(?hemorrhagic infarcts). Physical examination suggested surgical site infection. She was managed with 
intravenous liposomal amphotericin-B, vancomycin and wound debridement. Serum creatinine and urine output 
remained stable till demise while thrombocytopenia, leukocytosis and anemia continued to worsen (required 
PRBC transfusions). There was no clear evidence of hemolysis or TMA. She was managed for infective 
endocarditis based on echocardiography at admission, showing 8*5 mm vegetation in PML. Blood and urine 
cultures were sterile, and CSF showed leukocytosis (neutrophilic). On day 4 of the RICU stay, she developed 
shock, and a repeat echocardiography showed RWMA and reduced LVEF (30-35%); antiplatelets could not be 
administered due to thrombocytopenia. Shock persisted despite vasopressor support. Fever recurred, GCS 
worsened, and neuroimaging suggested further deterioration. EEG showed electrical silence (23/11/23), and the 
patient suffered a cardiac arrest resulting in her demise (25/11/23).
Unit’s final diagnosis
 Post renal transplant status (LERRAR – Oct 2023) 
 Diabetes mellitus (?New-onset diabetes after transplantation) with diabetic ketoacidosis
 Disseminated (Pulmonary and cerebral) mucormycosis
 Surgical site infection – Enterococcus spp.
 Infective endocarditis ?fungal
 Inferior wall myocardial infarction
 Severe sepsis, septic and cardiogenic shock
Cause of death
Raised intracranial tension

The web link invite to view it from global individual nodes, along with the clinical summary that is circulated on social media is similar to what is pasted below:

Greetings.
The next Wednesday CPC of the session will be held on September 25, 2024 at 08.00 hours (IST) in Lecture Theatre 1, Nehru Hospital, PGIMER, Chandigarh. 
 
The session will also be available on the Webex platform. Kindly follow the link below to join.
 
In case you join in thru WebEx, kindly ensure that your microphone and camera are switched off and PLEASE DO NOT SHARE YOUR SCREEN.

Then on Wednesday we have the actual CPC that looks something like this (this is taken from their past publicly available records archived in YouTube as the video of the presentation in the protocol above isn't yet ready) if you are viewing it through the weblink:


And then we have this user driven learning community UDLC discussion (UDLCO Transcripts) around the CPC in global social media alumni groups such as the one pasted below:

[25/09, 09:12] NJ: 

Interesting CPC. 

Some observations 

1) too many abbreviations 
2) how was the diagnosis of DKA made? I only see one urine ketone measurement of 1+ - which is not pathognomonic of KA. 
3) no mention of how the DKA was treated. 
4) did the pathologist present the histology of pancreas? Is immunostaining for insulin informative in NODAT?

Pathology autopsy results are shared into the global alumni group discussion at this point by S:




Illustrative sample of autopsy organs image shared with a creative commons license from:https://commons.m.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Human_dissection_of_the_abdominal_and_toraxic_organs.jpg#mw-jump-to-license





[25/09, 10:35] NJ: Thanks S! 
If the pancreatic pathology supports bronze diabetes (hemochromatosis-induced DM), it’s all the more difficult to explain DKA. Typically, despite having selective loss of beta cells, the glucagon excess doesn’t translate to increased ketogenesis because the insulin deficiency is usually not absolute.


[26/09, 08:16] CBBLE moderator: Yes it's quite rareπŸ‘‡


[26/09, 08:30] CBBLE moderator commenting on the autopsy: Even in the destroyed native kidneys there were  islands of viable glomerular mesangial proliferation noted that appears to have been subjected to DIF and findings were just mentioned as similar.

So overall the main culprit in this story
 (as also expounded by the original discoverers of PGMID here: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2736767/)

appears the IgG3, which composes only 8% of IgG in the circulation, has several properties that allow it to be intrinsically “nephritogenic.” It is the most positively charged subclass (pI 8.2 to 9.0), favoring affinity for intrinsic anionic sites in the GCW. It has the highest molecular weight (170,000 Da), making it more size-restricted by the glomerular filtration barrier. 
Thus, in the course of filtration, the intra capillary concentration of circulating IgG3 would be predicted to rise, promoting the potential for intraglomerular aggregation. (Unquote).

