Humanização nos serviços de saúde: perspectivas de profissionais atuantes na atenção primária à saúde / Humanization in health services: perspectives of professionals working in primary health care / Humanización en los servicios de salud: perspectivas de los profesionales que trabajan en atención primaria

Investigar o conhecimento dos profissionais que atuam na atenção básica sobre o atendimento humanizado. Estudo descritivo, exploratório, de abordagem qualitativa, realizado com 16 profissionais que atuam em unidade básica de saúde, realizado no mês de abril de 2022. Os dados foram coletados por meio de entrevista gravada, norteada pela questão: "Fale-me sobre o que você, senhor/senhora, sabe sobre humanização na assistência ao paciente. Após a conclusão das entrevistas, as mesmas foram transcritas, sendo submetidas à técnica de análise de conteúdo proposta por Bardin. Da análise das entrevistas, emergiram três categorias: Impactos da realização do cuidado humanizado e de sua ausência, na qual nota-se por meio dos discursos, que o cuidado à saúde do ser humano, quando prestado de modo humanizado é considerado como maneira mais eficaz para se ter um atendimento adequado e ético nos serviços de atenção à saúde. Estratégias para fortalecer a prática da assistência humanizada, pela qual verificou-se que a assistência à saúde realizada ao ser humano de uma forma humanizada, se torna muito mais forte e eficaz. Atividade laboral como sinônimo de cuidado empático, a qual evidenciou que é preciso continuar conscientizando a todos esses profissionais, que atuam nessa área, sobre esse cuidado humanizado, ou seja, o cuidado com empatia. Assim, concluiu-se que os profissionais apresentaram conhecimento básico sobre humanização no atendimento, sobre as consequências ao paciente caso ela não ocorra e como implementá-la, com constância, em suas atividades laborais, na atenção primária à saúde.

To investigate the knowledge of professionals working in primary care about humanized care. Descriptive, exploratory study, with a qualitative approach, carried out with 16 professionals who work in a basic health unit, carried out in April 2022. Data were collected through a recorded interview, guided by the question: "Tell me about what you, sir/madam, know about humanization in patient care. After completing the interviews, they were transcribed and submitted to the content analysis technique proposed by Bardin. From the analysis of the interviews, three categories emerged: Impacts of carrying out humanized care and its absence, in which it is noted through the speeches that human health care, when provided in a humanized way, is considered the most effective way to have adequate and ethical care in health care services. Strategies to strengthen the practice of humanized care, through which it was found that health care provided to human beings in a humanized way becomes much stronger and more effective. Work activity as a synonym for empathic care, which showed that it is necessary to continue making all these professionals, who work in this area, aware of this humanized care, that is, care with empathy. Thus, it was concluded that the professionals presented basic knowledge about humanization in care, about the consequences for the patient if it does not occur and how to implement it consistently in their work activities, in primary health care.

Investigar el conocimiento de los profesionales que trabajan en atención primaria sobre la atención humanizada. Estudio descriptivo, exploratorio, de enfoque cualitativo, realizado con 16 profesionales que trabajan en la unidad básica de salud, realizado en abril de 2022. Los datos se recogieron mediante una entrevista grabada, guiada por la pregunta: "Háblame de lo que sabes sobre la humanización en la atención al paciente". Una vez finalizadas las entrevistas, se transcribieron y se sometieron a la técnica de análisis de contenido propuesta por Bardin. Del análisis de las entrevistas surgieron tres categorías: Impactos de la implementación de la atención humanizada y su ausencia, en la que se observa a través de los discursos, que la atención a la salud del ser humano, cuando se brinda de manera humanizada, se considera la forma más efectiva de tener una atención adecuada y ética en los servicios de salud. Estrategias para fortalecer la práctica de la atención humanizada, mediante las cuales se verificó que la atención a la salud brindada al ser humano de manera humanizada, se hace mucho más fuerte y efectiva. La actividad laboral como sinónimo de atención empática, lo que demostró que es necesario seguir concienciando a todos estos profesionales que trabajan en este ámbito sobre la atención humanizada, es decir, la atención con empatía. Así, se concluyó que los profesionales tenían conocimientos básicos sobre la humanización en la atención sanitaria, sobre las consecuencias para el paciente si ésta no se produce y sobre cómo implementarla con constancia en su actividad laboral en la atención primaria.

In This Together: Navigating Ethical Challenges Posed by Family Clustering during the Covid-19 Pandemic.

