Patient activation reduces effects of implicit bias on doctor-patient interactions.

Disparities between Black and White Americans persist in medical treatment and health outcomes. One reason is that physicians sometimes hold implicit racial biases that favor White (over Black) patients. Thus, disrupting the effects of physicians' implicit bias is one route to promoting equitable health outcomes. In the present research, we tested a potential mechanism to short-circuit the effects of doctors' implicit bias: patient activation, i.e., having patients ask questions and advocate for themselves. Specifically, we trained Black and White standardized patients (SPs) to be "activated" or "typical" during appointments with unsuspecting oncologists and primary care physicians in which SPs claimed to have stage IV lung cancer. Supporting the idea that patient activation can promote equitable doctor-patient interactions, results showed that physicians' implicit racial bias (as measured by an implicit association test) predicted racially biased interpersonal treatment among typical SPs (but not among activated SPs) across SP ratings of interaction quality and ratings from independent coders who read the interaction transcripts. This research supports prior work showing that implicit attitudes can undermine interpersonal treatment in medical settings and provides a strategy for ensuring equitable doctor-patient interactions.

Attitudes toward the American Cancer Society's 2020 cervical cancer screening guidelines: A qualitative study of a national sample of US clinicians.

BACKGROUND: The 2020 American Cancer Society (ACS) guidelines are the most recent national guidelines for cervical cancer screening. These guidelines propose two major changes from current practice: initiating screening at age 25 years and using primary human papillomavirus (HPV) testing. Adoption of guidelines often occurs slowly, and therefore understanding clinician attitudes is important to facilitate practice change. METHODS: Interviews with a national sample of clinicians who perform cervical cancer screening in a variety of settings explored attitudes toward the two major changes from the 2020 ACS cervical cancer screening guidelines. Clinicians participated in 30- to 60-min interviews exploring their attitudes toward various aspects of cervical cancer screening. Qualitative analysis was performed. RESULTS: Seventy clinicians participated from across the United States. Few respondents were initiating screening at age 25 years, and none were using primary HPV testing. However, over half would be willing to adopt these practices if supported by scientific evidence and recommended by professional medical organizations. Barriers to adoption included the lack of endorsement by professional societies, lack of laboratory availability and insurance coverage, limited autonomy within large health care systems, and concerns related to missed disease. CONCLUSIONS: Few clinicians have adopted screening initiation or primary HPV testing, as recommended by the 2020 ACS guidelines, but over half were open to adopting these changes. Implementation may be facilitated via professional organization endorsement, clinician education, and laboratory, health care system, and insurance support. PLAIN LANGUAGE SUMMARY: In 2020, the American Cancer Society (ACS) released updated guidelines for cervical cancer screening. The main changes to current practices were to initiate screening at age 25 years instead of age 21 years and to screen using primary human papillomavirus (HPV) testing rather than cytology alone or in combination with HPV testing. We performed in-depth interviews with 70 obstetrics and gynecology, family medicine, and internal medicine physicians and advanced practice providers about their attitudes toward these guidelines. Few clinicians are following the 2020 ACS guidelines, but over half were open to changing practice if the changes were supported by evidence and recommended by professional medical organizations. Barriers to adoption included the lack of endorsement by professional medical organizations, logistical issues, and concerns about missed disease.

Barriers and Facilitators to End-of-Life Care Delivery in ICUs: A Qualitative Study.

