De-imFAR phase II project: a study protocol for a cluster randomised implementation trial to evaluate the effectiveness of de-implementation strategies to reduce low-value statin prescribing in the primary prevention of cardiovascular disease.

INTRODUCTION: This study aims to reduce potentially inappropriate prescribing (PIP) of statins and foster healthy lifestyle promotion in cardiovascular disease (CVD) primary prevention in low-risk patients. To this end, we will compare the effectiveness and feasibility of several de-implementation strategies developed following the structured design process of the Behaviour Change Wheel targeting key determinants of the clinical decision-making process in CVD prevention. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: A cluster randomised implementation trial, with an additional control group, will be launched, involving family physicians (FPs) from 13 Integrated Healthcare Organisations (IHOs) of Osakidetza-Basque Health Service with non-zero incidence rates of PIP of statins in 2021. All FPs will be exposed to a non-reflective decision assistance strategy based on reminders and decision support tools. Additionally, FPs from two of the IHOs will be randomly assigned to one of two increasingly intensive de-implementation strategies: adding a decision information strategy based on knowledge dissemination and a reflective decision structure strategy through audit/feedback. The target population comprises women aged 45-74 years and men aged 40-74 years with moderately elevated cholesterol levels but no diagnosed CVD and low cardiovascular risk (REGICOR<7.5%), who attend at least one appointment with any of the participating FPs (May 2022-May 2023), and will be followed until May 2024. We use the Reach, Effectiveness, Adoption, Implementation and Maintenance (RE-AIM) framework to evaluate outcomes. The main outcome will be the change in the incidence rate of PIP of statins and healthy lifestyle counselling in the study population 12 and 24 months after FPs' exposure to the strategies. Moreover, FPs' perception of their feasibility and acceptability, and patient experience regarding the quality of care received will be evaluated. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The study was approved by the Basque Country Clinical Research Ethics Committee and was registered in ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT04022850). Results will be disseminated in scientific peer-reviewed journals. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT04022850.

A qualitative evaluation of factors influencing Tumor Treating fields (TTFields) therapy decision making among brain tumor patients and physicians.

BACKGROUND: Tumor Treating Fields (TTFields) Therapy is an FDA-approved therapy in the first line and recurrent setting for glioblastoma. Despite Phase 3 evidence showing improved survival with TTFields, it is not uniformly utilized. We aimed to examine patient and clinician views of TTFields and factors shaping utilization of TTFields through a unique research partnership with medical neuro oncology and medical social sciences. METHODS: Adult glioblastoma patients who were offered TTFields at a tertiary care academic hospital were invited to participate in a semi-structured interview about their decision to use or not use TTFields. Clinicians who prescribe TTFields were invited to participate in a semi-structured interview about TTFields. RESULTS: Interviews were completed with 40 patients with a mean age of 53 years; 92.5% were white and 60% were male. Participants who decided against TTFields stated that head shaving, appearing sick, and inconvenience of wearing/carrying the device most influenced their decision. The most influential factors for use of TTFields were the efficacy of the device and their clinician's opinion. Clinicians (N = 9) stated that TTFields was a good option for glioblastoma patients, but some noted that their patients should consider the burdens and benefits of TTFields as it may not be the desired choice for all patients. CONCLUSIONS: This is the first study to examine patient decision making for TTFields. Findings suggest that clinician support and efficacy data are among the key decision-making factors. Properly understanding the path to patients' decision making is crucial in optimizing the use of TTFields and other therapeutic decisions for glioblastoma patients.

Study protocol for two stepped-wedge interventional trials evaluating the effects of holistic information technology-based patient-oriented management in older multimorbid patients with cancer: The GERONTE trials.

