An official American Thoracic Society workshop report: assessment and palliative management of dyspnea crisis.

In 2009, the American Thoracic Society (ATS) funded an assembly project, Palliative Management of Dyspnea Crisis, to focus on identification, management, and optimal resource utilization for effective palliation of acute episodes of dyspnea. We conducted a comprehensive search of the medical literature and evaluated available evidence from systematic evidence-based reviews (SEBRs) using a modified AMSTAR approach and then summarized the palliative management knowledge base for participants to use in discourse at a 2009 ATS workshop. We used an informal consensus process to develop a working definition of this novel entity and established an Ad Hoc Committee on Palliative Management of Dyspnea Crisis to further develop an official ATS document on the topic. The Ad Hoc Committee members defined dyspnea crisis as "sustained and severe resting breathing discomfort that occurs in patients with advanced, often life-limiting illness and overwhelms the patient and caregivers' ability to achieve symptom relief." Dyspnea crisis can occur suddenly and is characteristically without a reversible etiology. The workshop participants focused on dyspnea crisis management for patients in whom the goals of care are focused on palliation and for whom endotracheal intubation and mechanical ventilation are not consistent with articulated preferences. However, approaches to dyspnea crisis may also be appropriate for patients electing life-sustaining treatment. The Ad Hoc Committee developed a Workshop Report concerning assessment of dyspnea crisis; ethical and professional considerations; efficient utilization, communication, and care coordination; clinical management of dyspnea crisis; development of patient education and provider aid products; and enhancing implementation with audit and quality improvement.

Disseminating and implementing guidelines: article 13 in Integrating and coordinating efforts in COPD guideline development. An official ATS/ERS workshop report.

BACKGROUND: Professional societies, like many other organizations around the world, have recognized the need to use rigorous processes to ensure that health care recommendations are informed by the best available research evidence. This is the thirteenth of a series of 14 articles that were prepared to advise guideline developers in respiratory and other diseases. This article focuses on current concepts and research evidence about how to disseminate and implement guidelines optimally on a national and international level to improve quality of care. METHODS: In this article we address the following questions: What frameworks can aid guideline dissemination and implementation; what are the effects of different guideline dissemination and implementation strategies; and, what is the role of guideline developers in guideline dissemination and implementation? We identified existing systematic reviews and relevant methodological research. Our conclusions are based on evidence from published literature, experience from guideline developers, and workshop discussions. RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS: The Knowledge to Action cycle proposed by Graham and colleagues (J Contin Educ Health Prof 2006;26:13-24) provides a useful framework for planning dissemination and implementation activities that emphasize the need for tailored approaches based on an assessment of local barriers. There are a broad range of interventions that are generally effective at improving the uptake of evidence. The best intervention depends on likely barriers, available resources, and other practical considerations. Financial interventions (such as pay for performance) appear to be as effective as other interventions that aim to change professional behavior. Guideline developers who do not have responsibility for guideline implementation in their jurisdiction should support those with responsibility for implementation by considering the "implementability" of their guidelines.

An official American Thoracic Society policy statement: pay-for-performance in pulmonary, critical care, and sleep medicine.

RATIONALE: Pay-for-performance is a model for health care financing that seeks to link reimbursement to quality. The American Thoracic Society and its members have a significant stake in the development of pay-for-performance programs. OBJECTIVES: To develop an official ATS policy statement addressing the role of pay-for-performance in pulmonary, critical care and sleep medicine. METHODS: The statement was developed by the ATS Health Policy Committee using an iterative consensus process including an expert workshop and review by ATS committees and assemblies. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Pay-for-performance is increasingly utilized by health care purchasers including the United States government. Published studies generally show that programs result in small but measurable gains in quality, although the data are heterogeneous. Pay-for-performance may result in several negative consequences, including the potential to increase costs, worsen health outcomes, and widen health disparities, among others. Future research should be directed at developing reliable and valid performance measures, increasing the efficacy of pay-for-performance programs, minimizing negative unintended consequences, and examining issues of costs and cost-effectiveness. The ATS and its members can play a key role in the design and evaluation of these programs by advancing the science of performance measurement, regularly developing quality metrics alongside clinical practice guidelines, and working with payors to make performance improvement a routine part of clinical practice. CONCLUSIONS: Pay-for-performance programs will expand in the coming years. Pulmonary, critical care and sleep practitioners can use these programs as an opportunity to partner with purchasers to improve health care quality.

Attitudes and perceptions of internal medicine residents regarding pulmonary and critical care subspecialty training.

STUDY OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the attitudes and perceptions of internal medicine residents regarding pulmonary and critical care medicine (PCCM) training. DESIGN: Prospective study. SETTING: Three university hospitals. METHODS: An eight-page survey was distributed and collected between March 1, 2002, and June 30, 2002. All internal medicine or internal medicine/pediatric residents training at the three institutions were eligible for the study. RESULTS: One hundred seventy-eight residents in internal medicine from an eligible pool of 297 residents returned the survey (61% response rate). PCCM accounted for only 3.4% of the career choices. Forty-one percent of the residents seriously considered a pulmonary and/or critical care fellowship during their residency. Of these residents, 23.5% found the combination of programs the more attractive option, while 2.8% found pulmonary alone and 14.5% found critical care alone more attractive. Key factors associated with a higher resident interest in PCCM subspecialty training included more weeks in the ICU (p = 0.008), more role models in PCCM (3.02 +/- 0.78 vs 3.45 +/- 0.78, p = 0.0004), and resident observations of a greater sense of satisfaction among PCCM faculty (3.07 +/- 0.82 vs 3.33 +/- 0.82, p = 0.04) and fellows (3.05 +/- 0.69 vs 3.31 +/- 0.86, p = 0.03) [mean +/- SD]. The five most commonly cited attributes of PCCM fellowship that would attract residents to the field included intellectual stimulation (69%), opportunities to manage critically ill patients (51%), application of complex physiologic principles (45%), number of procedures performed (31%), and academically challenging rounds (29%). The five most commonly cited attributes of PCCM that would dissuade residents from the field included overly demanding responsibilities with lack of leisure time (54%), stress among faculty and fellows (45%), management responsibilities for chronically ill patients (30%), poor match of career with resident personality (24%), and treatment of pulmonary diseases (16%). CONCLUSIONS: Internal medicine residents have serious reservations about PCCM as a career choice. Our survey demonstrated that a minority of US medical graduates actually would choose PCCM as a career, which suggests that efforts to expand PCCM training capacity might result in vacant fellowship slots. To promote greater interest in PCCM training, efforts are needed to improve the attractiveness of PCCM and address the negative lifestyle perceptions of residents.