OBJECTIVES: To understand frontline ICU clinician's perceptions of end-of-life care delivery in the ICU. DESIGN: Qualitative observational cross-sectional study. SETTING: Seven ICUs across three hospitals in an integrated academic health system. SUBJECTS: ICU clinicians (physicians [critical care, palliative care], advanced practice providers, nurses, social workers, chaplains). INTERVENTIONS: None. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: In total, 27 semi-structured interviews were conducted, recorded, and transcribed. The research team reviewed all transcripts inductively to develop a codebook. Thematic analysis was conducted through coding, category formulation, and sorting for data reduction to identify central themes. Deductive reasoning facilitated data category formulation and thematic structuring anchored on the Systems Engineering Initiative for Patient Safety model identified that work systems (people, environment, tools, tasks) lead to processes and outcomes. Four themes were barriers or facilitators to end-of-life care. First, work system barriers delayed end-of-life care communication among clinicians as well as between clinicians and families. For example, over-reliance on palliative care people in handling end-of-life discussions prevented timely end-of-life care discussions with families. Second, clinician-level variability existed in end-of-life communication tasks. For example, end-of-life care discussions varied greatly in process and outcomes depending on the clinician leading the conversation. Third, clinician-family-patient priorities or treatment goals were misaligned. Conversely, regular discussion and joint decisions facilitated higher familial confidence in end-of-life care delivery process. These detailed discussions between care teams aligned priorities and led to fewer situations where patients/families received conflicting information. Fourth, clinician moral distress occurred from providing nonbeneficial care. Interviewees reported standardized end-of-life care discussion process incorporated by the people in the work system including patient, family, and clinicians were foundational to delivering end-of-life care that reduced both patient and family suffering, as well as clinician moral distress. CONCLUSIONS: Standardized work system communication tasks may improve end-of life discussion processes between clinicians and families.

Caregivers' and providers' perspectives of social and medical care after pediatric liver transplant: Results from the multicenter SOCIAL-Tx study.

Disparities exist in pediatric liver transplant (LT). We characterized barriers and facilitators to providing transplant and social care within pediatric LT clinics. This was a multicenter qualitative study. We oversampled caregivers reporting household financial strain, material economic hardship, or demonstrating poor health literacy. We also enrolled transplant team members. We conducted semistructured interviews with participants. Caregiver interviews focused on challenges addressing transplant and household needs. Transplant provider interviews focused on barriers and facilitators to providing social care within transplant teams. Interviews were recorded, transcribed, and coded according to the Capability, Opportunity, Motivation-Behavior model. We interviewed 27 caregivers and 27 transplant team members. Fifty-two percent of caregivers reported a household income <$60,000, and 62% reported financial resource strain. Caregivers reported experiencing (1) high financial burdens after LT, (2) added caregiving labor that compounds the financial burden, (3) dependency on their social network's generosity for financial and logistical support, and (4) additional support being limited to the perioperative period. Transplant providers reported (1) relying on the pretransplant psychosocial assessment for identifying social risks, (2) discomfort initiating social risk discussions in the post-transplant period, (3) reliance on social workers to address new social risks, and (4) social workers feeling overburdened by quantity and quality of the social work referrals. We identified barriers to providing effective social care in pediatric LT, primarily a lack of comfort in assessing and addressing new social risks in the post-transplant period. Addressing these barriers should enhance social care delivery and improve outcomes for these children.

Genetics providers' perspectives on the use of digital tools in clinical practice.

PURPOSE: Digital tools are increasingly incorporated into genetics practice to address challenges with the current model of care. Yet, genetics providers' perspectives on digital tool use are not well characterized. METHODS: Genetics providers across Canada were recruited. Semistructured interviews were conducted to ascertain their perspectives on digital tool use and the clinical practice factors that might inform digital tool integration. A qualitative interpretive description approach was used for analysis. RESULTS: Thirty-three genetics providers across 5 provinces were interviewed. Participants had favorable attitudes toward digital tool use. They were open to using digital tools in the pretest phase of the genetic testing pathway and for some posttest tasks or in a hybrid model of care. Participants expressed that digital tools could enhance efficiency and allow providers to spend more time practicing at the top of scope. Providers also described the need for careful consideration of the potential impact of digitalization on the clinician-patient dynamic, access to and equity of care, and unintended digital burden on providers. CONCLUSION: Genetics providers considered digital tools to represent a viable solution for improving access, efficiency, and quality of care in genetics practice. Successful use of digital tools in practice will require careful consideration of their potential unintended impacts.

A Pilot Survey on the Perceptions of Pediatric Subspecialty Fellows and Program Directors on Virtual Compared with In-Person Interview Experiences.

Pediatric fellowship programs have conducted virtual interviews since the start of the COVID-19 pandemic in 2020. In this national survey of fellowship program directors and fellows interviewed in-person and virtually, fellowship program directors and fellows formed accurate impressions, regardless of format, but our data did not clearly support one interview format over another.

