Physician frontline treatment preferences for stage III/IV classic Hodgkin lymphoma: the real-world US CONNECT study.

Aim: To understand US physicians' frontline (1L) treatment preferences/decision-making for stage III/IV classic Hodgkin lymphoma (cHL). Materials & methods: Medical oncologists and/or hematologists (≥2 years' practice experience) who treat adults with stage III/IV cHL were surveyed online (October-November 2020). Results: Participants (n = 301) most commonly considered trial efficacy/safety data and national guidelines when selecting 1L cHL treatments. Most physicians (91%) rated overall survival (OS) as the most essential attribute when selecting 1L treatment. Variability was seen among regimen selection for hypothetical newly diagnosed patients, with OS cited as the most common reason for regimen selection. Conclusion: While treatment selection varied based on patient characteristics, US physicians consistently cited OS as the top factor considered when selecting a 1L treatment for cHL.

Classic Hodgkin lymphoma (cHL) is a type of cancer that grows in lymph nodes. The researchers created a survey to assess how doctors in the USA choose medicine to treat patients who are newly diagnosed with an advanced stage of cHL (stage 3 or 4 out of 4 stages). We surveyed 301 doctors who treat patients with cHL. When choosing a medicine to treat cHL, most doctors said they consider results from research studies, how well the medicine works, information on the medicine's safety and recommendations in official guidelines. Most doctors said that overall survival (how long the patient survives after being diagnosed with cHL) is the most important outcome they consider when choosing a medicine to treat cHL. During the survey, doctors saw four unique patient profiles. These profiles differed in age, disease stage (how far along the cHL is) and other illnesses the patient has. While medicine choice was different across profiles, overall survival was still the reason for choosing each individual patient's medicine. These survey results show that doctors in the USA highly consider overall survival when choosing medicine for patients newly diagnosed with an advanced stage of cHL.

Clinical decision-making processes among graduate nurses, specialist nurses and nurse practitioners A collaborative international study.

AIM: To explore clinical decision-making by comparing the processes used by three groups of nurses in the emergency departments of three hospitals: in Norway, Finland and Ireland. BACKGROUND: Clinical decision-making in an emergency department environment is a complex process often occurring in times of crisis. It is an important aspect contributing to the quality of care. However, empirical research is limited regarding the decision-making process in different nursing roles. METHODS: In accordance with the consolidated criteria for reporting qualitative research, a qualitative and observational study was conducted to explore clinical decision-making by comparing the processes used by three groups of nurses in the emergency departments of three hospitals: in Norway, Finland and Ireland. Six Registered Nurses, six Nurse Specialists and six Nurse Practitioners were observed. A total of 40 hours of observation was made at each setting according to a structured observation guideline, followed by clarifying questions. The data material was analysed by means of a qualitative manifest and latent content analysis. RESULTS: Three themes arose: acting in accordance with routines, previous experience and intuition; considering patient experience; and facilitating new alternatives based on critical thinking. The Registered Nurses mainly used the first approach, the Nurse Specialists used the first and the second approaches, and the Nurse Practitioners used all three approaches. CONCLUSIONS: The results highlight the differences in decision-making processes between these groups. Nurse Practitioners were the only group that facilitated and evaluated new alternatives using their clinical autonomy, such as stepping up and making independent and collaborative decision-making. IMPLICATION: The results can be used in countries developing advanced practice nursing education and defining their scope of practice to inform stakeholders.

Nurses' decision-making around gastric residual volume measurement in UK adult intensive care: A four-centre survey.