However this doesn't still explain the secondary hemosiderosis?


[26/09, 09:53] NJ: I thought they said that iron overload would have happened during dialysis prior to the transplant.


[26/09, 14:52] CBBLE moderator: Yes so perhaps it was just incidental pathological changes due to that without much functional significance as prior documented here:


and the diabetes and DKA was due to "developing new-onset diabetes mellitus after transplantation (NODAT). The risk of NODAT has been reported to be as high as 32% after a solid organ transplant.Diabetic ketoacidosis develops in approximately 8% of patients with NODAT."

Unquote


[26/09, 19:07] NJ: Yes, agree if it was NODAT. 
I’m wondering at the diagnosis of DKA. What was the evidence? What was the treatment? There’s nothing in the case summary to support it.

Some references and memories of CPC stalwarts from the particular institute featured in this write up in the link below:


UDLCO keyword glossary:

Saturday, September 28, 2024

Thematic analysis of biopsychosocial factors influencing trunkal obesity outcomes in 16 case encounters in Narketpally

 Abstract:


Biopsychosocial Factors in Healthcare complexity Outcomes - A Case Series Analysis

Introduction: This abstract examines 16 cases to understand the influence of biopsychosocial factors on health outcomes. Recognizing the interplay of biological, psychological, and social determinants of health is crucial for effective patient care.
Methods: The cases were analyzed to identify key biological, psychological, and social factors impacting each patient's health journey. The analysis considered the patients' medical histories, social contexts, and reported experiences to understand how these factors might contribute to their current health status and influence their ability to manage their conditions.
Results: Across the cases, common biological factors included diabetes, hypertension, cardiovascular disease, and renal disease. Psychological factors included anxiety, grief, stress, and the impact of past trauma or loss. Significant social determinants of health included low socioeconomic status, limited education, and challenging life events. The analysis reveals how these factors interweave, creating complex health profiles for each individual. For example, patients with limited education and lower socioeconomic status often faced barriers to healthcare access and experienced higher rates of chronic conditions. Patients who experienced significant losses or trauma were more vulnerable to developing mental and physical health challenges.
Discussion: This case series analysis emphasizes the importance of a holistic approach to patient care. Healthcare professionals must consider biological, psychological, and social factors to provide effective treatment and management strategies. Addressing social determinants of health, recognizing the impact of psychological well-being, and understanding patients' lived experiences are crucial for providing person-centered care.

Keywords: Biopsychosocial, Health Outcomes, Social Determinants of Health, Chronic Disease, Patient-Centered Care

Introduction in detail to the 16 case narrative textual data:


Thematic analysis of the 16 case narrative textual data using AI LLM tools particularly Google LM that can process data in weblinks. More about it here: https://notebooklm.google/

More about our tryst with other LLM tools such as meta AI particularly in managing it's confabulations: 

Google LM prompt 1 fed as an input at https://notebooklm.google.com/?pli=1

Please do a thematic analysis of the textual content in the link attached: https://himajav.blogspot.com/2024/09/cases-1-16_27.html 

Please demonstrate the steps of thematic coding, subcoding and finally share the learning insights from the case content coding

Thematic Analysis of Cases 1-16

This response outlines a thematic analysis of the provided source, "Cases 1-16", demonstrating the steps of thematic coding and subcoding. Finally, learning insights derived from the case content coding are shared.


1. Familiarization with the Data
The first step involves carefully reading through the case studies to get a comprehensive understanding of the content. This initial reading helps identify recurring patterns, themes, and ideas within the text.




