Bridging comic art and research: lessons from an interdisciplinary collaboration project in a palliative care context.

The Dutch graphic novel Naasten, about palliative family caregiving, is the product of an interdisciplinary collaboration between researchers and two comic artists. This paper aims to present lessons, reflections and practical recommendations for other researchers interested in adopting (comic) arts-based research methods, in which artistic methods are used as novel ways for generating, analysing, interpreting or representing research data.Our project started with the goal of translation: we aimed at representing research findings into a more accessible, visual and textual form to stimulate discussion and reflection outside academia on moral challenges in family care. This was inspired by comics' hypothesised potential to show complex and embodied experiences, thus enabling more understanding in readers and offering powerful science communication tools. Although this goal of translation was realised in our project, we learnt along the way that the project could have benefited from a more explicit focus on interdisciplinarity from the start and by monitoring the interdisciplinary learning opportunities throughout the project. The following issues are important for any art-research collaboration: (1) an interest in and acknowledgement of each other's (potentially diverging) aims and roles: all parties should-from the start-commit themselves to interdisciplinary collaboration and to exploring the added value of using each other's methods, thereby finding a common methodological ground and language; (2) a continuous discussion of the sometimes contrasting approaches between artists and researchers: differences in using theory and story may result in different criteria for creating good art. When balancing scientific and aesthetic aims, the trustworthiness of the art work should remain an important criterion; (3) an awareness of the potential of interdisciplinary collaboration to offering new perspectives on one's scientific data collection and analysis, for example, providing other conceptualisations or indicating blind spots, provided that artists are involved in the early phases of research.

Evaluating the use of casuistry during moral case deliberation in the ICU: A multiple qualitative case study.

Intensive care unit (ICU) professionals engage in ethical decision making under conditions of high stakes, great uncertainty, time-sensitivity and frequent irreversibility of action. Casuistry is a way by which actionable knowledge is obtained through comparing a patient case to previous cases from experience in clinical practice. However, within the field of study as well as in practice, evidence-based medicine is the dominant epistemic framework. This multiple case study evaluated the use of casuistic reasoning by intensive care unit (ICU) professionals during moral case deliberation. It took place in two Dutch hospitals between June 2020 and June 2022. Twentyfive moral case deliberations from ICU practice were recorded and analyzed using discourse analysis. Additionally, 47 interviews were held with ICU professionals who participated in these deliberations, analyzed using thematic analysis. We found that ICU professionals made considerable use of case comparisons when discussing continuation, withdrawal or limitation. Analogies played a role in justifying or complicating moral judgements, and also played a role in addressing moral distress. The language of case-based arguments is most often not overtly normative. Rather, the data shows that casuistic reasoning deals with the medical, ethical and contextual elements of decisions in an integrated manner. Facilitators of MCD have an essential role in (supporting ICU professionals in) scrutinizing casuistic arguments. The data shows that during MCD, actual reasoning often deviated from principle- and rule-based reasoning which ICU professionals preferred themselves. Evidence-based arguments often gained the character of analogical arguments, especially when a patient-at-hand was seen as highly unique from the average patients in the literature. Casuistic arguments disguised as evidence-based arguments may therefore provide ICU professionals with a false sense of certainty. Within education, we should strive to train clinicians and ethics facilitators so that they can recognize and evaluate casuistic arguments.

Patient values in patient-provider communication about participation in early phase clinical cancer trials: a qualitative analysis before and after implementation of an online value clarification tool intervention.

