Patients' Preference for Participation in Medical Decision-Making: Secondary Analysis of the BEDSIDE-OUTSIDE Trial.

BACKGROUND: Patients may prefer different levels of involvement in decision-making regarding their medical care which may influence their medical knowledge. OBJECTIVE: We investigated associations of patients' decisional control preference (DCP) with their medical knowledge, ward round performance measures (e.g., duration, occurrence of sensitive topics), and perceived quality of care measures (e.g., trust in the healthcare team, satisfaction with hospital stay). DESIGN: This is a secondary analysis of a randomized controlled multicenter trial conducted between 2017 and 2019 at 3 Swiss teaching hospitals. PARTICIPANTS: Adult patients that were hospitalized for inpatient care. MAIN MEASURES: The primary outcome was patients' subjective average knowledge of their medical care (rated on a visual analog scale from 0 to 100). We classified patients as active, collaborative, and passive according to the Control Preference Scale. Data collection was performed before, during, and after the ward round. KEY RESULTS: Among the 761 included patients, those with a passive DCP had a similar subjective average (mean ± SD) knowledge (81.3 ± 19.4 points) compared to patients with a collaborative DCP (78.7 ± 20.3 points) and active DCP (81.3 ± 21.5 points), p = 0.25. Regarding patients' trust in physicians and nurses, we found that patients with an active vs. passive DCP reported significantly less trust in physicians (adjusted difference, - 5.08 [95% CI, - 8.69 to - 1.48 points], p = 0.006) and in nurses (adjusted difference, - 3.41 [95% CI, - 6.51 to - 0.31 points], p = 0.031). Also, patients with an active vs. passive DCP were significantly less satisfied with their hospital stay (adjusted difference, - 7.17 [95% CI, - 11.01 to - 3.34 points], p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Patients with active DCP have lower trust in the healthcare team and lower overall satisfaction despite similar perceived medical knowledge. The knowledge of a patient's DCP may help to individualize patient-centered care. A personalized approach may improve the patient-physician relationship and increase patients' satisfaction with medical care. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT03210987).

Perception of physicians and nursing staff members regarding outside versus bedside ward rounds: ancillary analysis of the randomised BEDSIDE-OUTSIDE trial.

BACKGROUND: We recently compared the effects of bedside and outside the room ward rounds on patients' knowledge about their medical care. Here, we report preferences of medical and nursing staff members regarding outside versus bedside ward rounds. METHODS: Within this ancillary project of a large multicentre randomised controlled trial, we prospectively conducted a survey of medical and nursing staff members participating in the weekly consultant ward rounds in the internal medicine division of three Swiss teaching hospitals between July 2017 and October 2019. Participants were asked about their preferences on outside versus bedside ward rounds. The primary endpoint was satisfaction of healthcare workers with the ward round measured with a visual analogue scale from 0 to 100. RESULTS: Between July 2017 and October 2019, 919 patients were included in the trial, and we received 891 survey responses (nurses 15.6%, residents 26.8%, attending physicians 29.6%, consultants 7.8% and chief physicians 20.2%. In the overall analysis, mean (± standard deviation) satisfaction of healthcare workers was higher with outside the room than bedside ward rounds (78.03 ± 16.96 versus 68.25 ± 21.10 respectively; age-, gender- and centre-adjusted difference of -10.46, 95% confidence interval [CI] -12.73 to -8.19; p <0.001). Healthcare workers reported better time management, more discussion of sensitive topics and less discomfort when case presentations were conducted outside the room. A stratified subgroup analysis considering the profession, however, showed strong differences, with nurses being more satisfied with bedside rounds (69.20 ± 20.32 versus 65.32 ± 20.92, respectively; adjusted difference 4.35, 95% CI -1.79 to 10.51; p <0.001), whereas attending physicians showed higher satisfaction with outside the room rounds (82.63 ± 13.87 versus 66.59 ± 21.82; adjusted difference -16.51, 95% CI -20.29 to -12.72; p = 0.002). CONCLUSIONS: While bedside ward rounds are considered more patient centred and are preferred by the nursing staff, physicians prefer outside the room presentation of patients during ward rounds because of the perceived better discussion of sensitive topics, better time management and less staff discomfort. Continuous training including medical communication techniques may help to increase satisfaction of physicians with bedside ward rounds. Trial registration: https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03210987.

Contagious Health Risk and Precautionary Social Distancing.

