Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 2 de 2
Filtrar
Más filtros

Banco de datos
Tipo del documento
País de afiliación
Intervalo de año de publicación
1.
Anesthesiology ; 139(5): 667-674, 2023 Nov 01.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37582252

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Healthcare trainees frequently report facing comments from their patients pertaining to their age. Exposure to ageist comments from patients may be related to greater stress and/or burnout in residents and may impact the quality of the resident-patient relationship. However, little empirical work has examined ageism expressed toward anesthesiology residents in clinical care, and therefore not much is known about how residents respond to these comments in practice. This research sought to determine how anesthesiology residents responded to ageist comments. METHODS: Anesthesiology residents (N = 60) engaged in a preoperative interaction with a standardized patient who was instructed to make an ageist comment to the resident. Resident responses were transcribed and coded using qualitative inductive content analysis to identify response themes. RESULTS: The most common resident response to the ageist comment, across gender and resident year, was to state their own experience. Some also described how they were still in training or that they were under supervision. Residents rarely reassured the patient that they would receive good care or identified the patient's anxiety as a cause of the ageist remark. CONCLUSIONS: These results provide a first step in understanding how ageism may be navigated by residents in clinical encounters. The authors discuss potential avenues for future research and education for responding to ageist remarks for both patients and clinicians.

2.
Hand (N Y) ; : 15589447231155583, 2023 Feb 21.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37545375

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the incidence of lymphedema onset or exacerbation in patients undergoing upper extremity interventions, both nonoperative and operative, after breast cancer surgery. METHODS: The study inclusion criteria were the following: (1) prior history of breast cancer surgery or lymphedema from the cancer; (2) upper extremity intervention, ipsilateral to the breast cancer side; and (3) follow-up of at least 1 month. Patients were evaluated for demographic information, type of breast cancer procedure and hand intervention, number of lymph nodes dissected, preexisting lymphedema, exacerbation of lymphedema, and new-onset lymphedema. RESULTS: A total of 161 patients undergoing 385 hand interventions (300 injections, 85 surgeries) were reviewed. Median follow-up was 31 months (range: 1-110). Nineteen patients had preexisting lymphedema ipsilateral to the hand procedure and none experienced an exacerbation of their lymphedema. Three patients developed new-onset lymphedema ipsilateral to their hand intervention at an average follow-up of 30 months (range: 4-67). One patient had a single injection and developed lymphedema over 5 years later. One had 2 injections in the same hand on the same date and developed lymphedema 3 months later. The third patient had 2 injections in the right hand, 1 injection and 1 surgery in the left hand, and developed either lymphedema or swelling due to rheumatoid arthritis in the right hand 1 year after the injections. CONCLUSIONS: Patients who have undergone breast cancer surgery can safely undergo upper extremity intervention with low risk of lymphedema exacerbation or onset.

SELECCIÓN DE REFERENCIAS
DETALLE DE LA BÚSQUEDA