INTRODUCTION: Current hospital-based care pathways are generally single-disease centred. As a result, coexisting morbidities are often suboptimally evaluated and managed, a deficiency becoming increasingly apparent among older patients who exhibit heterogeneity in health status, functional abilities, frailty, and other geriatric impairments. To address this issue, our study aims to assess a newly developed patient-centred care pathway for older patients with multimorbidity and cancer. The new care pathway was based on currently available evidence and co-designed by end-users including health care professionals, patients, and informal caregivers. Within this care pathway, all healthcare professionals involved in the care of older patients with multimorbidity and cancer will form a Health Professional Consortium (HPC). The role of the HPC will be to centralise oncologic and non-oncologic treatment recommendations in accordance with the patient's priorities. Moreover, an Advanced Practice Nurse will act as case-manager by being the primary point of contact for the patient, thus improving coordination between specialists, and by organising and leading the consortium. Patient monitoring and the HPC collaboration will be facilitated by digital communication tools designed specifically for this purpose, with the added benefit of being customisable for each patient. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The GERONTE study is a prospective international, multicentric study consisting of two stepped-wedge trials performed at 16 clinical sites across three European countries. Each trial will include 720 patients aged 70 years and over with a new or progressive cancer (breast, lung, colorectal, prostate) and at least one moderate or severe multimorbidity. The patients in the intervention group will receive the new care pathway whereas patients in the control group will receive usual oncologic care. DISCUSSION: GERONTE will evaluate whether this kind of holistic, patient-oriented healthcare management can improve quality of life (primary outcome) and other valuable endpoints in older patients with multimorbidity and cancer. An ancillary study will assess in depth the socio-economic impact of the intervention and deliver concrete implementation guidelines for the GERONTE intervention care pathway. TRIAL REGISTRATION: FRONE: NCT05720910 TWOBE: NCT05423808.

Factors Contributing to Non-Concordance Between End-of-Life Care and Advance Care Planning.

CONTEXT: Despite making do-not-resuscitate or comfort care decisions during advance care planning, terminally ill patients sometimes receive life-sustaining treatments as they approach end of life. OBJECTIVES: To examine factors contributing to nonconcordance between end-of-life care and advance care planning. METHODS: In this longitudinal retrospective cohort study, terminally ill patients with a life expectancy shorter than six months, who had previously expressed a preference for do-not-resuscitate or comfort care, were followed up after palliative shared care intervention. An instrument with eight items contributing to non-concordant care, developed through literature review and experts' consensus, was employed. An expert panel reviewed electronic medical records to determine factors associated with non-concordant care for each patient. Statistical analysis, including descriptive statistics and the chi-square test, examines demographic characteristics, and associations. RESULTS: Among the enrolled 7871 patients, 97 (1.2%) received non-concordant care. The most prevalent factor was "families being too distressed about the patient's deteriorating condition and therefore being unable to let go" (84.5%) followed by "limited understanding of medical interventions among patients and surrogates" (38.1%), and "lack of patient participation in the decision-making process" (25.8%). CONCLUSIONS: This study reveals that factors related to relational autonomy, emotional support, and health literacy may contribute to non-concordance between advance care planning and end-of-life care. In the future, developing an advance care planning model emphasizes respecting relational autonomy, providing emotional support, and enhancing health literacy could help patients receiving a goal concordant and holistic end-of-life care.

Faith and Science: Sacred Decision-Making in Cancer Care.

Many people view health, wellness, and illness through a lens of religion and spirituality (R&S), modern science, and culture. Faith and science are not dichotomous in health care; they are complementary and even intercon.

Anesthesia Approach to Managing Severe Hemorrhagic Shock and Anemia With Non-transfusion Alternatives in a Practicing Jehovah's Witness: A Case Report.

Traumatic hemorrhagic shock is a common yet life-threatening occurrence across the United States and is typically managed with blood transfusions as the standard of care. However, providers caring for a Jehovah's Witness patient who refuses transfusions due to religious reasons face unique ethical challenges in upholding evidence-based shock resuscitation protocols while respecting the patient's autonomy and faith-based stance that strictly prohibits blood products. We present a complex clinical case of a 46-year-old Jehovah's Witness who developed severe hemorrhagic shock, partial amputation, and critical anemia after a traumatic 40-mile-per-hour motorcycle collision resulting in comminuted fractures and arterial disruption. Despite receiving emergent blood transfusions initially, further transfusions were declined once his identity as a practicing Jehovah's Witness was disclosed. His hemoglobin plunged to dangerously low levels of 4.6 g/dL before stabilizing to 5.3 g/dL with pharmaceutical alternatives including intravenous iron, high-dose erythropoietin, and phlebotomy minimization. Respecting patient convictions while delivering effective evidence-based shock management created significant ethical conflicts given the proven efficacy of blood transfusions. However, this complex case demonstrates that through meticulous medical and surgical care coordinated by a multi-disciplinary team applying customized non-transfusion techniques, traumatic hemorrhagic shock and life-threatening anemia can still achieve favorable outcomes without relying on transfusions when respecting faith-based refusal of blood products.