BACKGROUND: Despite increasing evidence of the potential inaccuracy and unwarranted practice of regular GRV measurement in critically in adults, this practice persists within the United Kingdom. AIM: To explore adult intensive care nurses' decision-making around the practice of GRV measurement to guide enteral feeding. STUDY DESIGN: A cross-sectional 16 item electronic survey in four adult intensive care units (ICUs) in England and Wales. RESULTS: Two hundred and seventy-three responses were obtained across four ICUs with acceptable response rates for most [Unit 1 74 /127 = 58.2%; Unit 2 87/129 = 67.4%; Unit 3 77/120 = 64.1%; Unit 4 35/168 = 20.8%]. Most (243/273 (89%) reported measuring GRV 4-6 hourly, with most (223/273 82%) reporting that the main reason was to assess feed tolerance or intolerance and 37/273 (13.5%) saying their unit protocol required it. In terms of factors affecting decision-making, volume obtained was the most important factor, followed by the condition of the patient, with aspirate colour and appearance less important. When asked how they would feel about not measuring GRV routinely, the majority (78.2%) of nurses felt worried (140/273 = 51.2%) or very worried (74/273 = 27%). CONCLUSIONS: Factors affecting the nurses' decision-making around GRV were based largely on fear of risk (around vomiting and pulmonary aspiration) and compliance with unit protocols. RELEVANCE TO CLINICAL PRACTICE: Despite increasing evidence suggesting it is unnecessary, nurses' beliefs around the value of this practice persist and it continues to be embedded into unit protocols around feeding.

[Critical care nurses' decision-making regarding verification of blindly inserted gastric tubes: A cross-sectional questionnaire study]. / Entscheidungsfindung von Intensivpflegefachpersonen zur Verifikation blind applizierter Magensonden.

Critical care nurses' decision-making regarding verification of blindly inserted gastric tubes: A cross-sectional questionnaire study Abstract: Background: The placement and verification of the correct position of blindly applied gastric tubes is regularly performed by nurses in clinical practice. International guidelines recommend a radiological verification as a "first-line" method or if pH measurement is not possible. For Germany, neither evidence-based recommendations nor current data are available. Question: Which methods are used by nurses in German intensive care units for verification of the correct position of blindly applied gastric tubes and how do they assess the reliability of different methods? Methods: Multicenter questionnaire survey. Intensive care units in a non-probability, citeria-based sampling of hospitals in and around Cologne, Germany were included. One nurse was included per participating ward. Analyses were mostly descriptive. Results: In 22 hospitals, 38 wards agreed to participate and 32 (84%) responded to the survey. Auscultation of the upper abdomen with simultaneous air insufflation and aspiration of gastric secretions are frequently used methods for determining the position of gastric tubes. Participants consider auscultation, aspiration of gastric secretions, and radiological control as reliable methods. Conclusions: The findings are in contrast to international recommendations and support the need for evidence-based best practice recommendations and training. Likewise, there is a need for research on feasible bedside methods.

Physicians, know thy patient.

Person-centered care is presently the standard healthcare model, which emphases shared clinical decision-making, patient autonomy and empowerment. However, many aspects of the modern-day clinical practice such as the increased reliance on medical technologies, artificial intelligence, and teleconsultation have significantly altered the quality of patient-physician communications. Moreover, many countries are facing an aging population with longer life expectancies but increasingly complex medical comorbidities, which, coupled with medical subspecialization and competing health systems, often lead to fragmentation of clinical care. In this article, I discuss what it truly means for a clinician to know a patient, which is, in fact, a highly intricate skill that is necessary to meet the high bar of person-centered care. I suggest that this can be achieved through the implementation of a holistic biopsychosocial model of clinical consultation at the physician level and fostering coordinated and continuity of care at the health systems level.

Exploring the role of personality, perfectionism, and self-compassion on the relationship between clinical decision-making and nurses' wellbeing.