BACKGROUND: Patients with advanced cancer who no longer have standard treatment options available may decide to participate in early phase clinical trials (i.e. experimental treatments with uncertain outcomes). Shared decision-making (SDM) models help to understand considerations that influence patients' decision. Discussion of patient values is essential to SDM, but such communication is often limited in this context and may require new interventions. The OnVaCT intervention, consisting of a preparatory online value clarification tool (OnVaCT) for patients and communication training for oncologists, was previously developed to support SDM. This study aimed to qualitatively explore associations between patient values that are discussed between patients and oncologists during consultations about potential participation in early phase clinical trials before and after implementation of the OnVaCT intervention. METHODS: This study is part of a prospective multicentre nonrandomized controlled clinical trial and had a between-subjects design: pre-intervention patients received usual care, while post-intervention patients additionally received the OnVaCT. Oncologists participated in the communication training between study phases. Patients' initial consultation on potential early phase clinical trial participation was recorded and transcribed verbatim. Applying a directed approach, two independent coders analysed the transcripts using an initial codebook based on previous studies. Steps of continuous evaluation and revision were repeated until data saturation was reached. RESULTS: Data saturation was reached after 32 patient-oncologist consultations (i.e. 17 pre-intervention and 15 post-intervention). The analysis revealed the values: hope, perseverance, quality or quantity of life, risk tolerance, trust in the healthcare system/professionals, autonomy, social adherence, altruism, corporeality, acceptance of one's fate, and humanity. Patients in the pre-intervention phase tended to express values briefly and spontaneously. Oncologists acknowledged the importance of patients' values, but generally only gave 'contrasting' examples of why some accept and others refuse to participate in trials. In the post-intervention phase, many oncologists referred to the OnVaCT and/or asked follow-up questions, while patients used longer phrases that combined multiple values, sometimes clearly indicating their weighing. CONCLUSIONS: While all values were recognized in both study phases, our results have highlighted the different communication patterns around patient values in SDM for potential early phase clinical trial participation before and after implementation of the OnVaCT intervention. This study therefore provides a first (qualitative) indication that the OnVaCT intervention may support patients and oncologists in discussing their values. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Netherlands Trial Registry: NL7335, registered on July 17, 2018.

Accentuating patient values in shared decision-making: A mixed methods development of an online value clarification tool and communication training in the context of early phase clinical cancer trials.

OBJECTIVE: In the shared decision-making (SDM) process for potential early phase clinical cancer trial participation, value clarification is highly recommended. However, exploration and discussion of patient values between patients and oncologists remains limited. This study aims to develop an SDM-supportive intervention, consisting of a preparatory online value clarification tool (OnVaCT) and a communication training. METHODS: The OnVaCT intervention was developed and pilot-tested by combining theoretical notions on value clarification, with interview studies with patients and oncologists, focus groups with patient representatives and oncologists, and think aloud sessions with patients, following the Medical Research Council (MRC) framework for complex interventions. These human-centered methodologies enabled a user-centered approach at every step of the development process of the intervention. RESULTS: This study shows relevant patient values and oncologists' perspectives on value exploration and discussion in daily practice. This has been combined with theoretical considerations into the creation of characters based on real-life experiences of patients in the OnVaCT, and how the tool is combined with a communication training for oncologists to improve SDM.

[Moral injury in medicine: recognition and guidance]. / Morele schade in de geneeskunde.

Moral injury signifies a permanent mental wound characterized by feelings of guilt, shame, anger or moral disorientation. Physicians may become morally injured whenever they act in a way that conflicts with deeply held, moral beliefs. During a pandemic, a war or whenever physicians provide care to large numbers of refugees, there is a heightened risk of moral injury. These circumstances cause conditions of scarcity of personnel and resources, and urge governments and societies to sometimes ask physicians to act in manners which conflict with their moral beliefs. Moral injury can have damning consequences for the professionals involved. That is why it is essential that physicians learn to recognize the signs of moral injury within themselves and with colleagues.

How clinicians discuss patients' donor registrations of consent and presumed consent in donor conversations in an opt-out system: a qualitative embedded multiple-case study.

BACKGROUND: The Netherlands introduced an opt-out donor system in 2020. While the default in (presumed) consent cases is donation, family involvement adds a crucial layer of influence when applying this default in clinical practice. We explored how clinicians discuss patients' donor registrations of (presumed) consent in donor conversations in the first years of the opt-out system. METHODS: A qualitative embedded multiple-case study in eight Dutch hospitals. We performed a thematic analysis based on audio recordings and direct observations of donor conversations (n = 15, 7 consent and 8 presumed consent) and interviews with the clinicians involved (n = 16). RESULTS: Clinicians' personal considerations, their prior experiences with the family and contextual factors in the clinicians' profession defined their points of departure for the conversations. Four routes to discuss patients' donor registrations were constructed. In the Consent route (A), clinicians followed patients' explicit donation wishes. With presumed consent, increased uncertainty in interpreting the donation wish appeared and prompted clinicians to refer to "the law" as a conversation starter and verify patients' wishes multiple times with the family. In the Presumed consent route (B), clinicians followed the law intending to effectuate donation, which was more easily achieved when families recognised and agreed with the registration. In the Consensus route (C), clinicians provided families some participation in decision-making, while in the Family consent route (D), families were given full decisional capacity to pursue optimal grief processing. CONCLUSION: Donor conversations in an opt-out system are a complex interplay between seemingly straightforward donor registrations and clinician-family interactions. When clinicians are left with concerns regarding patients' consent or families' coping, families are given a larger role in the decision. A strict uniform application of the opt-out system is unfeasible. We suggest incorporating the four previously described routes in clinical training, stimulating discussions across cases, and encouraging public conversations about donation.