BACKGROUND: Since humans are social animals, social relations are incredibly important. However, in cases of contagious diseases such as the flu, social contacts also pose a health risk. According to prominent health behavior change theories, perceiving a risk for one's health motivates precautionary behaviors. The "behavioral immune system" approach suggests that social distancing might be triggered as a precautionary, evolutionarily learned behavior to prevent transmitting contagious diseases through social contact. This study examines the link between personal risk perception for an infectious disease and precautionary behavior for disease-prevention in the context of social relationships. METHODS: At 2-week intervals during the first semester, 100 Psychology freshmen indicated their flu risk perception, whether they had been ill during the previous week, and their friendships within their freshmen network for eight time points. RESULTS: Social network analysis revealed that participants who reported a high flu risk perception listed fewer friends (B = -0.10, OR = 0.91, p = 0.026), and were more likely to be ill at the next measuring point (B = 0.26, OR = 1.30, p = 0.005). Incoming friendship nominations increased the likelihood of illness (B = 0.14, OR = 1.15, p = 0.008), while the reduced number of friendship nominations only marginally decreased this likelihood (B = -0.07, OR = 0.93, p = 0.052). CONCLUSION: In accordance with the concept of a "behavioral immune system," participants with high flu risk perception displayed a social precautionary distancing even when in an environment, in which the behavior was ineffective to prevent an illness.

Effect of Bedside Compared With Outside the Room Patient Case Presentation on Patients' Knowledge About Their Medical Care : A Randomized, Controlled, Multicenter Trial.

BACKGROUND: Although bedside case presentation contributes to patient-centered care through active patient participation in medical discussions, the complexity of medical information and jargon-induced confusion may cause misunderstandings and patient discomfort. OBJECTIVE: To compare bedside versus outside the room patient case presentation regarding patients' knowledge about their medical care. DESIGN: Randomized, controlled, parallel-group trial. (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT03210987). SETTING: 3 Swiss teaching hospitals. PATIENTS: Adult medical patients who were hospitalized. INTERVENTION: Patients were randomly assigned to bedside or outside the room case presentation. MEASUREMENTS: The primary endpoint was patients' average knowledge of 3 dimensions of their medical care (each rated on a visual analogue scale from 0 to 100): understanding their disease, the therapeutic approach being used, and further plans for care. RESULTS: Compared with patients in the outside the room group (n = 443), those in the bedside presentation group (n = 476) reported similar knowledge about their medical care (mean, 79.5 points [SD, 21.6] vs. 79.4 points [SD, 19.8]; adjusted difference, 0.09 points [95% CI, -2.58 to 2.76 points]; P = 0.95). Also, an objective rating of patient knowledge by the study team was similar for the 2 groups, but the bedside presentation group had higher ratings of confusion about medical jargon and uncertainty caused by team discussions. Bedside ward rounds were more efficient (mean, 11.89 minutes per patient [SD, 4.92] vs. 14.14 minutes per patient [SD, 5.65]; adjusted difference, -2.31 minutes [CI, -2.98 to -1.63 minutes]; P < 0.001). LIMITATION: Only Swiss hospitals and medical patients were included. CONCLUSION: Compared with outside the room case presentation, bedside case presentation was shorter and resulted in similar patient knowledge, but sensitive topics were more often avoided and patient confusion was higher. Physicians presenting at the bedside need to be skilled in the use of medical language to avoid confusion and misunderstandings. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE: Swiss National Foundation (10531C_ 182422).

Neuron-specific enolase (NSE) improves clinical risk scores for prediction of neurological outcome and death in cardiac arrest patients: Results from a prospective trial.

AIM: Neuron-specific enolase (NSE) increases in response to brain injury and is recommended for outcome prediction in cardiac arrest patients. Our aim was to investigate whether NSE measured at different days after a cardiac arrest and its kinetics would improve the prognostic ability of two cardiac arrest specific risk scores. METHODS: Within this prospective observational study, we included consecutive adult patients after cardiac arrest. We calculated the Out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) score and the Cardiac Arrest Hospital Prognosis (CAHP) score upon ICU admission and measured serum NSE upon admission and days 1, 2, 3, 5 and 7. We calculated logistic regression models to study associations of scores and NSE levels with neurological outcome defined by Cerebral Performance Category (CPC) scale and in-hospital death. RESULTS: From 336 included patients, 180 (54%) survived until hospital discharge, of which 150 (45%) had a good neurological outcome. NSE at day 3 showed the highest prognostic accuracy (discrimination) for neurological outcome (area under the curve (AUC) 0.89) and in-hospital mortality (AUC 0.88). These results were robust in reclassification statistics and across different subgroups. NSE kinetics with admission levels serving as a baseline did not further improve prognostication. NSE on day 3 significantly improved discrimination of both clinical risk scores (CAHP from AUC 0.81 to 0.91; OHCA from AUC 0.79 to 0.89). CONCLUSION: NSE measured at day 3 significantly improves clinical risk scores for outcome prediction in cardiac arrest patients and may thus add to clinical decision making about escalation or withdrawal of therapy in this vulnerable patient population.

Depression and anxiety in relatives of out-of-hospital cardiac arrest patients: Results of a prospective observational study.