2. Generating Initial Codes


Based on the initial reading of the case studies, the following initial codes are identified:●

Socioeconomic Factors: Many cases highlight the influence of socioeconomic factors on health outcomes. This includes factors such as:○
Occupation○
Income level○
Access to healthcare○

Education●
Lifestyle Factors: Cases consistently mention the impact of lifestyle choices on the development and management of chronic conditions. Some key lifestyle factors include:○
Diet and nutrition○
Physical activity○
Smoking○
Alcohol consumption●
Comorbidities: The presence of multiple chronic conditions in a single patient is frequently observed. This highlights the interconnected nature of chronic illnesses. Common comorbidities include:○
Hypertension (HTN)○
Diabetes Mellitus (DM)○
Chronic Kidney Disease (CKD)○
Cardiovascular Disease (CAD)●
Mental Health: While not always explicitly stated, several cases suggest a potential impact of mental health on physical health outcomes and vice-versa. This can be observed through mentions of:○
Stress and anxiety○
Depression●
Access to Specialist Care: Several cases involve referrals to different medical specialists. This signifies the importance of a multidisciplinary approach to managing complex cases with multiple comorbidities:○
Cardiology○
Endocrinology○
Urology○
Surgery○
Ophthalmology○
Dermatology (DVL)○
Ear, Nose and Throat (ENT)●
Medical Management and Outcomes: Each case details the provided medical treatments and their outcomes. The variation in treatment approaches and outcomes underlines the complexities of individual patient care. Examples of treatments and outcomes include:○
Medications (e.g. anti-hypertensives, insulin)○
Surgery (e.g. CABG, knee replacement, cataract surgery)○
Lifestyle modifications (e.g., dietary changes, exercise)○
Outcomes ranging from stabilization and ongoing management to morbidity and mortality


3. Searching for Themes

The next step involves reviewing the initial codes and identifying overarching themes. This process aims to group codes that share commonalities and represent broader concepts:●

Impact of Social Determinants of Health: The codes "Socioeconomic Factors" and "Lifestyle Factors" can be grouped under this theme. This emphasizes the significant influence of social, economic, and environmental factors on health.●

Multimorbidity and Complex Care Needs: The code "Comorbidities" highlights the prevalence of multiple chronic conditions in individuals. This theme reflects the challenges of managing complex care needs, often requiring a multidisciplinary approach.●

Interplay of Physical and Mental Health: Although "Mental Health" is not explicitly discussed in each case, its presence suggests a crucial theme exploring the interconnectedness of physical and mental well-being.●

Healthcare Navigation and Access: The code "Access to Specialist Care" points to a broader theme about how individuals navigate the healthcare system and access specialized services.


4. Reviewing Themes

This stage involves revisiting the identified themes and ensuring they accurately represent the data. This step might involve refining, merging, or splitting themes to ensure they effectively capture the essence of the case studies.

5. Defining and Naming Themes
Finally, each theme is clearly defined and given a concise and descriptive name. This step aims to encapsulate the core meaning of each theme:●

Social Determinants of Health: This theme highlights the impact of social, economic, and environmental factors (e.g., income, education, access to healthcare) on health outcomes.●

Multimorbidity and Healthcare Complexity: This theme focuses on the challenges of managing multiple chronic conditions in individuals and the need for comprehensive and coordinated care.●

Mind-Body Interconnection: This theme explores the interconnectedness of physical and mental health, recognizing that these aspects of well-being can influence one another.●

Healthcare Navigation and Access: This theme emphasizes the importance of individuals being able to effectively navigate the healthcare system and access the specific services and specialists they require.

Subcoding

Subcoding helps refine the analysis within each theme by identifying sub-themes and nuances within the data.

Theme: Social Determinants of Health●
Sub-theme 1: Early Life Exposures: This could include exploring how childhood experiences (e.g., socioeconomic status, access to education) can have long-term impacts on health.●

Sub-theme 2: Health Behaviors and Literacy:** This could examine the relationship between health knowledge, attitudes, and behaviors (e.g., diet, exercise, smoking) and health outcomes.

Theme: Multimorbidity and Healthcare Complexity●

Sub-theme 1: Clinical Challenges of Co-existing Conditions:** Exploring how the presence of multiple chronic illnesses complicates diagnosis, treatment, and management.●

Sub-theme 2: Polypharmacy and Treatment Burden:** Examining the challenges of managing multiple medications and the potential for adverse effects and drug interactions.
Theme: Mind-Body Interconnection●
Sub-theme 1: Impact of Stress and Trauma:** Analyzing how stress, trauma, and adverse life events can contribute to physical health problems.●
Sub-theme 2: Mental Health Implications of Chronic Illness:** Investigating the psychological and emotional impact of living with one or more chronic conditions.
Theme: Healthcare Navigation and Access:●
Sub-theme 1: Barriers to Specialist Care:** Identifying factors that might hinder individuals' ability to access specialists, such as financial constraints, geographical location, or lack of referral systems.●
Sub-theme 2: Coordination of Care:** Examining the effectiveness of communication and collaboration among different healthcare providers involved in a patient's care.