Effect of Structural Moral Case Deliberation on Burnout Symptoms, Moral Distress, and Team Climate in ICU Professionals: A Parallel Cluster Randomized Trial.

OBJECTIVES: Moral case deliberation (MCD) is a team-based and facilitator-led, structured moral dialogue about ethical difficulties encountered in practice. This study assessed whether offering structural MCD in ICUs reduces burnout symptoms and moral distress and strengthens the team climate among ICU professionals. DESIGN: This is a parallel cluster randomized trial. SETTING: Six ICUs in two hospitals located in Nijmegen, between January 2020 and September 2021. SUBJECTS: Four hundred thirty-five ICU professionals. INTERVENTIONS: Three of the ICUs organized structural MCD. In three other units, there was no structural MCD or other structural discussions of moral problems. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: The primary outcomes investigated were the three burnout symptoms-emotional exhaustion, depersonalization, and a low sense of personal accomplishment-among ICU professionals measured using the Maslach Burnout Inventory on a 0-6 scale. Secondary outcomes were moral distress (Moral Distress Scale) on a 0-336 scale and team climate (Safety Attitude Questionnaire) on a 0-4 scale. Organizational culture was an explorative outcome (culture of care barometer) and was measured on a 0-4 scale. Outcomes were measured at baseline and in 6-, 12-, and 21-month follow-ups. Intention-to-treat analyses were conducted using linear mixed models for longitudinal nested data. Structural MCD did not affect emotional exhaustion or depersonalization, or the team climate. It reduced professionals' personal accomplishment (-0.15; p < 0.05) but also reduced moral distress (-5.48; p < 0.01). Perceptions of organizational support (0.15; p < 0.01), leadership (0.19; p < 0.001), and participation opportunities (0.13; p < 0.05) improved. CONCLUSIONS: Although structural MCD did not mitigate emotional exhaustion or depersonalization, and reduced personal accomplishment in ICU professionals, it did reduce moral distress. Moreover, it did not improve team climate, but improved the organizational culture.

Development of Moral Injury in ICU Professionals During the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Prospective Serial Interview Study.

OBJECTIVES: During the COVID-19 pandemic, ICU professionals have faced moral problems that may cause moral injury. This study explored whether, how, and when moral injury among ICU professionals developed in the course of the COVID-19 pandemic. DESIGN: This is a prospective qualitative serial interview study. SETTING: Two hospitals among which one university medical center and one teaching hospital in the Netherlands. SUBJECTS: Twenty-six ICU professionals who worked during the COVID-19 pandemic. INTERVENTIONS: None. MEASUREMENTS MAIN RESULTS: In-depth interviews with follow-up after 6 and 12 months. In total, 62 interviews were conducted. ICU professionals narrated about anticipatory worry about life and death decisions, lack of knowledge and prognostic uncertainty about COVID-19, powerlessness and failure, abandonment or betrayal by society, politics, or the healthcare organization, numbness toward patients and families, and disorientation and self-alienation. Centrally, ICU professionals describe longitudinal processes by which they gradually numbed themselves emotionally from patients and families as well as potentially impactful events in their work. For some ICU professionals, organizational, societal, and political responses to the pandemic contributed to numbness, loss of motivation, and self-alienation. CONCLUSIONS: ICU professionals exhibit symptoms of moral injury such as feelings of betrayal, detachment, self-alienation, and disorientation. Healthcare organizations and ICU professionals themselves should be cognizant that these feelings may indicate that professionals might have developed moral injury or that it may yet develop in the future. Awareness should be raised about moral injury and should be followed up by asking morally injured professionals what they need, so as to not risk offering unwanted help.

Complex interplay between moral distress and other risk factors of burnout in ICU professionals: findings from a cross-sectional survey study.