PURPOSE: Relatives of patients admitted to the intensive care unit (ICU) with out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) may suffer from adverse psychological outcomes. We assessed prevalence and risk factors for depression and anxiety in such relatives 90 days after ICU admission. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This study included consecutive relatives of OHCA patients admitted to the ICU of University Hospital in Basel, Switzerland. Relatives were interviewed upon admission regarding psychosocial risk factors and satisfaction with communication. Symptoms of depression and anxiety were assessed by Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS) 90 days after inclusion. RESULTS: Of 101 included relatives, 17% and 13% of relatives reported symptoms of depression and anxiety, respectively. Witnessing cardiopulmonary resuscitation was associated with depression (gender- and age-adjusted odds ratio [OR] 6.71; 95%CI 1.27 to 35.34; p = .025). Satisfaction with information and decision-making was associated with lower risk of depression (adjusted OR 0.95; 95%CI 0.91 to 0.99; p = .013). Unemployment (adjusted OR 10.42; 95%CI 1.18 to 92.35; p = .035) and lower perceived health status were associated with anxiety (adjusted OR 0.93; 95%CI 0.87 to 0.99; p = .025). CONCLUSIONS: Many relatives of OHCA patients report symptoms of depression and anxiety after 90 days. Improving initial care and communication may help to reduce these risks.

Effect of Bedside vs. Non-bedside Patient Case Presentation During Ward Rounds: a Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Ward rounds are important for communicating with patients, but it is unclear whether bedside or non-bedside case presentation is the better approach. METHODS: We conducted a comprehensive search up to July 2018 to identify randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing bedside and non-bedside case presentations. Data was abstracted independently by two researchers and study quality was assessed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool. Our primary outcome was patient's satisfaction with ward rounds. Our main secondary outcome was patient's understanding of disease and the management plan. RESULTS: Among 1647 identified articles, we included five RCTs involving 655 participants with overall moderate trial quality. We found no difference in having low patient's satisfaction between bedside and non-bedside case presentations (risk ratio [RR], 0.85; 95% CI, 0.66 to 1.09). We also found no impact on patient's understanding of their disease and management plan (RR, 0.92; 95% CI, 0.67 to 1.28). Trial sequential analysis (TSA) indicated low power of our main analysis. DISCUSSION: We found no differences in patient-relevant outcomes between bedside and non-bedside case presentations with a lack of statistical power among current trials. There is a need for larger studies to find the optimal approach to patient case presentation during ward rounds.

Performance of clinical risk scores to predict mortality and neurological outcome in cardiac arrest patients.

AIM: Several scores are available to predict mortality and neurological outcome in cardiac arrest patients admitted to the intensive care unit (ICU). The aim of the study was to externally validate the prognostic value of four previously published risk scores. METHODS: For this observational, single-center study, we prospectively included 349 consecutive adult cardiac arrest patients upon ICU admission. We calculated two cardiac arrest specific risk scores (OHCA and CAHP) and two general severity of illness scores (APACHE II and SAPS II). The primary endpoint was in-hospital mortality. Secondary endpoints were neurological outcome at hospital discharge and 30-day mortality. RESULTS: 170 patients (49%) died until hospital discharge. All scores were independently associated with outcomes in logistic regression analysis and showed acceptable discrimination for in-hospital mortality with highest AUCs of the cardiac arrest specific risk scores (OHCA: 0.80 (95%CI 0.75-0.85) and CAHP: 0.84 (95%CI 0.79-0.88) compared to the severity of illness scores (APACHE II: 0.78 (95%CI 0.73-0.83) and SAPS II: 0.77 (95%CI 0.72-0.82). Results were robust in subgroup analysis except for worse performance in elderly patients (>75 years) and patients with respiratory cause of cardiac arrest. Results were similar for 30-days mortality and slightly higher for neurological outcome. CONCLUSIONS: This study confirms the good prognostic performance of cardiac arrest specific scores to predict mortality and neurological outcomes in cardiac arrest patients. Routine use of OHCA or CAHP score helps to objectively risk stratify these vulnerable patients and thereby may improve therapeutic decisions.

Polarized but illusory beliefs about tap and bottled water: A product- and consumer-oriented survey and blind tasting experiment.

BACKGROUND: Despite the rigorous control of tap water quality, substantial price differences, and environmental concerns, bottled water consumption has increased in recent decades. To facilitate healthy and sustainable consumer choices, a deeper understanding of this "water consumption paradox" is needed. Therefore, the aim of the two present studies was to examine health-related beliefs and risk perceptions and their accuracy by implementing a combined product- and consumer-oriented approach. METHODS: An online survey (N = 578) and a blind taste test (N = 99) assessed perceptions and behaviors for tap and bottled water within primarily tap and bottled water consumers in a fully crossed design. The combined product- and consumer-oriented approach yielded significant consumer × product interaction effects. RESULTS: The two consumer groups showed "polarized" ratings regarding perceived quality/hygiene, health risks and taste for bottled and tap water, indicating that the two consumer groups substantially diverged in their beliefs. However, in the blind taste test, neither consumer group was able to distinguish tap from bottled water samples (consumer perspective). Moreover, tap or bottled water samples did not systemically vary in their ascribed health-risk or taste characteristics (product perspective). CONCLUSIONS: Although the two consumer groups differ greatly in their beliefs, the perceived health risk and taste differences seem to reflect illusionary beliefs rather than actual experiences or product characteristics. Public health campaigns should address these illusions to promote healthy and sustainable consumer choices.