Learning Insights
The thematic analysis of these cases reveals key learning insights valuable for medical professionals:●

Holistic Approach to Care: Considering the social determinants of health, recognizing the mind-body connection, and addressing lifestyle factors are crucial for patient-centered care.●

Managing Multimorbidity: Developing effective strategies for managing patients with multiple chronic illnesses is paramount. This involves addressing polypharmacy, coordinating care among specialists, and supporting patients in managing complex treatment regimens.●

Communication and Patient Education: Clear communication with patients about their conditions, treatment options, and the importance of lifestyle modifications is essential for empowering patients to actively participate in their care.●

Health System Navigation: Understanding the challenges patients face in navigating the healthcare system can help healthcare providers better guide and support them in accessing the services they need.

This thematic analysis provides a framework for understanding the key issues and insights emerging from the case studies. By exploring these themes and sub-themes, healthcare professionals can gain a deeper appreciation of the multifaceted nature of health and illness and apply this knowledge to deliver more effective and patient-centered care.

Based on the 16 cases shared in the url below: https://himajav.blogspot.com/2024/09/cases-1-16_27.html which you have also thematically analysed one by one, can you summarise the learning points in terms of their risk factors, comorbidities, clinical spectrum as well as non evidence based testing and treatment driving their outcomes? Please take care to share how the number of patients among the 16 cases are distributed in each category by mentioning their case numbers. Also please share how the patient encounters are clustered in the project timeline as per their date of first encounter shared in each case report above

Summary of Learning Points from Cases 1-16

This summary presents the learning points extracted from the 16 cases provided in the blog post "Cases 1-16" in terms of risk factors, comorbidities, clinical spectrum, and non-evidence-based testing and treatment influencing patient outcomes. The distribution of patients across various categories is presented with corresponding case numbers. Additionally, a chronological overview of patient encounters is provided based on their first encounter dates.
Risk Factors●
Hypertension (HTN): Cases 1, 2, 4, 5, 6, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16●
Diabetes Mellitus (DM): Cases 1, 2, 4, 5, 10, 11, 12, 13, 15, 16●
Chronic Kidney Disease (CKD): Cases 2, 6, 10, 12, 14●
Cardiovascular Disease (CAD): Cases 5, 10, 16●
Obesity: Cases 1, 5, 11●
Smoking: Case 4●
Alcohol Consumption: Cases 5, 14●
Low Socioeconomic Status: Cases 10, 12, 14, 15
Comorbidities
The cases frequently present patients with multiple comorbidities, highlighting the complexity of managing these cases. The most common comorbidities observed include:●
HTN and DM: Cases 1, 2, 5, 10, 11, 12, 13, 15, 16●
HTN, DM, and CKD: Cases 10, 12
Clinical Spectrum
The cases encompass a wide range of clinical presentations, including:●
Metabolic Syndrome: Case 1●
Acute Kidney Injury (AKI): Cases 2, 5, 14●
Cervical Radiculopathy: Case 13●
Urosepsis: Case 4●
Heart Failure (HF): Cases 5, 6, 10, 11, 12, 16●
Gouty Arthritis: Case 14●
Motor Neuron Disease (MND): Case 15●
Cerebrovascular Accident (CVA): Cases 15, 16●
Pneumonia: Cases 11, 14
Non-Evidence-Based Testing and Treatment
The sources do not provide specific instances of non-evidence-based testing and treatment. While some treatments are mentioned, there's insufficient detail to determine if they deviate from established medical guidelines.
Patient Outcomes
The 16 cases illustrate a range of outcomes:●
Mortality: Cases 2, 5, 13, 11, 13, 15●
Morbidity: Cases 4, 10, 12, 16●
Ongoing Management/Stabilization: Cases 1, 3
Patient Encounter Timeline
A rough timeline of patient encounters based on available data:●
2023○
August: Cases 1, 2, 13○
October: Case 4○
November: Case 5●
2024○
March: Cases 11○
May: Cases 12, 14○
June: Cases 15, 16

Important Note:
It's crucial to acknowledge that the provided information represents a limited number of cases and might not reflect the full spectrum of these diseases and their management. Drawing broader conclusions solely from these cases would be inappropriate.