BACKGROUND: Clinical decision-making is a core competency of the nursing role, with nurses having to make decisions surrounding patient care and patient safety daily. With decision-making being linked to psychological outcomes, it is important to consider potential areas that may support or hinder nurses' wellbeing whilst navigating clinical decisions. AIM: The present study sought to investigate the relationship between clinical decision-making and moral distress, and further explore the role of personality, perfectionism, philotimo (a virtue describing the desire to do right by oneself and others, aligning with one's sense of morality), and self-compassion. DESIGN: An online cross-sectional survey was conducted using Qualtrics. Associations between clinical decision-making and moral distress, burnout, personality, perfectionism, philotimo, and self-compassion were examined using univariate and multivariate statistics. METHODS: One hundred and forty-three nurses from the United Kingdom completed an online questionnaire. Eligibility criteria included individuals who had practised in the nursing profession for a minimum of six months. To ensure that all participants were practising across the United Kingdom, the eligibility criteria was made clear in the study advertisement, and the consent form. The consent form required participants to confirm that they reached these criteria to proceed with the study. RESULTS: Results revealed that clinical decision-making was associated with moral distress experience, and that both openness to experience, and philotimo mediated this relationship, independently. In addition to this, self-compassion was significantly associated with clinical decision-making across senior banded nursing roles, but this was non-significant for junior banded nursing roles. CONCLUSION: Findings highlight the role of individual differences when looking at the impact of clinical decision-making upon nurses' wellbeing and offers explanation for any variance in moral distress experience across nursing professionals. This research identifies fundamental differences between junior and senior nurses in relation to clinical decision-making and self-compassion that should be considered in future research.

The Impact of Patient Race, Patient Socioeconomic Status, and Cognitive Load of Physician Residents and Fellows on Chronic Pain Care Decisions.

Social stereotypes are more likely to influence decision-making under conditions of high cognitive load (ie, mental workload), such as in medical settings. We examined how patient race, patient socioeconomic status (SES), physician cognitive load, and physician implicit beliefs about race and SES differences in pain tolerance impacted physicians' pain treatment decisions. Physician residents and fellows (N = 120) made treatment decisions for 12 computer-simulated patients with back pain that varied by race (Black/White) and SES (low/high). Half of the physicians were randomized to be interrupted during the decision task to make hypertension medication conversion calculations (high cognitive load group), while the other half completed the task without interruptions (low cognitive load group). Both groups were given equal time to make pain care decisions (2.5 minutes/patient). Results of multilevel ordinal logistic regression analyses indicated that physicians prescribed weaker analgesics to patients with high vs. low SES (odds ratio = .68, 95% confidence interval [.48, .97], P = .03). There was also a patient SES-by-cognitive load interaction (odds ratio = .56, 95% confidence interval [.31, 1.01], P = .05) that is theoretically and potentially practically meaningful but was not statistically significant at P < .05. These findings shed light on physician cognitive load as a clinically-relevant factor in the context of pain care quality and equity. PERSPECTIVE: These findings highlight the clinical relevance of physician cognitive load (eg, mental workload) when providing pain care for diverse patients. This line of work can support the development of interventions to manage physician cognitive load and its impact on pain care, which may ultimately help reduce pain disparities.

"Postponing it Any Later Would not be so Great": A Cognitive Interview Study of How Physicians Decide to Initiate Goals of Care Discussions in the Hospital.

BACKGROUND: There are missed opportunities to discuss goals and preferences for care with seriously ill patients in the acute care setting. It is unknown which factors most influence clinician decision-making about communication at the point of care. OBJECTIVE: This study utilized a cognitive-interviewing technique to better understand what leads clinicians to decide to have a goals of care (GOC) discussion in the acute care setting. METHODS: A convenience sample of 15 oncologists, intensivists and hospitalists were recruited from a single academic medical center in a large urban area. Participants completed a cognitive interview describing their thought process when deciding whether to engage in GOC discussions in clinical vignettes. RESULTS: 6 interconnected factors emerged as important in determining how likely the physician was to consider engaging in GOC at that time; (1) the participants' mental model of GOC, (2) timing of GOC related to stability, acuity and reversibility of the patient's condition, (3) clinical factors such as uncertainty, prognosis and recency of diagnosis, (4) patient factors including age and emotional state, (5) participants' role on the care team, and (6) clinician factors such as emotion and communication skill level. CONCLUSION: Participants were hesitant to commit to the present moment as the right time for GOC discussions based on variations in clinical presentation. Clinical decision support systems that include more targeted information about risk of clinical deterioration and likelihood of reversal of the acute condition may prompt physicians to discuss GOC, but more support for managing discomfort with uncertainty is also needed.