Patient decision-making in the era of transcarotid artery revascularization.

OBJECTIVE: The National Coverage Determination on carotid stenting by Medicare in October 2023 stipulates that patients participate in a shared decision-making (SDM) conversation with their proceduralist before an intervention. However, to date, there is no validated SDM tool that incorporates transcarotid artery revascularization (TCAR) into its decision platform. Our objective was to elicit patient and surgeon experiences and preferences through a qualitative approach to better inform the SDM process surrounding carotid revascularization. METHODS: We performed longitudinal perioperative semistructured interviews of 20 participants using purposive maximum variation sampling, a qualitative technique designed for identification and selection of information-rich cases, to define domains important to participants undergoing carotid endarterectomy or TCAR and impressions of SDM. We also performed interviews with nine vascular surgeons to elicit their input on the SDM process surrounding carotid revascularization. Interview data were coded and analyzed using inductive content analysis coding. RESULTS: We identified three important domains that contribute to the participants' ultimate decision on which procedure to choose: their individual values, their understanding of the disease and each procedure, and how they prefer to make medical decisions. Participant values included themes such as success rates, "wanting to feel better," and the proceduralist's experience. Participants varied in their desired degree of understanding of carotid disease, but all individuals wished to discuss each option with their proceduralist. Participants' desired medical decision-making style varied on a spectrum from complete autonomy to wanting the proceduralist to make the decision for them. Participants who preferred carotid endarterectomy felt outcomes were superior to TCAR and often expressed a desire to eliminate the carotid plaque. Those selecting TCAR felt it was a newer, less invasive option with the shortest procedural and recovery times. Surgeons frequently noted patient factors such as age and anatomy, as well as the availability of long-term data, as reasons to preferentially select one procedure. For most participants, their surgeon was viewed as the most important source of information surrounding their disease and procedure. CONCLUSIONS: SDM surrounding carotid revascularization is nuanced and marked by variation in patient preferences surrounding autonomy when choosing treatment. Given the mandate by Medicare to participate in a SDM interaction before carotid stenting, this analysis offers critical insights that can help to guide an efficient and effective dialog between patients and providers to arrive at a shared decision surrounding therapeutic intervention for patients with carotid disease.

Radiation Oncologists' Views on Adjuvant Radiotherapy for Early-Stage Breast Cancer in the Elderly: Comparisons between Japan and the United States.

PURPOSE: To understand perspective on breast cancer using a survey. MATERIALS & METHODS: Questionnaire was distributed to 304 Japanese radiation oncologists (RadOncs) (response rate: 64.1%). Result was compared with a similar US survey. RESULTS: In a scenario with an 81-year-old patient with comorbidities, while most US RadOncs chose to tell that radiation might not be necessary, 2% of Japanese chose it. In a scenario with a healthy 65-year-old breast cancer patient with lumpectomy, while most US RadOncs chose to discuss omission of radiation, 24.5% of Japanese chose it. CONCLUSIONS: Differences were observed on radiotherapy for older early-stage breast cancer.

The Patient-Physician Relationship: Medical Students' Perceptions in a Novel Course.

The patient-physician relationship, especially in the case of severely ill patients, is often fraught with anxiety, grief, and guilt in the physician who may come to feel that he or she has failed the patient and thereby becomes a "second victim." This notion was first explored in a 1973 publication (Artiss and Levine N Engl J Med 288(23):1210-4, 1973) that described a novel interactive seminar series for oncology fellows that had been designed to address and possibly remedy the frequent disquiet experienced by young physicians in this setting. Fifty years later, the medical student co-authors of this Perspective enrolled in an elective course that comprised a similar series of interactive seminars, now addressing the contemporary patient-physician relationship. The earlier paper was employed as a historical background, and the framework of the course then broadened such that the students considered the current environmental changes in medical practice (social, cultural, financial, legal, policy) that may be linked to the character of individual patient-physician relationships. This essay reports on the students' perception of such relationships, and on the environmental elements that may be helpful or harmful to the well-being of both patients and physicians.

Empathy Among Physicians and Nurses in Japan: A Nationwide Cross-sectional Study.