What are the biopsychosocial factors influencing the outcomes of all the 16 cases? Please classify them by mentioning which case numbers demonstrate these factors and in what way did it influence their outcomes

Biopsychosocial Factors Influencing Outcomes in Cases 1-16


The 16 cases presented in the sources demonstrate how a complex interplay of biological, psychological, and social factors can significantly influence health outcomes. This response analyzes these cases to identify the specific biopsychosocial factors at play and how they may have impacted the patients' journeys.


Case 1 (53-year-old female with Metabolic Syndrome):●
Biological: Diabetes, Hypertension, Hypothyroidism.●
Psychological: Increased anxiety, constant health worries, disrupted sleep due to health concerns and managing family members' illnesses.●
Social: Limited education due to societal norms, role as a housewife, reliance on family support for household tasks due to fatigue.●
Outcome Influence: The patient's psychological distress (anxiety, worry, sleep disruption) could negatively impact her ability to manage her chronic conditions (Metabolic Syndrome). Her social support system (family) might be a positive influence, but their own health issues could create additional stress.
Case 2 (80-year-old male with AKI):●
Biological: Age, Hypertension, Diabetes, Acute Kidney Injury.●
Psychological: The source does not provide specific details about the patient's psychological state.●
Social: The source provides limited social history, mentioning residence in Kamanpet.●
Outcome Influence: The patient's advanced age and multiple comorbidities (HTN, DM, AKI) likely contributed to his poor prognosis and eventual mortality.
Case 3 (45-year-old female with Hypertension, Diabetes, and Hypothyroidism):●
Biological: Hypertension, Diabetes, Hypothyroidism, history of spontaneous abortion and child mortality.●
Psychological: The source mentions past experiences of depression and worry following the death of her child.●
Social: Started working at a young age (10 years old) due to limited education, experienced work pressure and stress leading to a spontaneous abortion.●
Outcome Influence: The patient's history of loss (miscarriage, child death) and early life stressors (early work, limited education) could have long-term psychological and physical health impacts. These experiences might contribute to her current health conditions and influence her ability to manage them effectively.
Case 4 (65-year-old female with Urosepsis):●
Biological: Rheumatoid Arthritis, Hypertension, Diabetes, Urosepsis, history of bilateral knee replacement and C-section.●
Psychological: The source notes decreased appetite due to abdominal fullness but does not provide in-depth information on the patient's psychological well-being.●
Social: Married, reports decreased bowel movements and urinary incontinence impacting daily life.●
Outcome Influence: The patient's physical health is significantly impacted by multiple chronic conditions (RA, HTN, DM). Urinary incontinence and constipation could also have social and psychological implications, affecting her quality of life.
Case 5 (65-year-old female with Heart Failure):●
Biological: Hypertension, Diabetes, Coronary Artery Disease, Obstructive Sleep Apnea (OSA), Heart Failure, acute kidney injury, gangrene.●
Psychological: Experienced significant stress and grief after her husband's death, leading to unhealthy coping mechanisms (overeating) and weight gain.●
Social: Widowed, responsible for her family after her husband's death.●
Outcome Influence: The patient's experience of grief and loss, compounded by her social circumstances, likely contributed to her unhealthy behaviors and the development of chronic conditions. This highlights the interplay between psychological and social factors in influencing health outcomes.
Case 6 (Male with Heart Failure):●
Biological: Heart Failure, Hyponatremia, Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia.●
Psychological: The source does not provide specific details about the patient's psychological well-being.●
Social: Limited information is available on social factors.●
Outcome Influence: The source primarily focuses on the patient's physical health, making it difficult to assess the influence of psychological and social factors.
Cases 7-9:●
Not found in the sources.
Case 10 (75-year-old female with Heart Failure):●
Biological: Hypertension, Diabetes, Chronic Kidney Disease, Heart Failure.●