Harrowing stories reported in the media describe Covid-19 ravaging through families. This essay reports professional experiences of this phenomenon, family clustering, as encountered during the pandemic's spread across Southern California. We identify three ethical challenges following from it: Family clustering impedes shared decision-making by reducing available surrogate decision-makers for incapacitated patients, increases the emotional burdens of surrogate decision-makers, and exacerbates health disparities for and the suffering of people of color at increased likelihood of experiencing family clustering. We propose that, in response to these challenges, efforts in advance care planning be expanded, emotional support offered to surrogates and family members be increased, more robust state guidance be issued on ethical decision-making for unrepresented patients, ethics consultation be increased in the setting of conflict following from family clustering dynamics, and health care professionals pay more attention to systemic and personal racial biases and inequities that affect patient care and the surrogate experience.

"I wanted to participate in my own care": Evaluation of a Patient Navigation Program.

INTRODUCTION: Patient navigation programs can help people overcome barriers to outpatient care. Patient experiences with these programs are not well understood. The goal of this study was to understand patient experiences and satisfaction with an emergency department (ED)-initiated patient navigation (ED-PN) intervention for US Medicaid-enrolled frequent ED users. METHODS: We conducted a mixed-methods evaluation of patient experiences and satisfaction with an ED-PN program for patients who visited the ED more than four times in the prior year. Participants were Medicaid-enrolled, English- or Spanish-speaking, New Haven-CT residents over the age of 18. Pre-post ED-PN intervention surveys and post-ED-PN individual interviews were conducted. We analyzed baseline and follow-up survey responses as proportions of total responses. Interviews were coded by multiple readers, and interview themes were identified by consensus. RESULTS: A total of 49 participants received ED-PN. Of those, 80% (39/49) completed the post-intervention survey. After receiving ED-PN, participants reported high satisfaction, fewer barriers to medical care, and increased confidence in their ability to coordinate and manage their medical care. Interviews were conducted until thematic saturation was reached. Four main themes emerged from 11 interviews: 1) PNs were perceived as effective navigators and advocates; 2) health-related social needs were frequent drivers of and barriers to healthcare; 3) primary care utilization depended on clinic accessibility and quality of relationships with providers and staff; and 4) the ED was viewed as providing convenient, comprehensive care for urgent needs. CONCLUSIONS: Medicaid-enrolled frequent ED users receiving ED-PN had high satisfaction and reported improved ability to manage their health conditions.

New Horizons-Addressing Healthcare Disparities in Endocrine Disease: Bias, Science, and Patient Care.

Unacceptable healthcare disparities in endocrine disease have persisted for decades, and 2021 presents a difficult evolving environment. The COVID-19 pandemic has highlighted the gross structural inequities that drive health disparities, and antiracism demonstrations remind us that the struggle for human rights continues. Increased public awareness and discussion of disparities present an urgent opportunity to advance health equity. However, it is more complicated to change the behavior of individuals and reform systems because societies are polarized into different factions that increasingly believe, accept, and live different realities. To reduce health disparities, clinicians must (1) truly commit to advancing health equity and intentionally act to reduce health disparities; (2) create a culture of equity by looking inwards for personal bias and outwards for the systemic biases built into their everyday work processes; (3) implement practical individual, organizational, and community interventions that address the root causes of the disparities; and (4) consider their roles in addressing social determinants of health and influencing healthcare payment policy to advance health equity. To care for diverse populations in 2021, clinicians must have self-insight and true understanding of heterogeneous patients, knowledge of evidence-based interventions, ability to adapt messaging and approaches, and facility with systems change and advocacy. Advancing health equity requires both science and art; evidence-based roadmaps and stories that guide the journey to better outcomes, judgment that informs how to change the behavior of patients, providers, communities, organizations, and policymakers, and passion and a moral mission to serve humanity.

Examining the Educational Value of Student-Run Clinics for Health Care Students.

PURPOSE: Student-run clinics (SRCs) are increasingly recognized as an educational experience in many health professions' curricula. Several benefits have been documented, including students with SRC experience using patient-centered approaches to care, showing interest in working with marginalized populations, and more fully appreciating the care provided by interprofessional teams. Yet, few studies have explored student experiences within SRCs or examined how these experiences affect and shape these documented attitudes. This study explored the experiences of students at an SRC and the effect of these experiences on their learnings. METHOD: From November 2016 to July 2017, 23 students in the Community Health Initiative by University Students SRC at the University of British Columbia participated in 2 focus group interviews: the first after their first clinic day and the second on their final clinic day. Open- and closed-ended questions were used to explore participants' learnings from the SRC. Using a grounded theory approach, the authors iteratively analyzed the transcribed interviews, adjusting questions for subsequent focus groups as new themes evolved. Three investigators each separately coded the data; the full team then collectively consolidated the themes and developed explanatory models for each theme. RESULTS: Two themes were identified from the focus group input: (1) through managing real, complex patients-in situations unlike those offered in classroom and case-based learning environments-students gained insights into the intricacies of incorporating the patient's perspective into their definition and management of the patient's problem, and (2) by working as a team instead of focusing on delineating scopes of practice, students gained a meaningful understanding of the roles of practitioners from other health professions. CONCLUSIONS: This study provides insights into the unique opportunities SRCs offer health care students early in their training, enabling them to develop a richer understanding and appreciation of holistic and interprofessional approaches to patient care.