Decision-making in case of an unintended pregnancy: an overview of what is known about this complex process.

Introduction: Unintended pregnancies are a worldwide health issue, faced each year by one in 16 people, and experienced in various ways. In this study we focus on unintended pregnancies that are, at some point, experienced as unwanted because they present the pregnant person with a decision to continue or terminate the pregnancy. The aim of this study is to learn more about the decision-making process, as there is a lack of insights into how people with an unintended pregnancy reach a decision. This is caused by 1) assumptions of rationality in reproductive autonomy and decision-making, 2) the focus on pregnancy outcomes, e.g. decision-certainty and reasons and, 3) the focus on abortion in existing research, excluding 40% of people with an unintended pregnancy who continue the pregnancy. Method: We conducted a narrative literature review to examine what is known about the decision-making process and aim to provide a deeper understanding of how persons with unintended pregnancy come to a decision.Results: Our analysis demonstrates that the decision-making process regarding unintended pregnancy consists of navigating entangled layers, rather than weighing separable elements or factors. The layers that are navigated are both internal and external to the person, in which a 'sense of knowing' is essential in the decision-making process. Conclusion: The layers involved and complexity of the decision-making regarding unintended pregnancy show that a rational decision-making frame is inadequate and a more holistic frame is needed to capture this dynamic and personal experience.

Indian Society of Critical Care Medicine and Indian Association of Palliative Care Expert Consensus and Position Statements for End-of-life and Palliative Care in the Intensive Care Unit.

End-of-life care (EOLC) exemplifies the joint mission of intensive and palliative care (PC) in their human-centeredness. The explosion of technological advances in medicine must be balanced with the culture of holistic care. Inevitably, it brings together the science and the art of medicine in their full expression. High-quality EOLC in the ICU is grounded in evidence, ethical principles, and professionalism within the framework of the Law. Expert professional statements over the last two decades in India were developed while the law was evolving. Recent landmark Supreme Court judgments have necessitated a review of the clinical pathway for EOLC outlined in the previous statements. Much empirical and interventional evidence has accumulated since the position statement in 2014. This iteration of the joint Indian Society of Critical Care Medicine-Indian Association of Palliative Care (ISCCM-IAPC) Position Statement for EOLC combines contemporary evidence, ethics, and law for decision support by the bedside in Indian ICUs. How to cite this article: Mani RK, Bhatnagar S, Butola S, Gursahani R, Mehta D, Simha S, et al. Indian Society of Critical Care Medicine and Indian Association of Palliative Care Expert Consensus and Position Statements for End-of-life and Palliative Care in the Intensive Care Unit. Indian J Crit Care Med 2024;28(3):200-250.

Integrating Shared Decision-Making into Undergraduate Oncology Education: A Pedagogical Framework.

The integration of shared decision-making (SDM) into undergraduate oncology education represents a critical evolution in medical pedagogy, reflecting the growing complexity and patient-centric focus of contemporary healthcare. This paper introduces a comprehensive pedagogical framework designed to embed SDM within the undergraduate medical curriculum, particularly in oncology, where the multiplicity of treatment options and their profound impact on patient life underscore the necessity of this approach. Grounded in a systematic literature review and aligned with established educational theories, this framework proposes twelve strategic approaches to cultivate future physicians proficient in both clinical acumen and patient-collaborative decision-making. The framework emphasizes real-world clinical experience, role-playing, case studies, and decision aids to deepen students' understanding of SDM. It advocates for the development of communication skills, ethical deliberation, and cultural competence, recognizing the multifaceted nature of patient care. The inclusion of patient narratives and evidence-based decision-making further enriches the curriculum, offering a holistic view of patient care. Additionally, the integration of digital tools within the SDM process acknowledges the evolving technological landscape in healthcare. The paper also addresses challenges in implementing this framework, such as curricular constraints and the need for educator training. It underscores the importance of continual evaluation and adaptation of these strategies to the dynamic field of medical education and practice. Overall, this comprehensive approach aims not only to enhance the quality of oncological care but also to prepare medical students for the complexities of modern medicine, where patient involvement in decision-making is both a necessity and an expectation.

