Purpose To provide evidence-based recommendations to oncology clinicians, patients, family and friend caregivers, and palliative care specialists to update the 2012 American Society of Clinical ...Oncology (ASCO) provisional clinical opinion (PCO) on the integration of palliative care into standard oncology care for all patients diagnosed with cancer. Methods ASCO convened an Expert Panel of members of the ASCO Ad Hoc Palliative Care Expert Panel to develop an update. The 2012 PCO was based on a review of a randomized controlled trial (RCT) by the National Cancer Institute Physicians Data Query and additional trials. The panel conducted an updated systematic review seeking randomized clinical trials, systematic reviews, and meta-analyses, as well as secondary analyses of RCTs in the 2012 PCO, published from March 2010 to January 2016. Results The guideline update reflects changes in evidence since the previous guideline. Nine RCTs, one quasiexperimental trial, and five secondary analyses from RCTs in the 2012 PCO on providing palliative care services to patients with cancer and/or their caregivers, including family caregivers, were found to inform the update. Recommendations Inpatients and outpatients with advanced cancer should receive dedicated palliative care services, early in the disease course, concurrent with active treatment. Referral of patients to interdisciplinary palliative care teams is optimal, and services may complement existing programs. Providers may refer family and friend caregivers of patients with early or advanced cancer to palliative care services.
A significant change for patients and families during SARs-CoV-2 has been the restriction of visitors for hospitalized patients. We analyzed SARs-CoV-2 hospital visitation policies and found ...widespread variation in both development and content. This variation has the potential to engender inequity in access. We propose guidance for hospital visitation policies for this pandemic to protect, respect, and support patients, visitors, clinicians, and communities.
Full text
Available for:
GEOZS, IJS, IMTLJ, KILJ, KISLJ, NLZOH, NUK, OILJ, PNG, SAZU, SBCE, SBJE, UILJ, UL, UM, UPCLJ, UPUK, ZAGLJ, ZRSKP
•The interpersonal connection formed with a surgeon is essential to trust; care paradigms should facilitate interpersonal connections.•Institutional and surgeon reputation, and observed surgeon ...collegial relationships influence trust formation.•Trust in a surgeon is perceived to have unique implications and importance, but trust overall operates similarly to other contexts.
Trust is crucial to the success of any personal or professional relationship. Literature on trust in the surgeon-patient relationship has been largely explored through quantitative methodologies, primarily examining why trust may or may not exist. We aimed to qualitatively elucidate the mechanisms of how trust develops between otolaryngologists and their patients.
Patients were recruited by surgery scheduling staff following an outpatient visit where a decision had been made to proceed with surgery at a tertiary academic medical center. We used qualitative realist thematic analysis of phone interviews to explore participants’ (n = 17) perceptions and conceptualization of trust formation within the surgeon-patient relationship.
Thematic analysis revealed three themes regarding trust formation in the surgeon-patient relationship: 1) Trust Across Various Contexts; 2) Impact of Prior Knowledge; and 3) Interpersonal Connection during the Clinical Encounter.
An interpersonal surgeon-patient connection is crucial to the formation of trust. Trust is also influenced by surgeon and institutional reputation and witnessed surgeon interactions with the healthcare team.
Patients perceive trust in a surgeon as carrying unique importance. To optimize conditions for trust development in this context, surgical care paradigms should promote meaningful preoperative interpersonal surgeon-patient relationships and positive surgeon and institutional reputations.