Social Determinants of Hallway Bed Use.

INTRODUCTION: Hallway beds in the emergency department (ED) produce lower patient satisfaction and inferior care. We sought to determine whether socioeconomic factors influence which visits are assigned to hallway beds, independent of clinical characteristics at triage. METHODS: We studied 332,919 visits, across 189,326 patients, to two academic EDs from 2013-2016. We estimated a logistic model of hallway bed assignment, conditioning on payor, demographics, triage acuity, chief complaint, patient visit frequency, and ED volume. Because payor is not generally known at the time of triage, we interpreted it as a proxy for other observable characteristics that may influence bed assignment. We estimated a Cox proportional hazards model of hallway bed assignment on length of stay. RESULTS: Median patient age was 53. 54.0% of visits were by women. 42.1% of visits were paid primarily by private payors, 37.1% by Medicare, and 20.7% by Medicaid. A total of 16.2% of visits were assigned to hallway beds. Hallway bed assignment was more likely for frequent ED visitors, for lower acuity presentations, and for psychiatric, substance use, and musculoskeletal chief complaints, which were more common among visits paid primarily by Medicaid. In a logistic model controlling for these factors, as well as for other patient demographics and for the volume of recent ED arrivals, Medicaid status was nevertheless associated with 22% greater odds of assignment to a hallway bed (odds ratio 1.22, [95% confidence interval, CI, 1.18-1.26]), compared to private insurance. Visits assigned to hallway beds had longer lengths of stay than roomed visits of comparable acuity (hazard ratio for departure 0.91 [95% CI, 0.90-0.92]). CONCLUSION: We find evidence of social determinants of hallway bed use, likely involving epidemiologic, clinical, and operational factors. Even after accounting for different distributions of chief complaints and for more frequent ED use by the Medicaid population, as well as for other visit characteristics known at the time of triage, visits paid primarily by Medicaid retain a disproportionate association with hallway bed assignment. Further research is needed to eliminate potential bias in the use of hallway beds. [West J Emerg Med. 2020;21(4)949-958.].

Ethics and Industry Interactions: Impact on Specialty Training, Clinical Practice, and Research.

Physicians in training and their mentors must be cognizant of ethical concerns related to industry interactions. Mentors perceived to have conflicts of interest or to be engaging in misconduct can unconsciously and profoundly affect the learning and academic environment by implying certain values and expectations. Despite increased awareness of ethical concerns related to industry interactions in clinical practice and research, there remains a need for interventions to prevent ethical transgressions. Ethics education is essential and a move in the right direction, but it alone is likely inadequate in preventing unethical behavior. Education should be supplemented with ethical environments at institutions.

[3-Countries-Manifest: Turning Point in Medicine - Patient Care on the Dangerous Path to Economization and Industrialization - 10 Demands for Humane Medical Care]. / 3-Länder-Manifest: Zeitenwende in der Medizin ­ Patientenversorgung auf dem gefährlichen Weg in die Ökonomisierung und Industrialisierung.

The 3-Country-Manifest extends beyond existing oaths, vows and codices. It is supposed to encourage discussion and close the gap in the conflict between medical-ethical principles and a dangerous development through economisation, commercialisation and industrialisation of the patient care.Ten demands are raised to clarify the medical profession's urgent concerns due to economic, technological and medical-ethical developments and as a result ensure that patient welfare will remain the pivotal measure of medicine in the future.The Physicians 3-Country-Manifest addresses concrete suggestions and topics as a starting point for a change in awareness and attitude in all interest groups in health care. It wants to accomplish the necessary turning point towards humanely designed medical care.

Homeless, Ill, and Psychiatrically Complex: The Grueling Carousel of Cassandra Lee.

Ask any clinical ethics consultant, and they can tell you about their transformative cases. Some stick with us because all roads led nowhere. Cassandra Lee had a history of pulling out lines and tubes and a distaste of warming blankets. Her admission marked her thirtieth over the past year. Many of the challenges facing the hospital caring for her were not unique: significant psychiatric issues, prolonged nonadherence to medical advice, and end-of-life decision-making combined to create an ethically dense and vexing situation. Ms. Lee, like so many patients, was suffering because of system failures.

Bystander Ethics and Good Samaritanism: A Paradox for Learning Health Organizations.