BACKGROUND: Empathy with patients improves clinical outcomes. Although previous studies have shown no significant differences in empathy levels between physicians and nurses, investigations have not considered differences in cultural backgrounds and related factors of healthcare providers at the individual level. OBJECTIVE: This study compares empathy between physicians and nurses in Japan and identifies relevant factors that contribute to these differences. DESIGN: A cross-sectional survey design was used in the study. The online survey was conducted using the Nikkei Medical Online website. PARTICIPANTS: A total of 5441 physicians and 965 nurses in Japan who were registered as members of Nikkei Medical Online were included. MAIN MEASURES: Empathy was measured by the Jefferson Scale of Empathy (JSE). KEY RESULTS: Cronbach's α was 0.89. The mean JSE score for Japanese physicians was significantly lower at 100.05 (SD = 15.75) than the mean score of 110.63 (SD = 12.25) for nurses (p<0.001). In related factors, higher age (increasing by one year) (+0.29; 95% CI 0.25 to 0.32; p<0.001), self-identified female gender (+5.45; 95% CI 4.40 to 6.49; p<0.001), having children (+1.20; 95% CI 0.30 to 2.10; p=0.009), and working at a hospital with 20-99 beds (+1.73; 95% CI 0.03 to 3.43; p=0.046) were significantly associated with higher scores, whereas those whose mother is a physician (-6.65; 95% CI -8.82 to -4.47; p<0.001) and father is a nurse (-9.53; 95% CI -16.54 to -2.52; p=0.008) or co-medical professional (-3.85; 95% CI -5.49 to -2.21; p<0.001) were significantly associated with lower scores. CONCLUSIONS: Physicians had significantly lower scores on the JSE than nurses in Japan. Higher age, self-identified female gender, having children, working at a small hospital, having a mother who is a physician, and having a father who is a nurse or co-medical professional were factors associated with the level of empathy.

Differences in influencing mechanism of clinicians' adoption behavior for liver cancer screening technology between the leading and subordinate hospitals within medical consortiums.

BACKGROUND: Medical consortiums have been extensively established to facilitate the integration of health resources and bridge the technical gap among member institutions. However, some commonly appropriate technologies remain stagnant in subordinate hospitals, although they have been routinely applied in leading hospitals. Besides, the mechanism underlying differences in clinicians' adoption behavior at different levels of institutions was unknown. Therefore, this study aimed to investigate the differences in influencing mechanisms of clinicians' hepatic contrast-enhanced ultrasound technology (CEUS) utilization behavior between leading and subordinate hospitals within medical consortiums, thus providing clues for expanding effective and appropriate technologies within integrated care systems. METHODS: A self-designed scale was developed based on the theory of planned behavior (TPB). A multistage sampling method was applied to investigate clinicians who were aware of CEUS and worked in liver disease-related departments within the sampled medical institutions. The final sample size was 289. AMOS 24.0 software was used to construct multi-group structural equation modeling (SEM) to validate the hypotheses and determine the mechanism of hepatic CEUS utilization. RESULTS: It revealed that behavioral intention significantly influenced adoption behavior, regardless of whether it was in leading hospitals or subordinate hospitals (ß = 0.283, p < 0.001). Furthermore, behavioral attitude (ß = 0.361, p < 0.001) and perceived behavioral control (ß = 0.582, p < 0.001) exerted significant effects on adoption behavior through behavioral intention. However, in leading hospitals, subjective norm had a significant positive effect on behavioral intention (ß = 0.183, p < 0.01), while it had a significant negative impact on behavioral intention in the subordinate hospitals (ß = -0.348, p < 0.01). CONCLUSION: To effectively translate the adoption intention into actual behavior, it is recommended to elucidate the demand and facilitators involved in the process of health technology adoption across leading and subordinate hospitals. Additionally, bolstering technical support and knowledge dissemination within subordinate hospitals while harnessing the influential role of key individuals can further enhance this transformative process.

Dissonance in the face of Alzheimer's disease breakthroughs: clinician and lay stakeholder acceptance, concerns and willingness to pay for emerging disease-modifying therapies.