Full text
Available for:
GEOZS, IJS, IMTLJ, KILJ, KISLJ, NLZOH, NUK, OILJ, PNG, SAZU, SBCE, SBJE, UILJ, UL, UM, UPCLJ, UPUK, ZAGLJ, ZRSKP
ASCO Guidelines provide recommendations with comprehensive review and analyses of the relevant literature for each recommendation, following the guideline development process as outlined in the ASCO ...Guidelines Methodology Manual . ASCO Guidelines follow the ASCO Conflict of Interest Policy for Clinical Practice Guidelines . Clinical Practice Guidelines and other guidance (“Guidance”) provided by ASCO is not a comprehensive or definitive guide to treatment options. It is intended for voluntary use by providers and should be used in conjunction with independent professional judgment. Guidance may not be applicable to all patients, interventions, diseases, or stages of diseases. Guidance is based on review and analysis of relevant literature, and is not intended as a statement of the standard of care. ASCO does not endorse third-party drugs, devices, services, or therapies and assumes no responsibility for any harm arising from or related to the use of this information. See complete disclaimer in Appendix 1 and 2 (online only) for more. PURPOSE To provide evidence-based guidance to oncology clinicians, patients, nonprofessional caregivers, and palliative care clinicians to update the 2016 ASCO guideline on the integration of palliative care into standard oncology for all patients diagnosed with cancer. METHODS ASCO convened an Expert Panel of medical, radiation, hematology-oncology, oncology nursing, palliative care, social work, ethics, advocacy, and psycho-oncology experts. The Panel conducted a literature search, including systematic reviews, meta-analyses, and randomized controlled trials published from 2015-2023. Outcomes of interest included quality of life (QOL), patient satisfaction, physical and psychological symptoms, survival, and caregiver burden. Expert Panel members used available evidence and informal consensus to develop evidence-based guideline recommendations. RESULTS The literature search identified 52 relevant studies to inform the evidence base for this guideline. RECOMMENDATIONS Evidence-based recommendations address the integration of palliative care in oncology. Oncology clinicians should refer patients with advanced solid tumors and hematologic malignancies to specialized interdisciplinary palliative care teams that provide outpatient and inpatient care beginning early in the course of the disease, alongside active treatment of their cancer. For patients with cancer with unaddressed physical, psychosocial, or spiritual distress, cancer care programs should provide dedicated specialist palliative care services complementing existing or emerging supportive care interventions. Oncology clinicians from across the interdisciplinary cancer care team may refer the caregivers (eg, family, chosen family, and friends) of patients with cancer to palliative care teams for additional support. The Expert Panel suggests early palliative care involvement, especially for patients with uncontrolled symptoms and QOL concerns. Clinicians caring for patients with solid tumors on phase I cancer trials may also refer them to specialist palliative care. Additional information is available at www.asco.org/supportive-care-guidelines .
The Root of the Problem Yeow, Raymond Y.; El-Dalati, Sami; Jouney, Edward A. ...
Circulation Cardiovascular quality and outcomes,
09/2021, Volume:
14, Issue:
9
Journal Article
Trust is an essential element of an effective physician-patient relationship. There is limited literature examining trust between trainees and patients in the surgical setting. The goal of this study ...was to investigate how otolaryngology patients perceive trust in trainees during delivery of surgical care.
We extracted trainee-specific data from a larger, qualitative interview study examining trust in the surgeon-patient relationship. We then used realist thematic analysis to explore preoperative otolaryngology patients’ perceptions of trust in trainees during delivery of surgical care.
Department of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery at Michigan Medicine in Ann Arbor, MI, a tertiary academic medical center.
Using convenience sampling, adults 18 years or older scheduled to undergo elective otolaryngologic surgery between February and June 2019 were invited, and 12 agreed to participate in the study.
All participants (n = 12) self-identified as White/Caucasian with a mean age of 60 years (range, 28-82). Participants were 50% (n = 6) female and 50% (n = 6) male. Thematic analysis of participants’ perspectives about trust in trainees during delivery of surgical care revealed 3 themes. Trust in trainees is conditional based on (i) level of trainee involvement; (ii) trust in the attending surgeon; and, (iii) trust in the institution.
Trust in trainees during delivery of surgical care is conditional on types of tasks trainees perform, bounded by trust in their attending surgeon, and positively influenced by institutional trust. Trainees and surgical educators must look to innovative methods to engender trust more efficiently in the clinic and immediate pre-operative setting. Such approaches can have a positive impact on patient outcomes, facilitate stronger trainee-attending interpersonal relationships, and empower surgeons to practice the professional values integral to surgical care.
Full text
Available for:
GEOZS, IJS, IMTLJ, KILJ, KISLJ, NLZOH, NUK, OILJ, PNG, SAZU, SBCE, SBJE, UILJ, UL, UM, UPCLJ, UPUK, ZAGLJ, ZRSKP
We sought to examine whether sociodemographic differences, such as race and socioeconomic status, existed between patients in the PICU, pediatric cardiothoracic ICU (PCTU), and NICU who were ...identified as having ethical issues during interprofessional ethics rounds and all other patients admitted to these units and to characterize the primary ethical issues identified in this context.
We compared sociodemographic factors among patients admitted to a quaternary academic children's hospital between January 2017 and December 2018 who were identified as having ethical issues during PICU, PCTU, and NICU interprofessional ethics rounds (
= 122) with those of all other patients admitted to these units (
= 4971). χ
tests or Fisher's exact tests, Mann-Whitney
tests, and a multivariable logistic regression analysis were performed.