Challenges Addressing Lung Cancer Screening for Patients With Multimorbidity in Primary Care: A Qualitative Study.

PURPOSE: Many individuals who are eligible for lung cancer screening have comorbid conditions complicating their shared decision-making conversations with physicians. The goal of our study was to better understand how primary care physicians (PCPs) factor comorbidities into their evaluation of the risks and benefits of lung cancer screening and into their shared decision-making conversations with patients. METHODS: We conducted semistructured interviews by videoconference with 15 PCPs to assess the extent of shared decision-making practices and explore their understanding of the intersection of comorbidities and lung cancer screening, and how that understanding informed their clinical approach to this population. RESULTS: We identified 3 themes. The first theme was whether to discuss or not to discuss lung cancer screening. PCPs described taking additional steps for individuals with complex comorbidities to decide whether to initiate this discussion and used subjective clinical judgment to decide whether the conversation would be productive and beneficial. PCPs made mental assessments that factored in the patient's health, life expectancy, quality of life, and access to support systems. The second theme was that shared decision making is not a simple discussion. When PCPs did initiate discussions about lung cancer screening, although some believed they could provide objective information, others struggled with personal biases. The third theme was that ultimately, the decision to be screened was up to the patient. Patients had the final say, even if their decision was discordant with the PCP's advice. CONCLUSIONS: Shared decision-making conversations about lung cancer screening differed substantially from the standard for patients with complex comorbidities. Future research should include efforts to characterize the risks and benefits of LCS in patients with comorbidities to inform guidelines and clinical application.

"It was classed as a nonemergency": Women's experiences of kidney disease and preconception decision-making, family planning, and parenting in the United Kingdom during COVID-19.

OBJECTIVES: To investigate the experiences of women with kidney disease, residing in the United Kingdom (UK), living through the first 18 months of the COVID-19 pandemic with specific focus on preconception decision-making, family planning, and parenting. METHODS: We conducted a mixed-methods study, comprising an online survey and follow-up interviews, with UK-resident women aged 18-50. RESULTS: We received 431 surveys and conducted 30 interviews. Half (n = 221, 51%) of the survey respondents considered that COVID-19 influenced the quality of communication with healthcare professionals and 68% (n = 295) felt that the pandemic disrupted their support networks. Interview participants indicated that delayed and canceled appointments caused anxiety, grief, and loss of pregnancy options. Women's perception of themselves as (good) mothers as well as their capacity to have and raise a child, meet partners, and sustain healthy relationships was negatively affected by the "clinically extremely vulnerable" label. Women's trust in their healthcare was dismantled by miscommunication and variation in lockdown rules that caused confusion and increased worry. Women reported that COVID-19 contributed to postnatal depression, excessive concern over infant mortality, preoccupation over others following rules, and catastrophising. CONCLUSION: Some women in the UK with chronic kidney disease lost or missed their opportunity to have children during the pandemic. Future pandemic planners need to look more holistically and longer term at what is and is not classed as an emergency, both in how services are reconfigured and how people with chronic conditions are identified, communicated with, and treated.

Decision-Making in the Admission of Older Patients: A Thematic Analysis From Multiple-Stakeholder Perspectives.

