Provision of Compassionate and Empathic Care as a Well-Being Preservation Tool for Emergency Physicians: A Scoping Review.

Objective: Compassion and physician well-being are two key components related to quality care in health including emergency medicine. The objective of this study was to explore the impact of compassion in care on the well-being of emergency physicians. We conducted a scoping review to explore the impact of provision of compassionate care by emergency physicians on their well-being and subconcepts. Methods: Four electronic databases and grey literature were searched to find evidence related to compassion, empathy, self-compassion, and their impact on emergency physicians' well-being. Following title and abstract review, two reviewers independently screened full-text articles, and extracted data. Data were presented using descriptive statistics and a narrative analysis. Results: A total of 803 reports were identified in databases. Three articles met eligibility criteria for data extraction. None directly examined compassion and well-being. Included studies addressed empathy and burnout in emergency medicine professionals. Conclusion: No high-quality evidence could be found on the topic in the population of interest. Literature related to the topic of compassion in physicians, especially in emergency physicians, a field known for its high demand and stress levels, is currently scarce and additional evidence is needed to better describe and understand the association between physicians' compassion and well-being.

[Mapping in 3D with MapIt: an added value for a professionalization path from the student perspective]. / Cartographier en 3D avec MapIt : une plus-value pour un parcours de professionnalisation selon la perspective étudiante.

During the pandemic, the MapIt app was integrated into an occupational therapy program to support remote learning of built environment adaptation. MapIt maps rooms in a home, then generates a 3D model for viewing and taking virtual measurements. The students express that the use of MapIt during their training leads to embodying the roles expected of an occupational therapist. To inspire other good pedagogical ideas, this article presents how MapIt can support learning in authentic situations, a key element of a professionalization path, approaching the realities experienced by patients, clients, or caregivers.

Evaluation of clinical innovation: a gray zone in the ethics of modern clinical practice?

BACKGROUND: Various stakeholders can have differing opinions regarding ethical review when introducing new procedures with patients. OBJECTIVE: This pilot study examines the way in which Research Ethics Boards (REBs; Institutional Review Boards) and clinical biochemists (CBs; laboratory medicine specialists) differ in their interpretation of what is research and what should be considered common practice versus innovation versus experimentation when introducing new procedures with patients. It also explores whether these groups agree on who is responsible for the ethical review of new procedures. METHODS: A validated case scenario for the introduction of a new diagnostic test into clinical practice was sent to CBs and REBs across Canada. Participants were asked to determine whether the scenario constituted research; whether the test procedure should be considered as experimental, innovative, or commonly accepted care; and whether the project required approval by a REB and, if not, who should be responsible for ethical review. RESULTS: Results showed 81% of 37 CBs and 52% of 27 REBs identified the scenario as research. Responsibility for ethical review was assigned to REBs by 44% of REBs and 54% of CBs. Of all participants, 53% classified the test procedure as 'innovative', 8% as 'experimental', whereas 17% classified it as 'commonly accepted'. CONCLUSIONS: This pilot study indicates a substantial variation in the ethical assessment of innovation in clinical care. This suggests the need to further elaborate on the types of innovation in health care and categorize the nature of the risks associated with each.

The TEAM methodology for the evaluation of information systems in biomedicine.

The TEAM evaluation methodology for information systems in biomedicine (Total Evaluation and Acceptance Methodology) is a unifying methodology for any computer-based information system based on a three dimensional framework; these dimensions being Role, Time and Structure. The theory is derived from how the information system relates to the general system where it should operate, the properties of information flow within a general system and the relation between a system and its models. As a system can in theory be modelled from many perspectives, a perspective to be modelled is built up by formulating criteria relevant to that perspective which can be evaluated by quantitative and qualitative assessment methods. Key characteristics of the methodology include the insistence on a global rather than partial approach to the evaluation of information systems, also the dynamic nature of an information system which is continually in modification as it more successfully deals with the inherent complexity of the environment in which it is operating. The role dimension identifies four main categories, designer, specialist user, end user and stakeholder from which several sub-categories may be identified. The time dimension has four main phases towards relative stability of the information system. The structural dimension distinguishes strategic, tactical or organisational and operational levels that often are confused together with risk of dilution in current approaches. It is believed that this framework and methodology can provide a basis for future standardisation of evaluation methodologies.