BACKGROUND: Introducing new disease-modifying therapies (DMTs) for Alzheimer's disease demands a fundamental shift in diagnosis and care for most health systems around the world. Understanding the views of health professionals, potential patients, care partners and taxpayers is crucial for service planning and expectation management about these new therapies. AIMS: To investigate the public's and professionals' perspectives regarding (1) acceptability of new DMTs for Alzheimer's disease; (2) perceptions of risk/benefits; (3) the public's willingness to pay (WTP). METHOD: Informed by the 'theoretical framework of acceptability', we conducted two online surveys with 1000 members of the general public and 77 health professionals in Ireland. Descriptive and multivariate regression analyses examined factors associated with DMT acceptance and WTP. RESULTS: Healthcare professionals had a higher acceptance (65%) than the general public (48%). Professionals were more concerned about potential brain bleeds (70%) and efficacy (68%), while the public focused on accessibility and costs. Younger participants (18-24 years) displayed a higher WTP. Education and insurance affected WTP decisions. CONCLUSIONS: This study exposes complex attitudes toward emerging DMTs for Alzheimer's disease, challenging conventional wisdom in multiple dimensions. A surprising 25% of the public expressed aversion to these new treatments, despite society's deep-rooted fear of dementia in older age. Healthcare professionals displayed nuanced concerns, prioritising clinical effectiveness and potential brain complications. Intriguingly, younger, better-educated and privately insured individuals exhibited a greater WTP, foregrounding critical questions about healthcare equity. These multifaceted findings serve as a guidepost for healthcare strategists, policymakers and ethicists as we edge closer to integrating DMTs into Alzheimer's disease care.

Attitudes toward and experiences of clinical and non-clinical services among individuals who self-harm or attempt suicide: a systematic review.

The prevalence of self-harm has increased substantially in recent decades. Despite the development of guidelines for better management and prevention of self-harm, service users report that quality of care remains variable. A previous systematic review of research published to June 2006 documented largely negative experiences of clinical services among patients who self-harm. This systematic review summarized the literature published since then to July 2022 to examine contemporary attitudes toward and experience of clinical and non-clinical services among individuals who self-harm and their relatives. We systematically searched for literature using seven databases. Quality of studies was assessed using the Mixed-Methods Appraisal Tool and findings were summarized using a narrative synthesis. We identified 29 studies that met our inclusion criteria, all of which were from high- or middle-income countries and were generally of high methodological quality. Our narrative synthesis identified negative attitudes toward clinical management and organizational barriers across services. Generally, more positive attitudes were found toward non-clinical services providing therapeutic contact, such as voluntary sector organizations and social services, than clinical services, such as emergency departments and inpatient units. Views suggested that negative experiences of service provision may perpetuate a cycle of self-harm. Our review suggests that in recent years there has been little improvement in attitudes toward and experiences of services for patients who self-harm. These findings should be used to reform clinical guidelines and staff training across clinical services to promote patient-centered and compassionate care and deliver more effective, acceptable and accessible services.

A qualitative study of the perceptions and experiences of participants and healthcare professionals in the DiRECT-Australia type 2 diabetes remission service.

BACKGROUND: The UK Diabetes Remission Clinical Trial (DiRECT) study was replicated in an Australian primary care setting. This qualitative study aimed to explore and understand the perceptions and experiences of both participants and healthcare professionals (HCPs) involved in the DiRECT-Australia Type 2 Diabetes Remission Service. METHODS: All participants and HCPs delivering the service were invited to participate in semi-structured interviews via online videoconferencing. The interview guides explored perceptions and experiences in DiRECT-Australia, covering aspects such as barriers and facilitators to recruitment and participation, motivations and challenges across service phases, adequacy of support provided and the overall acceptability of the service. All interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed verbatim and analysed using thematic analysis. RESULTS: Eight DiRECT-Australia participants and six HCPs (three general practitioners, two practice nurses and one dietitian) participated. Four overarching themes were identified: (1) Enablers and barriers to recruitment and continuous participation in DiRECT-Australia; (2) Motivators and overcoming barriers across the total diet replacement, food reintroduction and weight maintenance phases; (3) Importance of participant-HCP interactions and continuous support; (4) Acceptance and long-term need for DiRECT-Australia. Adherence to total diet replacement was less challenging than anticipated by participants. Transitioning to the food reintroduction phase was difficult but overcome through HCP support. DiRECT-Australia was well accepted by both participants and HCPs, and participants expressed willingness to continue with the service, if provided on a long-term basis. CONCLUSIONS: Both participants and HCPs were highly interested in the new diabetes remission service set up in an Australian primary care setting. The acceptability of DiRECT-Australia was underscored by participants emphasising the effectiveness of the service in achieving significant weight loss and diabetes remission. There is a need for long-term and wider implementation of the service to ensure that anyone with recent onset type 2 diabetes is offered the best possible chance to achieve remission.