Introduction As rural healthcare systems grapple with an aging population, understanding the factors influencing hospital admission decisions for elderly patients is crucial. This study explores the complex interplay of medical, social, and psychological factors that shape these decisions, as perceived by multiple stakeholders, including physicians, patients, and their families. Method This study was conducted in Unnan City Hospital, a rural community hospital in Unnan, Japan, using a qualitative thematic analysis approach. Participants included general physicians, patients admitted more than once, and their families. One-on-one semi-structured interviews were conducted in Japanese, recorded, transcribed, and analyzed. The analysis focused on identifying themes that influence decision-making processes regarding the admission of elderly patients. The research team, comprising family medicine, public health, and community health care experts, ensured a multi-perspective approach through collaborative coding and discussion. Results Three primary themes emerged from the analysis: "dilemma between medical indications and social admissions," "risks and benefits of hospitalization in response to unpredictable changes in the elderly," and "social factors intertwined with the multilayered nature of hospital admission decisions." Physicians reported a conflict between their medical training and the social needs of patients, often leading to stress and negative emotions. The unpredictable health trajectories of elderly patients necessitated a nuanced risk-benefit analysis for hospitalization. In addition, social factors, such as bed availability, patient's living environment, and psychosocial contexts, significantly influenced admission decisions. Conclusion The study highlights the need for a more holistic approach to medical education and practice, especially in rural healthcare settings. Recognizing the complexity of factors influencing hospitalization decisions, including medical, social, and individual patient circumstances, is vital. The findings underscore the importance of integrating biopsychosocial aspects into the decision-making process for the hospitalization of elderly patients, advocating for patient-centered care that respects the unique challenges in rural healthcare environments.

The relevance of the contribution of psychoneuroendocrinoimmunology and psychology of reasoning and decision making to nursing science: A discursive paper.

AIM: Patients' death or adverse events appear to be associated with poor healthcare decision-making. This might be due to an inability to have an adequate representation of the problem or of the connections among problem-related elements. Changing how a problem is formulated can reduce biases in clinical reasoning. The purpose of this article is to explore the possible contributions of psychoneuroendocrinoimmunology (PNEI) and psychology of reasoning and decision-making (PRDM) to support a new nursing theoretical frame. DESIGN: Discursive paper. METHOD: This article discusses the main assumptions about nursing and nurses' ability to face patient's problems, suggesting a new approach that integrates knowledge from PNEI and PRDM. While PNEI explains the complexity of systems, highlighting the importance of systems connections in affecting health, PRDM underlines the importance of the informative context in creating a mental representation of the problem. Furthermore, PRDM suggests the need to pay attention to information that is not immediately explicit and its connections. CONCLUSION: Nursing recognizes the patient-nurse relationship as the axiom that governs care. The integration of PNEI and PRDM in nursing theoretics allows the expansion of the axiom by providing essential elements to read a new type of relationship: the relationship among information. PNEI explains the relationships between biological systems and the psyche and between the whole individual and the environment; PRDM provides tools for the nurse's analytical thinking system to correctly process information and its connections. IMPACT ON NURSING PRACTICE: A theoretical renewal is mandatory to improve nursing reasoning and nursing priority identification. Integrating PNEI and PRDM into nursing theoretics will modify the way professionals approach patients, reducing cognitive biases and medical errors. NO PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: There was no patient or public involvement in the design or writing of this discursive article.

Factors influencing the use of natural health products, in particular for concentration and cognition in Germany.

BACKGROUND: Natural health products (NHP) are an important part of the healthcare system. They are mainly non-prescription and sold over the counter, which requires active decision making by the consumer. Within the framework of the Complementary and Alternative Healthcare Model, this study aims to identify factors that influence NHP usage, in particular related to concentration and cognition (CC), a topic that concerns all ages and social classes within the population. METHODS: Data were collected by means of a representative online survey (n = 1,707) in Germany in April 2022. Three user groups were defined: NHPCC users, who used NHP for CC (12 month prevalence); nCC-NHP users, who used NHP but not for CC indications (12 month prevalence); and past NHP users, who have used NHP but not within the previous 12 months. Independent influencing variables were categorized into predisposing, enabling, need, and health service use factors. Data were analyzed with descriptive statistics, inferential statistics, and binary logistic regression models to compare NHPCC users to nCC-NHP users (model 1) and to past NHP users (model 2). RESULTS: A higher share of NHPCC and nCC-NHP users compared to past NHP users were women, self-medicated with NHP, and used information about NHP provided by health professionals or on product. Their openness-to-change value orientation was more pronounced than of past users. Compared to nCC-NHP and past NHP users, the probability of being an NHPCC user increased if an individual had more difficulties in daily attention and memory performance, made use of health professionals and literature to seek information about NHP, and used NHP for health support and illness prevention. Additionally, a female gender, NHP self-medication, and having higher values of self-transcendence were significant indicators for NHPCC usage compared to past NHP usage. CONCLUSION: NHP manufacturers, health professionals, and policymakers should be aware of the factors that lead to NHP consumption decisions and consider them in the development and optimization of healthcare strategies as well as in the marketing and communication strategies of companies producing NHP, in particular for CC. The current study can contribute to characterizing the target groups and to defining the aims and communication channels of such campaigns.

