All Publications


  • Operative Burden in Conflict vs Nonconflict Settings: Experience of Medecins Sans Frontieres Rahman, A. S., Chao, T. E., Centurion, M., Dominguez, L., Chu, K. M. ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC. 2019: S136
  • Family. Annals of internal medicine Rahman, A. S. 2019; 171 (1): 66–67

    View details for DOI 10.7326/M19-0395

    View details for PubMedID 31261404

  • The Beige Room. Academic medicine : journal of the Association of American Medical Colleges Rahman, A. S. 2019; 94 (2): 181

    View details for PubMedID 30694904

  • Waiting it out: consultation delays prolong in-patient length of stay. Postgraduate medical journal Rahman, A. S., Shi, S., Meza, P. K., Jia, J. L., Svec, D., Shieh, L. 2019

    Abstract

    Decreasing delays for hospitalised patients results in improved hospital efficiency, increased quality of care and decreased healthcare expenditures. Delays in subspecialty consultations and procedures can cause increased length of stay due to reasons outside of necessary medical care.To quantify, describe and record reasons for delays in consultations and procedures for patients on the general medicine wards.We conducted weekly audits of all admitted patients on five Internal Medicine teams over 8 weeks. A survey was reviewed with attending physicians and residents on five internal medicine teams to identify patients with a delay due to consultation or procedure, quantify length of delay and record reason for delay.During the study period, 316 patients were reviewed and 48 were identified as experiencing a total of 53 delays due to consultations or procedures. The average delay was 1.8 days for a combined total of 83 days. Top reasons for delays included scheduling, late response to page and a busy service. The frequency in length of consult delays vary among different specialties. The highest frequency of delays was clustered in procedure-heavy specialties.This report highlights the importance of reviewing system barriers that lead to delayed service in hospitals. Addressing these delays could lead to reductions in length of stay for inpatients.

    View details for PubMedID 30674619

  • Impact of Affordable Care Act Implementation on Catastrophic Health Expenditures among Trauma Patients Liu, C., Rahman, A. S., Chao, T. E. ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC. 2018: S148–S149
  • Adipocyte arrestin domain-containing 3 protein (Arrdc3) regulates uncoupling protein 1 (Ucp1) expression in white adipose independently of canonical changes in beta-adrenergic receptor signaling PLOS ONE Carroll, S. H., Zhang, E., Wang, B. F., Leclair, K. B., Rahman, A., Cohen, D. E., Plutzky, J., Patwari, P., Lee, R. T. 2017; 12 (3)

    Abstract

    Adaptive thermogenesis and cold-induced activation of uncoupling protein 1 (Ucp1) in brown adipose tissue in rodents is well-described and attributed to sympathetic activation of β-adrenergic signaling. The arrestin domain containing protein Arrdc3 is a regulator of obesity in mice and also appears linked to obesity in humans. We generated a mouse with conditional deletion of Arrdc3, and here we present evidence that genetic ablation of Arrdc3 specifically in adipocytes results in increased Ucp1 expression in subcutaneous and parametrial adipose tissue. Although this increase in expression did not correspond with significant changes in body weight or energy expenditure, adipocyte-specific Arrdc3-null mice had improved glucose tolerance. It was previously hypothesized that Arrdc3 ablation leads to increased β-adrenergic receptor sensitivity; however, in vitro experiments show that Arrdc3-null adipocytes responded to β-adrenergic receptor agonist with decreased Ucp1 levels. Additionally, canonical β-adrenergic receptor signaling was not different in Arrdc3-null adipocytes. These data reveal a role for Arrdc3 in the regulation of Ucp1 expression in adipocytes. However, this adipocyte effect is insufficient to generate the obesity-resistant phenotype of mice with ubiquitous deletion of Arrdc3, indicating a likely role for Arrdc3 in cells other than adipocytes.

    View details for DOI 10.1371/journal.pone.0173823

    View details for Web of Science ID 000396094700043

    View details for PubMedID 28291835

    View details for PubMedCentralID PMC5349670

  • Radiologists' Role in the Communication of Imaging Examination Results to Patients: Perceptions and Preferences of Patients AMERICAN JOURNAL OF ROENTGENOLOGY Mangano, M. D., Rahman, A., Choy, G., Sahani, D. V., Boland, G. W., Gunn, A. J. 2014; 203 (5): 1034-1039

    Abstract

    It has been suggested that radiology reporting practices would be improved if radiologists were to discuss the results of an examination directly with the patient. The attitudes and preferences of patients with regard to direct communication with the radiologist are not well-defined. The purpose of this study was to survey patients about their preferred method of receiving radiologic results.An anonymous survey was distributed to adult patients undergoing contrast-enhanced CT or MRI over a 2-week period in June 2013.The response rate was 58.4% (642 responses). For normal examination results, the preferred mode of communication was a telephone call from the ordering physician (34.1%); only 12% of respondents opted for a telephone call from the radiologist, and 2.6% chose a face-to-face meeting with the radiologist. For abnormal test results, the preferred mode of communication was also a telephone call from the ordering physician (49.8%); 14.4% of respondents selected a telephone call from the radiologist, and 8.3% chose a face-to-face meeting with the radiologist. Patients preferred receiving very detailed versions of radiology reports for both normal (46.4%) and abnormal (81.8%) test results. Patients also expressed a desire to have access to at least key images from their examinations.Patients prefer receiving both normal and abnormal examination results from the physicians who ordered the examination rather than the radiologist. They also prefer to receive very detailed examination results rather than a brief summary in lay terms.

    View details for DOI 10.2214/AJR.14.12470

    View details for Web of Science ID 000347415700042

    View details for PubMedID 25341142