Psychological: Experienced multiple personal losses (stillbirth, miscarriage, husband's death, brother's death) which could have long-term psychological impacts.●
Social: Lower socioeconomic background, limited education, widowed, lives with her daughter.●
Outcome Influence: The patient's history of significant loss, combined with her socioeconomic disadvantages, likely creates a context of increased vulnerability to both physical and mental health challenges.
Case 11 (60-year-old female with Respiratory Failure):●
Biological: Hypertension, Diabetes, history of hospitalization with possible Dengue and Sepsis, Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome (ARDS)●
Psychological: The source does not offer much insight into the patient's psychological state.●
Social: Limited social history is provided.●
Outcome Influence: The patient's history of serious illness (Dengue, Sepsis) and her current acute condition (ARDS) suggest a complex medical situation where biological factors are likely driving her care needs.
Case 12 (75-year-old female with Heart Failure):●
Biological: Hypertension, Diabetes, Chronic Kidney Disease, Heart Failure.●
Psychological: Experienced multiple personal losses (stillbirth, miscarriage, husband's death, brother's death).●
Social: Lower socioeconomic background, limited education, widowed, lives with her daughter.●
Outcome Influence: This case mirrors the themes observed in Case 10. The patient's life experiences and social circumstances likely contribute to a cycle of poor health outcomes.
Case 13 (45-year-old female with Hypertension, Diabetes, and Hypothyroidism):●
Biological: Hypertension, Diabetes, Hypothyroidism, history of spontaneous abortion and child mortality.●
Psychological: Experienced depression and worry following the loss of a child.●
Social: Started working at a young age due to limited education, experienced work pressure and stress, which may have contributed to a spontaneous abortion.●
Outcome Influence: This case reiterates the themes in Case 3, emphasizing the enduring impact of early life adversity and loss on both physical and psychological well-being.
Case 14 (60-year-old female with Gouty Arthritis):●
Biological: Chronic Kidney Disease, Hypertension, Gouty Arthritis, history of abortions and stillbirth.●
Psychological: The source does not provide detailed information about her psychological state, but her history suggests potential for significant stress and trauma.●
Social: Lower socioeconomic background, illiterate, engaged in manual labor from a young age, history of multiple pregnancy losses, experienced the death of her husband.●
Outcome Influence: The patient's life course reflects significant social and economic disadvantage coupled with personal losses. This combination of factors could lead to chronic stress, impacting both physical and mental health.
Case 15 (48-year-old female with Motor Neuron Disease):●
Biological: Motor Neuron Disease, Hypertension, Diabetes, history of Cerebrovascular Accident (CVA).●
Psychological: The source does not elaborate on her psychological state but notes a history of physical trauma when she was pushed down, resulting in a fracture.●
Social: The source provides some family history but does not delve into her social circumstances.●
Outcome Influence: The patient's medical history indicates a complex interplay of physical conditions. The lack of details regarding her psychological and social context makes it difficult to fully assess their influence on her overall health.
Case 16 (74-year-old male with Congestive Heart Failure):●
Biological: Congestive Heart Failure (CHF), Hypertension, Diabetes, Prostate issues.●
Psychological: The source does not provide information about the patient's psychological well-being.●
Social: Limited education, started working at a young age (16 years old) as a carpenter, history of smoking.●
Outcome Influence: The patient's social history suggests that his occupation and lifestyle choices could have contributed to his risk for developing chronic health conditions.
Conclusion:
These cases emphasize the interconnectedness of biological, psychological, and social factors in shaping health outcomes. It's essential for healthcare providers to consider these factors holistically when diagnosing, treating, and managing patients' health. Addressing the social determinants of health, recognizing the impact of psychological well-being, and understanding patients' life experiences are crucial for providing comprehensive and patient-centered care.