Support for Chronic Pain Management for Breast Cancer Survivors Through Novel Digital Health Ecosystems: Pilot Usability Study of the PainRELife Mobile App.

BACKGROUND: Chronic pain is one of the most common and critical long-term effects of breast cancer. Digital health technologies enhance the management of chronic pain by monitoring physical and psychological health status and supporting pain self-management and patient treatment decisions throughout the clinical pathway. OBJECTIVE: This pilot study aims to evaluate patients' experiences, including usability, with a novel digital integrated health ecosystem for chronic pain named PainRELife. The sample included patients with breast cancer during survivorship. The PainRELife ecosystem comprises a cloud technology platform interconnected with electronic health records and patients' devices to gather integrated health care data. METHODS: We enrolled 25 patients with breast cancer (mean age 47.12 years) experiencing pain. They were instructed to use the PainRELife mobile app for 3 months consecutively. The Mobile Application Rating Scale (MARS) was used to evaluate usability. Furthermore, pain self-efficacy and participation in treatment decisions were evaluated. The study received ethical approval (R1597/21-IEO 1701) from the Ethical Committee of the European Institute of Oncology. RESULTS: The MARS subscale scores were medium to high (range: 3.31-4.18), and the total app quality score was 3.90. Patients with breast cancer reported reduced pain intensity at 3 months, from a mean of 5 at T0 to a mean of 3.72 at T2 (P=.04). The total number of times the app was accessed was positively correlated with pain intensity at 3 months (P=.03). The engagement (P=.03), information (P=.04), and subjective quality (P=.007) subscales were positively correlated with shared decision-making. Furthermore, participants with a lower pain self-efficacy at T2 (mean 40.83) used the mobile app more than participants with a higher pain self-efficacy (mean 48.46; P=.057). CONCLUSIONS: The data collected in this study highlight that digital health technologies, when developed using a patient-driven approach, might be valuable tools for increasing participation in clinical care by patients with breast cancer, permitting them to achieve a series of key clinical outcomes and improving quality of life. Digital integrated health ecosystems might be important tools for improving ongoing monitoring of physical status, psychological burden, and socioeconomic issues during the cancer survivorship trajectory. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): RR2-10.2196/41216.

Electronic Integrated Management of Childhood Illness (eIMCI): a randomized controlled trial to evaluate an electronic clinical decision-making support system for management of sick children in primary health care facilities in South Africa.

BACKGROUND: Electronic clinical decision-making support systems (eCDSS) aim to assist clinicians making complex patient management decisions and improve adherence to evidence-based guidelines. Integrated management of Childhood Illness (IMCI) provides guidelines for management of sick children attending primary health care clinics and is widely implemented globally. An electronic version of IMCI (eIMCI) was developed in South Africa. METHODS: We conducted a cluster randomized controlled trial comparing management of sick children with eIMCI to the management when using paper-based IMCI (pIMCI) in one district in KwaZulu-Natal. From 31 clinics in the district, 15 were randomly assigned to intervention (eIMCI) or control (pIMCI) groups. Computers were deployed in eIMCI clinics, and one IMCI trained nurse was randomly selected to participate from each clinic. eIMCI participants received a one-day computer training, and all participants received a similar three-day IMCI update and two mentoring visits. A quantitative survey was conducted among mothers and sick children attending participating clinics to assess the quality of care provided by IMCI practitioners. Sick child assessments by participants in eIMCI and pIMCI groups were compared to assessment by an IMCI expert. RESULTS: Self-reported computer skills were poor among all nurse participants. IMCI knowledge was similar in both groups. Among 291 enrolled children: 152 were in the eIMCI group; 139 in the pIMCI group. The mean number of enrolled children was 9.7 per clinic (range 7-12). IMCI implementation was sub-optimal in both eIMCI and pIMCI groups. eIMCI consultations took longer than pIMCI consultations (median duration 28 minutes vs 25 minutes; p = 0.02). eIMCI participants were less likely than pIMCI participants to correctly classify children for presenting symptoms, but were more likely to correctly classify for screening conditions, particularly malnutrition. eIMCI participants were less likely to provide all required medications (124/152; 81.6% vs 126/139; 91.6%, p= 0.026), and more likely to prescribe unnecessary medication (48/152; 31.6% vs 20/139; 14.4%, p = 0.004) compared to pIMCI participants. CONCLUSIONS: Implementation of eIMCI failed to improve management of sick children, with poor IMCI implementation in both groups. Further research is needed to understand barriers to comprehensive implementation of both pIMCI and eIMCI. (349) CLINICAL TRIALS REGISTRATION: Clinicaltrials.gov ID: BFC157/19, August 2019.