Perspectives and awareness of endoscopy healthcare professionals on sustainable practices in gastrointestinal endoscopy: results of the LEAFGREEN survey.

BACKGROUND: Gastrointestinal (GI) endoscopy is one of healthcare's main contributors to climate change. We aimed to assess healthcare professionals' attitudes and the perceived barriers to implementation of sustainable GI endoscopy. METHODS: The LEAFGREEN web-based survey was a cross-sectional study conducted by the European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) Green Endoscopy Working Group. The questionnaire comprised 39 questions divided into five sections (respondent demographics; climate change and sustainability beliefs; waste and resource management; single-use endoscopes and accessories; education and research). The survey was available via email to all active members of the ESGE and the European Society of Gastroenterology and Endoscopy Nurses and Associates (ESGENA) in March 2023. RESULTS: 407 respondents participated in the survey (11% response rate). Most participants (86%) agreed climate change is real and anthropogenic, but one-third did not consider GI endoscopy to be a significant contributor to climate change. Improvement in the appropriateness of endoscopic procedures (41%) and reduction in single-use accessories (34%) were considered the most important strategies to reduce the environmental impact of GI endoscopy. Respondents deemed lack of institutional support and knowledge from staff to be the main barriers to sustainable endoscopy. Strategies to reduce unnecessary GI endoscopic procedures and comparative studies of single-use versus reusable accessories were identified as research priorities. CONCLUSIONS: In this survey, ESGE and ESGENA members acknowledge climate change as a major threat to humanity. Further improvement in sustainability beliefs and professional attitudes, reduction in inappropriate GI endoscopy, and rational use of single-use accessories and endoscopes are critically required.

Electrodiagnostic reporting preferences of referring physicians: An exploratory survey.

INTRODUCTION/AIMS: Electrodiagnostic (EDX) studies play a crucial role in the evaluation of patients with peripheral nervous system disorders. Accurate and succinct communication of test results is critical to patient safety and clinical decision-making. The objective of this study was to explore EDX reporting preferences of referring physicians to improve quality of communication and patient care. METHODS: An online survey was developed, and a purposive sampling strategy was used to recruit physicians in the authors' professional networks. Quantitative and qualitative survey data underwent frequency and thematic analyses, respectively. RESULTS: There were 40 respondents, including: 21 non-surgical specialists, 12 surgical specialists, and 7 family physicians. Sections rated as most critical were diagnostic impression (97%) and summary/interpretation (72%). Only 18% reported numeric data as critical to their needs, preferring this data to be formatted as bullet points or tables without nerve conduction study waveforms. Regarding the format of the data summary and diagnostic impression sections, the majority of respondents preferred bullet points rather than paragraphs. DISCUSSION: The results of this exploratory survey suggest that physicians who refer patients for EDX studies prefer reports that emphasize the interpretation of EDX data and a clear diagnostic impression, particularly in bullet point format. This project highlights important preferences and how they compare to recommended reporting guidelines, which may help improve communication and ultimately patient care. Future efforts should explore larger sample sizes with all key stakeholders in the EDX process to better understand reporting styles and preferences with greater nuance and context.

Medicine in the marketplace: clinician and patient views on commercial influences on assisted reproductive technology.