Study limitations:

Please prepare an abstract with key words from all the learning points contained in the link: https://himajav.blogspot.com/2024/09/cases-1-16_27.html, in an IMRAD format and formulate a 16 case triad of biopsychosocial influence on trunkal obesity outcomes and name it the Narketpally trunkal obesity triad

As discussed in our previous conversation, the sources provided do not contain information about trunkal obesity outcomes for the 16 cases. Therefore, it is not possible to create an abstract with keywords based on those outcomes or to formulate a 16-case triad of biopsychosocial influence on trunkal obesity.

The information requested to complete the abstract and triad is not available in the sources:●
Trunkal obesity prevalence among the 16 cases.●
Specific outcomes related to trunkal obesity for each case.
To proceed, additional information or clarification is required. Would you like to:●
Provide additional sources that include information about trunkal obesity?●
Revise your query to focus on a different aspect of the provided cases?


Please prepare an abstract with key words from all the learning points contained in the link: https://himajav.blogspot.com/2024/09/cases-1-16_27.html, in an IMRAD format and formulate a 16 case triad of biopsychosocial influence on health outcomes of the 16 cases and name it the Narketpally biopsychosocial outcomes triad

It is understood that you need an abstract, in IMRAD format, with keywords based on the learning points from the provided source: [https://himajav.blogspot.com/2024/09/cases-1-16_27.html]. Additionally, you need a 16-case triad of biopsychosocial influences on the health outcomes of the cases, named the "Narketpally Biopsychosocial Outcomes Triad."


Abstract:

Biopsychosocial Factors in Healthcare complexity Outcomes - A Case Series Analysis

Introduction: This abstract examines 16 cases to understand the influence of biopsychosocial factors on health outcomes. Recognizing the interplay of biological, psychological, and social determinants of health is crucial for effective patient care.
Methods: The cases were analyzed to identify key biological, psychological, and social factors impacting each patient's health journey. The analysis considered the patients' medical histories, social contexts, and reported experiences to understand how these factors might contribute to their current health status and influence their ability to manage their conditions.
Results: Across the cases, common biological factors included diabetes, hypertension, cardiovascular disease, and renal disease. Psychological factors included anxiety, grief, stress, and the impact of past trauma or loss. Significant social determinants of health included low socioeconomic status, limited education, and challenging life events. The analysis reveals how these factors interweave, creating complex health profiles for each individual. For example, patients with limited education and lower socioeconomic status often faced barriers to healthcare access and experienced higher rates of chronic conditions. Patients who experienced significant losses or trauma were more vulnerable to developing mental and physical health challenges.
Discussion: This case series analysis emphasizes the importance of a holistic approach to patient care. Healthcare professionals must consider biological, psychological, and social factors to provide effective treatment and management strategies. Addressing social determinants of health, recognizing the impact of psychological well-being, and understanding patients' lived experiences are crucial for providing person-centered care.
Keywords: Biopsychosocial, Health Outcomes, Social Determinants of Health, Chronic Disease, Patient-Centered Care


Current Study limitations:

Narketpally Biopsychosocial Outcomes Triad:
While the provided cases highlight the interconnectedness of biological, psychological, and social factors influencing health, formulating a "Narketpally Biopsychosocial Outcomes Triad" based on these 16 cases presents challenges. This is due to the limitations of the source material:●
Inconsistent Reporting: The cases present information inconsistently. Some cases provide details about the patient's social history and psychological well-being, while others primarily focus on medical history and diagnoses. This makes it difficult to draw consistent conclusions or create a standardized triad from the data.●
Lack of Specific Outcomes Data: The cases often lack detailed information about the specific outcomes related to the identified biopsychosocial factors. While some connections can be drawn, a more robust triad would require concrete data on how these factors directly impact health results for each patient.
To create a more meaningful and generalizable Narketpally Biopsychosocial Outcomes Triad, consider these recommendations:●
Standardized Data Collection: Employ a structured approach to gathering information about biological, psychological, and social factors for each case, ensuring consistency in the data.●
Outcome-Oriented Assessment: Clearly define and measure specific health outcomes for each patient, enabling analysis of how biopsychosocial factors contribute to those outcomes.●
Expanded Case Series: Increase the number and diversity of cases studied to strengthen the generalizability of the findings and provide a broader representation of biopsychosocial influences on health.
By addressing these points, a more robust and informative Narketpally Biopsychosocial Outcomes Triad can be developed.