Association of personal and systemic factors on intrapartum risk perception and obstetric intervention rates: a cross-sectional study.

BACKGROUND: Risk perception is fundamental to decision-making; therefore its exploration is essential to gaining a comprehensive understanding of the decision-making process for peripartum interventions. The aim of this study was to investigate associations between personal and systemic factors of the work setting and the risk perception of obstetric healthcare professionals, and in turn how this might influence decisions regarding obstetric interventions. METHODS: Case vignettes were used to measure risk perception. A quantitative cross-sectional online survey was performed within an exploratory sequential mixed-methods design, and an intervention readiness score created. Associations were calculated using location and dispersion measures, t-tests and correlations in addition to multiple linear regression. RESULTS: Risk perception, as measured by the risk assessment score, was significantly lower (average 0.8 points) for midwives than for obstetricians (95%-CI [-0.673; -0.317], p < .001). Statistically significant correlations were found for: years of experience and annual number of births in the current workplace, but this was not clinically relevant; hours worked, with the groups of participants working ≥ 30,5 h showing a statistically significant higher risk perception than participants working 20,5-30 h (p = .005); and level of care of the current workplace, with the groups of participants working in a birth clinic (Level IV) showing a statistically significant lower risk perception than participants working in Level I hospital (highly specialised obstetric and neonatal care; p = .016). The option of midwife-led birthing care showed no correlation with risk perception. The survey identified that risk perception, occupation, years in the profession and number of hours worked (i.e. full or part time) represent significant influences on obstetric healthcare professionals' willingness to intervene. CONCLUSIONS: The results of the survey give rise to the hypothesis that the personal and systemic factors of professional qualification, occupation, number of hours worked and level of acuity of the workplace are related to the risk perception of obstetric healthcare professionals. In turn, risk perception itself made a significant contribution to explaining differences in willingness to intervene, suggesting that it influences obstetricians' and midwives' decision-making. Overall, however, the correlations were weak and should be interpreted cautiously. The significant variations in the use of interventions must be addressed in order to provide the highest quality and best possible care for childbearing women and their families. To this end, developing strategies to improve interdisciplinary relationships and collaboration is of great importance. TRIAL REGISTRATION: German Clinical Trials Register DRKS00017172 (18.06.2019).

Brain-wide neural activity underlying memory-guided movement.

Behavior relies on activity in structured neural circuits that are distributed across the brain, but most experiments probe neurons in a single area at a time. Using multiple Neuropixels probes, we recorded from multi-regional loops connected to the anterior lateral motor cortex (ALM), a circuit node mediating memory-guided directional licking. Neurons encoding sensory stimuli, choices, and actions were distributed across the brain. However, choice coding was concentrated in the ALM and subcortical areas receiving input from the ALM in an ALM-dependent manner. Diverse orofacial movements were encoded in the hindbrain; midbrain; and, to a lesser extent, forebrain. Choice signals were first detected in the ALM and the midbrain, followed by the thalamus and other brain areas. At movement initiation, choice-selective activity collapsed across the brain, followed by new activity patterns driving specific actions. Our experiments provide the foundation for neural circuit models of decision-making and movement initiation.

Digital Triage Tools for Sexually Transmitted Infection Testing Compared With General Practitioners' Advice: Vignette-Based Qualitative Study With Interviews Among General Practitioners.