With bivariate analyses, we detected significant differences by race, insurance type, and ventilator dependence, but no significant differences between the 2 groups existed on the basis of sex, ethnicity, religion, primary language, age, or a socioeconomic status metric. After we adjusted for confounders using a multivariable logistic regression analysis, only patients who were ventilator dependent were at significantly higher odds (odds ratio = 5.78; confidence interval = 3.69-9.04;
< .001) of being identified as having ethical issues. Goals of care was the most frequent ethical issue (44%).
Except for ventilator dependence, patients with ethical issues during PICU, PCTU, and NICU interprofessional ethics rounds are demographically similar to overall patients admitted in these units. Future research should be used to assess whether proactive rounds impact the timing of ethics consultation requests as well as to determine if interprofessional ethics rounds influence volume and acuity in formal ethics consultation practices.
Clinical ethics consultants (CECs) frequently provide guidance to parents feeling grief and uncertainty. In response to a case in which a CEC works with parents making end-of-life decisions for their ...child, we argue that CECs should use insights from decision science to consider how emotional distress, information-processing heuristics, and person-environment relationships can influence decision making. Rather than rely on decision aids, CECs should take a personalized, values-based approach to facilitating decision making that acknowledges context and a plurality of possible "right" answers. By using this approach and insights from decision science to support parental decision making, the consultation itself becomes a decision aid, as consultants and parents engage in shared decision making through facilitated discussion and reflection.
Background: Iron deficiency (ID) and iron deficiency anemia (IDA) cause significant morbidity. Despite being a disease of high prevalence, affecting people with heart failure, chronic kidney disease, ...heavy menstrual bleeding, irritable bowel disease, hereditary hemorrhagic telangiectasia (HHT), and bariatric surgery, it has low healthcare priority. The World Health Organization (WHO) estimates 37% of people who are pregnant, and 30% of women 15-49 years of age worldwide are anemic. Fibroids, which are the leading cause of abnormal uterine bleeding, disproportionately impact people of color. ID and IDA cause fatigue, impaired cognitive function, and poor mental health, eroding quality of life and personal productivity. In addition, IDA has been associated with an increase in all-cause mortality is associated with an increased risk of arterial and venous thrombosis. Under-treatment of IDA results in avoidable hospitalizations, emergency room visits, blood transfusions, decreased HRQoL, and loss of personal productivity. Despite the significant impact ID and IDA can have on morbidity, mortality, and quality of life, intravenous iron remains underutilized. No study has been performed to date to assess provider practices, knowledge, and perceptions of intravenous iron use. This qualitative study aims to understand trainees' experiences with intravenous iron use in patients with ID and IDA. Methods: We conducted an inductive reflective thematic analysis of semi-structured qualitative interviews from five focus groups to understand trainees' experiences with and barriers to prescribing intravenous iron in patients with ID and IDA. Internal medicine residents from academic institutions across the country were recruited via snowball sampling. Chief residents from six internal medicine programs were contacted to disseminate sign up links to their residents; programs were chosen for geographic diversity. Results: Twenty-eight internal medicine residents responded and nineteen residents across five institutions participated (PGY levels 1-3). Thematic analysis of trainees' experiences of caring for patients with conditions characterized by iron deficiency resulted in three main themes: education, systemic factors, and practice pattern. Participants identified a wide range of conditions for which they consider administration of oral or intravenous iron. However, they generally expressed uncertainty as to whether evidence-based guidelines exist to guide their decision-making with the exception of intravenous iron administration in heart failure patients. In addition, systemic factors, such as setting, support staff, hospital formularies, order sets, and insurance status often impacted their decision to use intravenous iron. Conclusions: There is a wide variation among residents' practice patterns in regard to their comfort with prescribing intravenous iron. The ease or hesitancy with which they do so is greatly influenced by educational and systemic factors. By gaining a deeper understanding of the experiences of trainees we can lay the foundation to develop evidence-based guidelines and educational initiatives for conditions characterized by ID and IDA. Additionally, by identifying both institutional facilitators and barriers, we can cultivate system-based initiatives to improve access to intravenous iron. To assess this need on a larger scale, our next step involves developing a survey that will be widely distributed via national societies. While cost, insurance status, and need for specialty referral were identified as barriers for intravenous iron use, there was no explicit discussion of how these barriers may contribute to healthcare inequity for underserved populations.
Full text
Available for:
IJS, IMTLJ, KILJ, NLZOH, NUK, SAZU, UILJ, UL, UM, UPCLJ, UPUK, ZAGLJ, ZRSKP
PDF