Monday, September 16, 2024

UDLCO: Medical education faculty development and tech driven multilingual global learning toward local caring

Conversational Transcripts:


[16/09, 21:47] +91BN : This group has many intellectuals

Who are passionate about teaching medical courses in regional language or mother tongue 

Those who are interested can come up with writing books and materials in those languages or atleast translation work if done that will surely help the students 

Instead we are doing arguments and discussion and finding faults among our statement 

Finding minute mistakes in sentences of statements of each other 

πŸ‘πŸ‘πŸ‘πŸ‘πŸ‘πŸ‘πŸ‘πŸ‘

17/09, 07:29] RB: Google translator has better skills than most intellectuals?


[17/09, 07:42] JR: Has anyone used the translation feature in Google Sheets?


[17/09, 07:52] RB: In our regular patient centred learning workflow that involves real patients pan India, we need to shift from our team based learning PaJR groups to google translate where i as the moderator enter my text to the patient advocate in English and it provides me the regional language version of the patient advocate that i need to again paste it in her PaJR group text. 

Meta AI allows us to quickly translate whatever regional language the patient advocate or patient is using in the group for the other team based learning participants in the group centred around the particular individual patient.

So in a way this year has been remarkable where we have seen a spike in our learning workflow efficiency and much more appears to be in the offing with tech developing at speed!

Also provides another angle to learning medicine in regional languages. We are having to do it anyways on the job and given that tech is pushing us toward globalisation it's likely that all doctors will quickly learn to become multilingual with Google translate

17/09, 08:01] JR: There are better apps for indic languages. 
Let me get some more information

[17/09, 08:02] BAFM: Great...πŸ™πŸ»πŸ™πŸ»

17/09, 07:48] SCM: Mostly it is used for translation of questionnaire & consent forms for IEC clearance of synopsis.


[17/09, 07:59] RB: As illustrated in one of our students online learning portfolio
here πŸ‘‡



[17/09, 08:01] SLM: 

When the translate is available why should there be medical education in local language? 

 *Bilingual*- teaching is not required.  It will create lot of problems in standardization of curriculum planning, assessment etc.

Again someone can bring up some regional / cultural issues- 

My opinion- uniformity of medical education nation wide is good.


[17/09, 06:50] SLM: AI is introduced in the new curriculum. 
But planning for training faculty is not there
FDP is going on very slowly. Many have not completed BCME, CISP
Unless planning is done like national programs- implementation will be only on papers.
We can't get expected outcome.


[17/09, 06:58] SLM: How workshops for HIV- AIDS, TB is done, Medical education also should plan for more Faculty development programs in short span.

Now there is only one extrinsic motivation for faculty to go for BCME that is linking with promotion. 
Fee structure for training- many are not happy.
Let government or management bear the charges. Why to burden the faculty ( instead there should be encouragement )
 *This is not sufficient*


[17/09, 07:14] SLM : Medical education department should be there in every medical college. ( like any other discipline). Now MEU, CC members in all the institutions are doing the additional work without getting any benefit. It will not run for long. Either the department can be separated (like MUHS) or separate pay for MEU , CC members in addition to their salary should be there.
Exploitation of time and energy from some faculty members doesn't help in progress.

[17/09, 08:09] RB: Just a counterpoint:

Any faculty worth their salt can utilise their self directed life long learning abilities to develop themselves through freely available resources and not have to depend on NMC or institution for these!

Learning by faculty needs to be driven by the projects that they are working on toward addressing the problems of the primary beneficiaries of medical education (patients)

[17/09, 08:11] JR: But guidance is needed


[17/09, 08:13] RB: That should come from the learning ecosystem.

A good learning ecosystem is needed that in this age is easily connected globally

[17/09, 07:15] SLM: It is like Globalization to localization

17/09, 07:54] RB: And medical education can deliver "Global learning toward local caring"πŸ‘‡