BACKGROUND: Digital triage tools for sexually transmitted infection (STI) testing can potentially be used as a substitute for the triage that general practitioners (GPs) perform to lower their work pressure. The studied tool is based on medical guidelines. The same guidelines support GPs' decision-making process. However, research has shown that GPs make decisions from a holistic perspective and, therefore, do not always adhere to those guidelines. To have a high-quality digital triage tool that results in an efficient care process, it is important to learn more about GPs' decision-making process. OBJECTIVE: The first objective was to identify whether the advice of the studied digital triage tool aligned with GPs' daily medical practice. The second objective was to learn which factors influence GPs' decisions regarding referral for diagnostic testing. In addition, this study provides insights into GPs' decision-making process. METHODS: A qualitative vignette-based study using semistructured interviews was conducted. In total, 6 vignettes representing patient cases were discussed with the participants (GPs). The participants needed to think aloud whether they would advise an STI test for the patient and why. A thematic analysis was conducted on the transcripts of the interviews. The vignette patient cases were also passed through the digital triage tool, resulting in advice to test or not for an STI. A comparison was made between the advice of the tool and that of the participants. RESULTS: In total, 10 interviews were conducted. Participants (GPs) had a mean age of 48.30 (SD 11.88) years. For 3 vignettes, the advice of the digital triage tool and of all participants was the same. In those vignettes, the patients' risk factors were sufficiently clear for the participants to advise the same as the digital tool. For 3 vignettes, the advice of the digital tool differed from that of the participants. Patient-related factors that influenced the participants' decision-making process were the patient's anxiety, young age, and willingness to be tested. Participants would test at a lower threshold than the triage tool because of those factors. Sometimes, participants wanted more information than was provided in the vignette or would like to conduct a physical examination. These elements were not part of the digital triage tool. CONCLUSIONS: The advice to conduct a diagnostic STI test differed between a digital triage tool and GPs. The digital triage tool considered only medical guidelines, whereas GPs were open to discussion reasoning from a holistic perspective. The GPs' decision-making process was influenced by patients' anxiety, willingness to be tested, and age. On the basis of these results, we believe that the digital triage tool for STI testing could support GPs and even replace consultations in the future. Further research must substantiate how this can be done safely.

AI-driven decision support systems and epistemic reliance: a qualitative study on obstetricians' and midwives' perspectives on integrating AI-driven CTG into clinical decision making.

BACKGROUND: Given that AI-driven decision support systems (AI-DSS) are intended to assist in medical decision making, it is essential that clinicians are willing to incorporate AI-DSS into their practice. This study takes as a case study the use of AI-driven cardiotography (CTG), a type of AI-DSS, in the context of intrapartum care. Focusing on the perspectives of obstetricians and midwives regarding the ethical and trust-related issues of incorporating AI-driven tools in their practice, this paper explores the conditions that AI-driven CTG must fulfill for clinicians to feel justified in incorporating this assistive technology into their decision-making processes regarding interventions in labor. METHODS: This study is based on semi-structured interviews conducted online with eight obstetricians and five midwives based in England. Participants were asked about their current decision-making processes about when to intervene in labor, how AI-driven CTG might enhance or disrupt this process, and what it would take for them to trust this kind of technology. Interviews were transcribed verbatim and analyzed with thematic analysis. NVivo software was used to organize thematic codes that recurred in interviews to identify the issues that mattered most to participants. Topics and themes that were repeated across interviews were identified to form the basis of the analysis and conclusions of this paper. RESULTS: There were four major themes that emerged from our interviews with obstetricians and midwives regarding the conditions that AI-driven CTG must fulfill: (1) the importance of accurate and efficient risk assessments; (2) the capacity for personalization and individualized medicine; (3) the lack of significance regarding the type of institution that develops technology; and (4) the need for transparency in the development process. CONCLUSIONS: Accuracy, efficiency, personalization abilities, transparency, and clear evidence that it can improve outcomes are conditions that clinicians deem necessary for AI-DSS to meet in order to be considered reliable and therefore worthy of being incorporated into the decision-making process. Importantly, healthcare professionals considered themselves as the epistemic authorities in the clinical context and the bearers of responsibility for delivering appropriate care. Therefore, what mattered to them was being able to evaluate the reliability of AI-DSS on their own terms, and have confidence in implementing them in their practice.