RESEARCH QUESTION: What are the views and experiences of patient and expert stakeholders on the positive and negative impacts of commercial influences on the provision of assisted reproductive technology (ART) services, and what are their suggestions for governance reforms? DESIGN: Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 31 ART industry experts from across Australia and New Zealand and 25 patients undergoing ART from metropolitan and regional Australia, between September 2020 and September 2021. Data were analysed using thematic analysis. RESULTS: Expert and patient participants considered that commercial forces influence the provision of ART in a number of positive ways - increasing sustainability, ensuring consistency in standards and providing patients with greater choice. Participants also considered commercial forces to have a number of negative impacts, including increased costs to government and patients; the excessive use of interventions that lack sufficient evidence to be considered part of standard care; inadequately informed consent (particularly with regard to financial information); and threats to patient-provider relationships and patient-centred care. Participants varied in whether they believed that professional self-regulation is sufficient. While recognizing the benefits of commercial investment in healthcare, many considered that regulatory reforms, as well as organizational cultural initiatives, are needed as means to ensure the primacy of patient well-being. CONCLUSIONS: The views expressed in this study should be systematically and critically examined to derive insights into how best to govern ART. These insights may also inform the design and delivery of other types of healthcare that are provided in the private sector.

Obstetric violence is a misnomer.

The term "obstetric violence" has been used in the legislative language of several countries to protect mothers from abuse during pregnancy. Subsequently, it has been expanded to include a spectrum of obstetric procedures, such as induction of labor, episiotomy, and cesarean delivery, and has surfaced in the peer-reviewed literature. The term "obstetric violence" can be seen as quite strong and emotionally charged, which may lead to misunderstandings or misconceptions. It might be interpreted as implying a deliberate act of violence by healthcare providers when mistreatment can sometimes result from systemic issues, lack of training, or misunderstandings rather than intentional violence. "Obstetric mistreatment" is a more comprehensive term that can encompass a broader range of behaviors and actions. "Violence" generally refers to the intentional use of physical force to cause harm, injury, or damage to another person (eg, physical assault, domestic violence, street fights, or acts of terrorism), whereas "mistreatment" is a more general term and refers to the abuse, harm, or control exerted over another person (such as nonconsensual medical procedures, verbal abuse, disrespect, discrimination and stigmatization, or neglect, to name a few examples). There may be cases where unprofessional personnel may commit mistreatment and violence against pregnant patients, but as obstetrics is dedicated to the health and well-being of pregnant and fetal patients, mistreatment of obstetric patients should never be an intended component of professional obstetric care. It is necessary to move beyond the term "obstetric violence" in discourse and acknowledge and address the structural dimensions of abusive reproductive practices. Similarly, we do not use the term "psychiatric violence" for appropriately used professional procedures in psychiatry, such as electroshock therapy, or use the term "neurosurgical violence" when drilling a burr hole. There is an ongoing need to raise awareness about the potential mistreatment of obstetric patients within the context of abuse against women in general. Using the term "mistreatment in healthcare" instead of the more limited term "obstetric violence" is more appropriate and applies to all specialties when there is unprofessional abuse and mistreatment, such as biased care, neglect, emotional abuse (verbal), or physical abuse, including performing procedures that are unnecessary, unindicated, or without informed patient consent. Healthcare providers must promote unbiased, respectful, and patient-centered professional care; provide an ethical framework for all healthcare personnel; and work toward systemic change to prevent any mistreatment or abuse in our specialty.

Oncologists' psychological flourishing: A driving force for positive attitudes at work.

OBJECTIVE: Oncologists' psychological health is a major challenge due to the consequential concerning the quality of the care they provide. However, only critical states of their health have been really examined by scientists. This study sought to plug this gap by investigating the mediating role of psychological flourishing in the relationship between the perception of the professional social context (i.e., perceived workplace isolation and organizational support) and positive attitudes at work among oncologists (i.e., work engagement, task adjustment and empathy). METHODS: The study was a cross-sectional, including 541 French oncologists. Participants completed a self-report questionnaire. Structural Equation Modeling was employed to test the hypotheses. RESULTS: The analysis revealed that workplace isolation and organizational support perceptions were related to oncologists' work engagement, task adjustment and empathy. Additionally, psychological flourishing acted as a partial mediator between these perceptions of professional social context and oncologists' work-related attitudes. CONCLUSIONS: This research underlined the potential of enhancing the psychological flourishing of oncologists by improving organizational support and mitigating their sense of isolation, and in turn, to enhance some dimensions of their positive attitudes at work.