Routine blood markers from different biological pathways improve early risk stratification in cardiac arrest patients: Results from the prospective, observational COMMUNICATE study.

INTRODUCTION: Prognostication of cardiac arrest patients admitted to the intensive care unit (ICU) may influence treatment decision, but remains challenging. We evaluated the incremental usefulness of routine blood markers from different biological pathways for predicting fatal outcome and neurological deficits in cardiac arrest patients. METHODS: We prospectively included consecutive, adult cardiac arrest patients upon ICU admission. We recorded initial clinical parameters and measured blood markers of cardiac injury/stress (troponin, BNP, CK), inflammation/infection (WBC, CRP, procalcitonin) and shock (lactate, creatinine, urea). The primary and secondary endpoints were all-cause in-hospital mortality and bad neurological outcome defined by the Cerebral Performance Category (CPC) score. RESULTS: Mortality in the 321 included patients was 49% (n = 156). Procalcitonin (adjusted odds ratio 1.84, 95%CI 1.34 to 2.53, p < 0.001; AUC 0.73) and lactate (adjusted odds ratio 7.29, 95%CI 3.05 to 17.42, p < 0.001; AUC 0.70) were identified as independent prognostic factors for mortality and significantly improved discrimination of a parsimonious clinical model including resuscitation measures (no-flow time, shockable rhythm) and initial vital signs (Glasgow coma scale, respiratory rate) from an AUC of 0.79 to 0.84 (p < 0.001). Cardiac markers did not further improve the model. Results for neurological outcome were similar with model improvements by procalcitonin and lactate from AUC 0.83 to 0.87 (p = 0.004). CONCLUSION: Assessment of routine markers of inflammation/infection and shock provide significant improvements for prognostication of cardiac arrest patients, while cardiac markers did not further improve statistical models. Combination of blood markers and clinical parameters may help to improve initial management decisions in this vulnerable patient population.

Risk Perceptions After Receiving Multiple Risk Feedback.

How do people respond to multiple risk feedback in a real-life context? Based on theoretical assumptions, three different predictions for risk perceptions were tested: (a) relative accuracy in risk perceptions, (b) self-defensive responses according to self-affirmation theory, and (c) compensatory responses according to the compensatory health belief model. Participants of a community health screening ( N = 725) received multiple risk indicator feedback for actual blood pressure, blood glucose, and blood lipid levels. Consistent multiple risk feedback profiles encompassed three consistent readings (three normal or three elevated readings). Mixed risk profiles included one elevated and two normal readings. Results indicate relative accuracy in responses: an elevated reading triggered higher risk perception of the respective risk factor. Importantly, the effect was not modulated by the presence of normal readings as assumed by the self-defensive or compensatory response perspective, indicating that people accurately integrate multiple risk indicator feedback as it is often provided in real life.

Pre-Feedback Risk Expectancies and Reception of Low-Risk Health Feedback: Absolute and Comparative Lack of Reassurance.

BACKGROUND: Personalised health-risk assessment is one of the most common components of health promotion programs. Previous research on responses to health risk feedback has commonly focused on the reception of bad news (high-risk feedback). The reception of low-risk feedback has been comparably neglected since it is assumed that good news is reassuring and readily received. However, field studies suggest mixed responses to low-risk health feedback. Accordingly, we examine whether pre-feedback risk expectancies can mitigate the reassuring effects of good news. METHODS: In two studies (N = 187, N = 565), after assessing pre-feedback risk expectancies, participants received low-risk personalised feedback about their own risk of developing (the fictitious) Tucson Chronic Fatigue Syndrome (TCFS). Study 2 also included peer TCFS risk status feedback. Afterwards, self- and peer-related risk perception for TCFS was assessed. RESULTS: In both studies, participants who expected to be at high risk but received good news (unexpected low-risk feedback) showed absolute lack of reassurance. Specifically, they felt at significantly greater TCFS risk than participants who received expected good news. Moreover, the unexpected low-risk group even believed that their risk was as high as (Study 1) or higher (Study 2) than that of their peers (comparative lack of reassurance). CONCLUSION: Results support the notion that high pre-feedback risk expectancies can mitigate absolute and comparative reassuring effects of good news.