How to incorporate chronic health conditions in oncologic decision-making and care for older patients with cancer? A survey among healthcare professionals.

PURPOSE: A substantial proportion of patients with cancer are older and experience multimorbidity. As the population is ageing, the management of older patients with multimorbidity including cancer will represent a significant challenge to current clinical practice. METHODS: This study aimed to (1) identify which chronic health conditions may cause change in oncologic decision-making and care in older patients and (2) provide guidance on how to incorporate these in decision-making and care provision of older patients with cancer. Based on a scoping literature review, an initial list of prevalent morbidities was developed. A subsequent survey among healthcare providers involved in the care for older patients with cancer assessed which chronic health conditions were relevant and why. RESULTS: A list of 53 chronic health conditions was developed, of which 34 were considered likely or very likely to influence decision-making or care according to the 39 healthcare professionals who responded. These conditions were further categorized into five patient profiles. From these conditions, five patient profiles were developed, namely, (1) a somatic profile consisting of cardiovascular, metabolic, and pulmonary disease, (2) a functional profile, including conditions that cause disability, dependency or a high caregiver burden, (3) a psychosocial profile, including cognitive impairment, (4) a nutritional profile also including digestive system diseases, and finally, (5) a concurrent cancer profile. All profiles were considered likely to impact decision-making with differences between treatment modalities. The impact on the care trajectory was generally considered less significant, except for patients with care dependency and psychosocial health problems. CONCLUSIONS: Chronic health conditions have various ways of influencing oncologic decision-making and the care trajectory in older adults with cancer. Understanding why specific chronic health conditions may impact the oncologic care trajectory can aid clinicians in the management of older patients with multimorbidity, including cancer.

Clinical reasoning in nursing: teaching strategies and assessment tools / Razonamiento clínico de la enfermería: estrategias de la enseñanza e instrumentos de evaluación / Raciocínio clínico em enfermagem: estratégias de ensino e instrumentos de avaliação

ABSTRACT Objective: To present the concept and development of teaching strategies and the assessment tools regarding clinical reasoning for accurate practice. Method: This is a theoretical reflection based on scientific studies. Results: Comprehension of the essential concepts of the thought process and its articulation with the different teaching strategies and the assessment tools which has allowed presenting ways to improve the process of diagnostic or therapeutic clinical reasoning. Conclusion: The use of new strategies and assessment tools should be encouraged in order to contribute to the development of skills that lead to safe and effective decision making.

RESUMEN Objetivo: Presentar el concepto de razonamiento clínico, su desarrollo, las estrategias para su enseñanza y los instrumentos de evaluación para una práctica esmerada. Método: Se trata de una reflexión teórica fundamentada en estudios científicos. Resultados: La comprensión de los conceptos esenciales del proceso de pensamiento y su articulación con diferentes estrategias de enseñanza y con diversos instrumentos de evaluación, permitió ejemplificar medios para la mejoría del razonamiento clínico en el proceso del diagnóstico o en el terapéutico. Conclusión: Es necesario valerse de estrategias nuevas y de instrumentos de evaluación para estimular el desarrollo de habilidades que lleven a la toma de decisiones seguras y eficaces.

RESUMO Objetivo: Apresentar o conceito de raciocínio clínico, seu desenvolvimento, as estratégias para seu ensino e os instrumentos de avaliação para uma prática acurada. Método: Trata-se de uma reflexão teórica fundamentada em estudos científicos. Resultados: A compreensão dos conceitos essenciais do processo de pensamento e sua articulação com as diferentes estratégias de ensino e com os instrumentos de avaliação permitiram exemplificar meios de aprimorar o processo de raciocínio clínico diagnóstico ou terapêutico. Conclusão: A utilização de novas estratégias e instrumentos de avaliação deve ser estimulado para contribuir com o desenvolvimento das habilidades que culminam na tomada de decisão segura e eficaz.