Health-care workforce implications of the Dobbs v Jackson Women's Health Organization decision.

The Dobbs v Jackson Women's Health Organization Supreme Court decision, which revoked the constitutional right to abortion in the USA, has impacted the national medical workforce. Impacts vary across states, but providers in states with restrictive abortion laws now must contend with evolving legal and ethical challenges that have the potential to affect workforce safety, mental health, education, and training opportunities, in addition to having serious impacts on patient health and far-reaching societal consequences. Moreover, Dobbs has consequences on almost every facet of the medical workforce, including on physicians, nurses, pharmacists, and others who work within the health-care system. Comprehensive research is urgently needed to understand the wide-ranging implications of Dobbs on the medical workforce, including legal, ethical, clinical, and psychological dimensions, to inform evidence-based policies and standards of care in abortion-restrictive settings. Lessons from the USA might also have global relevance for countries facing similar restrictions on reproductive care.

Societal implications of the Dobbs v Jackson Women's Health Organization decision.

On June 24, 2022, the US Supreme Court's decision in Dobbs v Jackson Women's Health Organization marked the removal of the constitutional right to abortion in the USA, introducing a complex ethical and legal landscape for patients and providers. This shift has had immediate health and equity repercussions, but it is also crucial to examine the broader impacts on states, health-care systems, and society as a whole. Restrictions on abortion access extend beyond immediate reproductive care concerns, necessitating a comprehensive understanding of the ruling's consequences across micro and macro levels. To mitigate potential harm, it is imperative to establish a research agenda that informs policy making and ensures effective long-term monitoring and reporting, addressing both immediate and future impacts.

Barriers and Facilitators to the Implementation of Family-Centered Technology in Complex Care: Feasibility Study.

BACKGROUND: Care coordination is challenging but crucial for children with medical complexity (CMC). Technology-based solutions are increasingly prevalent but little is known about how to successfully deploy them in the care of CMC. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to assess the feasibility and acceptability of GoalKeeper (GK), an internet-based system for eliciting and monitoring family-centered goals for CMC, and to identify barriers and facilitators to implementation. METHODS: We used the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR) to explore the barriers and facilitators to the implementation of GK as part of a clinical trial of GK in ambulatory clinics at a children's hospital (NCT03620071). The study was conducted in 3 phases: preimplementation, implementation (trial), and postimplementation. For the trial, we recruited providers at participating clinics and English-speaking parents of CMC<12 years of age with home internet access. All participants used GK during an initial clinic visit and for 3 months after. We conducted preimplementation focus groups and postimplementation semistructured exit interviews using the CFIR interview guide. Participant exit surveys assessed GK feasibility and acceptability on a 5-point Likert scale. For each interview, 3 independent coders used content analysis and serial coding reviews based on the CFIR qualitative analytic plan and assigned quantitative ratings to each CFIR construct (-2 strong barrier to +2 strong facilitator). RESULTS: Preimplementation focus groups included 2 parents (1 male participant and 1 female participant) and 3 providers (1 in complex care, 1 in clinical informatics, and 1 in neurology). From focus groups, we developed 3 implementation strategies: education (parents: 5-minute demo; providers: 30-minute tutorial and 5-minute video on use in a clinic visit; both: instructional manual), tech support (in-person, virtual), and automated email reminders for parents. For implementation (April 1, 2019, to December 21, 2020), we enrolled 11 providers (7 female participants, 5 in complex care) and 35 parents (mean age 38.3, SD 7.8 years; n=28, 80% female; n=17, 49% Caucasian; n=16, 46% Hispanic; and n=30, 86% at least some college). One parent-provider pair did not use GK in the clinic visit, and few used GK after the visit. In 18 parent and 9 provider exit interviews, the key facilitators were shared goal setting, GK's internet accessibility and email reminders (parents), and GK's ability to set long-term goals and use at the end of visits (providers). A key barrier was GK's lack of integration into the electronic health record or patient portal. Most parents (13/19) and providers (6/9) would recommend GK to their peers. CONCLUSIONS: Family-centered technologies like GK are feasible and acceptable for the care of CMC, but sustained use depends on integration into electronic health records. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03620071; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03620071.

Parent Perspectives in Shared Decision-Making for Children With Medical Complexity.

OBJECTIVE: Shared decision-making (SDM) may improve outcomes for children with medical complexity (CMC). CMC have lower rates of SDM than other children, but little is known about how to improve SDM for CMC. The objective of this study is to describe parent perspectives of SDM for CMC and identify opportunities to improve elements of SDM specific to this vulnerable population. METHODS: Interviews with parents of CMC explored SDM preferences and experiences. Eligible parents were ≥18 years old, English- or Spanish-speaking, with a CMC <12 years old. Interviews were recorded, transcribed, and analyzed by independent coders for shared themes using modified grounded theory. Codes were developed using an iterative process, beginning with open-coding of a subset of transcripts followed by discussion with all team members, and distillation into preliminary codes. Subsequent coding reviews were conducted until no new themes emerged and existing themes were fully explored. RESULTS: We conducted interviews with 32 parents (27 in English, mean parent age 34 years, standard deviation = 7; mean child age 4 years, standard deviation = 4; 50% with household income <$50,000, 47% with low health literacy) in inpatient and outpatient settings. Three categories of themes emerged: participant, knowledge, and context. Key opportunities to improve SDM included: providing a shared decision timeline, purposefully integrating patient preferences and values, and addressing uncertainty in decisions. CONCLUSION: Our results provide insight into parent experiences with SDM for CMC. We identified unique opportunities to improve SDM for CMC that will inform future research and interventions to improve SDM for CMC.

Human cognition and the AI revolution.

Discovering the true nature of reality may ultimately hinge on grasping the nature and essence of human understanding. What are the fundamental elements or building blocks of human cognition? And how will the rise of superintelligent machines challenge our ideas about cognition, reality, and the limits of human understanding? Logician/mathematician Roger Antonsen and computer science pioneer Barbara J. Grosz join forces to shed light on these questions and the horizon of artificial intelligence.

Assessing EHR use during hospital morning rounds: A multi-faceted study.

BACKGROUND: The majority of U.S hospitals have implemented electronic health records (EHRs). While the benefits of EHRs have been widely touted, little is known about their effects on inpatient care, including how well they meet workflow needs and support care. OBJECTIVE: Assess the extent to which EHRs support care team workflow during hospital morning rounds. DESIGN: We applied a mixed-method approach including observations of care teams during morning rounds, semi-structured interviews and an electronic survey of hospital inpatient clinicians. Structured field notes taken during observations were used to identify workflow patterns for analysis. We applied a grounded theory approach to extract emerging themes from interview transcripts and used SPSS Statistics 24 to analyze survey responses. SETTING: Medical units at a major teaching hospital in New England. RESULTS: Data triangulation across the three analyses yielded four main findings: (1) a high degree of variance in the ways care teams use EHRs during morning rounds. (2) Pervasive use of workarounds at critical points of care (3) EHRs are not used for information sharing and frequently impede intra-care team communication. (4) System design and hospital room settings do not adequately support care team workflow. CONCLUSIONS: Gaps between EHR design and the functionality needed in the complex inpatient environment result in lack of standardized workflows, extensive use of workarounds and team communication issues. These issues pose a threat to patient safety and quality of care. Possible solutions need to include improvements in EHR design, care team training and changes to the hospital room setting.