In 2012, a U.S. Institute of Medicine report called for a different approach to health care: "Left unchanged, health care will continue to underperform; cause unnecessary harm; and strain national, state, and family budgets." The answer, they suggested, would be a "continuously learning" health system. Ethicists and researchers urged the creation of "learning health organizations" that would integrate knowledge from patient-care data to continuously improve the quality of care. Our experience with an ongoing research study on atrial fibrillation-a trial known as IMPACT-AFib-gave us some insight into one of the challenges that will have to be dealt with in creating these organizations. Although the proposed educational intervention study placed no restrictions on what providers and health plans could do, the oversight team argued that the ethical principle of beneficence did not allow the researchers to be "bystanders" in relation to a control group receiving suboptimal care. In response, the researchers designed a "workaround" that allowed the project to go forward. We believe the experience suggests that what we call "bystander ethics" will create challenges for the kinds of quality improvement research that LHOs are designed to do.

Marketing the Research Missions of Academic Medical Centers: Why Messages Blurring Lines Between Clinical Care and Research Are Bad for both Business and Ethics.

Academic Medical Centers (AMCs) offer patient care and perform research. Increasingly, AMCs advertise to the public in order to garner income that can support these dual missions. In what follows, we raise concerns about the ways that advertising blurs important distinctions between them. Such blurring is detrimental to AMC efforts to fulfill critically important ethical responsibilities pertaining both to science communication and clinical research, because marketing campaigns can employ hype that weakens research integrity and contributes to therapeutic misconception and misestimation, undermining the informed consent process that is essential to the ethical conduct of research. We offer ethical analysis of common advertising practices that justify these concerns. We also suggest the need for a deliberative body convened by the Association of American Medical Colleges and others to develop a set of voluntary guidelines that AMCs can use to avoid in the future, the problems found in many current AMC advertising practices.

Mayo Clinic's 5-Step Policy for Responding to Bias Incidents.

Patient bias towards clinicians and employees in health care is common, but policy to address bias and to support staff is relatively limited. Creating a framework to address bias incidents is critical for cultivating environments that are safe for employees and patients. Mayo Clinic has created both policy to support staff and a reporting mechanism for accountability. Education, resources, and training are available and being disseminated to teach employees ways to respond to bias incidents.

Integrating clinical and economic evidence in clinical guidelines: More needed than ever!

RATIONALE, AIMS, AND OBJECTIVES: In recent years, several expensive new health technologies have been introduced. The availability of those technologies intensifies the discussion regarding the affordability of these technologies at different decision-making levels. On the meso level, both hospitals and clinicians are facing budget constraints resulting in a tension to balance between different patients' interests. As such, it is crucial to make optimal use of the available resources. Different strategies are in place to deal with this problem, but decisions on a macro level on what to fund or not can limit the role and freedom of clinicians in their decisions on a micro level. At the same time, without central guidance regarding such decisions, micro level decisions may lead to inequities and undesirable treatment variation between clinicians and hospitals. The challenge is to find instruments that can balance both levels of decision making. DISCUSSION: Clinicians are becoming increasingly aware that their decisions to spend more resources (like time and budget) on 1 particular patient group reduce the resources available to other patients. Involving clinicians in thinking about the optimal use of limited resources, also in an attempt to bridge the world of economic reasoning and clinical practice, is crucial therefore. We argue that clinical guidelines may prove a clear vehicle for this by including both clinical and economic evidence to support the recommendations made. The development of such guidelines requires cooperation of clinicians, and health economists are cooperating with each other. CONCLUSION: The development of clinical guidelines which combine economic and clinical evidence should be stimulated, to balance central guidance and uniformity while maintaining necessary decentralized freedom. This is an opportunity to combine the reality of budgets and opportunity costs with clinical practice. Missing this opportunity risks either variation and inequity or central and necessarily crude measures.

Ethics of Burn Wound Care in a Low-Middle Income Country.

This review focuses on burn care in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). It attempts to put the burden of disease in perspective by showing that burn care is under-resourced across the spectrum of LMICs and by interrogating the ethical dilemmas and challenges that staff face in caring for burn patients in this environment, with a focus on South Africa. More specifically, it will attempt to address the following issues: the threshold for utilizing the intensive care unit (ICU), how to balance treatment against cost, the percentage burn considered survivable and how it should be determined, the use of skin from both cadavers and living related donors, and the appropriate ethical guidelines for LMICs.

Ethics and the cardiac pacemaker: more than just end-of-life issues.

For many years, ethical debate about pacemakers has focused on whether and under what circumstances they may be turned off in end of life care. Several other important ethical issues have been neglected, perhaps because the dilemmas they pose for cardiologists are not so immediate. These include: potential conflicts of interest, particularly those arising from the role of industry employed allied professionals (IEAPs) in pacemaker care; unanticipated impacts of commercial competition and the device improvement cycle; risks associated with remotely accessible software; equity in access to healthcare; and questions about reuse of explanted pacemakers in low and middle income countries. This paper analyses these issues in order to facilitate a more comprehensive approach to ethics and the cardiac pacemaker. Cardiologists should be aware of all of these issues and contribute to ongoing discussions about how they are resolved.