BACKGROUND: Burnout threatens intensive care unit (ICU) professionals' capacity to provide high-quality care. Moral distress is previously considered a root cause of burnout, but there are other risk factors of burnout such as personality, work-life balance and culture. This study aimed to disentangle the associations of ICU professionals' moral distress and other risk factors with the components of burnout-emotional exhaustion, depersonalisation and personal accomplishment-suggesting informed burnout prevention strategies. METHODS: Cross-sectional survey completed in 2019 of ICU professionals in two Dutch hospitals. The survey included validated measure for burnout (the Dutch Maslach Burnout Inventory), moral distress (Moral Distress Scale), personality (short Big Five Inventory), work-home balance (Survey Work-Home Interaction Nijmegen) and organisational culture (Culture of Care Barometer). Each of the three components of burnout was analysed as a separate outcome, and for each of the components, a separate regression analysis was carried out. RESULTS: 251 ICU professionals responded to the survey (response rate: 53.3%). Burnout prevalence was 22.7%. Findings showed that moral distress was associated with emotional exhaustion (ß=0.18, 95% CI 0.9 to 0.26) and depersonalisation (ß=0.19, 95% CI 0.10 to 0.28) and with increased emotional exhaustion mediated by negative work-to-home spillover (ß=0.09, 95% CI 0.04 to 0.13). Support from direct supervisors mitigates the association between moral distress and emotional exhaustion (ß=0.16, 95% CI 0.04 to 0.27). CONCLUSIONS: Understanding moral distress as a root cause of burnout is too simplified. There is an important interplay between moral distress and work-home imbalance. Interventions that support individual coping with moral distress and a work-home imbalance, and the support of direct supervisors, are paramount to prevent burnout in physicians and nurses.

Core values of patients with advanced cancer considering participation in an early-phase clinical trial: a qualitative study.

OBJECTIVE: This article identifies the core values that play a role in patients' decision-making process about participation in early-phase clinical cancer trials. METHODS: Face-to-face, semi-structured serial interviews (n = 22) were performed with thirteen patients with advanced cancer recruited in two Dutch specialized cancer centers. In a cyclic qualitative analysis process, open and axial coding of the interviews finally led to an overview of the values that are woven into patients' common language about cancer and clinical trials. RESULTS: Six core values were described, namely, acceptance creates room for reconsideration of values, reconciliation with one's fate, hope, autonomy, body preservation, and altruism. Previously found values in advanced cancer, such as acceptance, hope, autonomy, and altruism, were further qualified. Reconciliation with one's fate and body preservation were highlighted as new insights for early-phase clinical cancer trial literature. CONCLUSIONS: This article furthers the understanding of core values that play a role in the lives and decision-making of patients with advanced cancer who explore participation in early-phase clinical cancer trials. These values do not necessarily have to be compatible with one another, making tragic choices necessary. Understanding the role of core values can contribute to professional sensitivity regarding what motivates patients' emotions, thoughts, and decisions and help patients reflect on and give words to their values and preferences. It supports mutual understanding and dialog from which patients can make decisions according to their perspectives on a good life for themselves and their fellows in the context of participation in an early-phase clinical cancer trial.

Morisprudence: a theoretical framework for studying the relationship linking moral case deliberation, organisational learning and quality improvement.

There is a claim that clinical ethics support services (CESS) improve healthcare quality within healthcare organisations. However, there is lack of strong evidence supporting this claim. Rather, the current focus is on the quality of CESS themselves or on individual learning outcomes. In response, this article proposes a theoretical framework leading to empirical hypotheses that describe the relationship between a specific type of CESS, moral case deliberation and the quality of care at the organisational level. We combine insights from the literature on CESS, organisational learning and quality improvement and argue that moral case deliberation causes healthcare professionals to acquire practical wisdom. At the organisational level, where improving quality is a continuous and collective endeavour, this practical wisdom can be aggregated into morisprudence, which is an ongoing formulation of moral judgements across cases encountered within the organisation. Focusing on the development of morisprudence enables refined scrutinisation of CESS-related quality claims.

Facilitators and barriers in using comics to support family caregivers of patients receiving palliative care at home: A qualitative study.

BACKGROUND: Family caregiving at home is highly important for people receiving palliative treatment, but also a complex experience, subject to implicit social expectations. This study empirically explored the claim that comics benefit palliative care practice, through evaluating a graphic novel's value as an aid in supportive conversations with family caregivers. AIM: To identify facilitators and barriers in using Naasten (Loved ones), a Dutch research-based graphic novel about family caregivers providing care at the end-of-life. DESIGN: Qualitative study, following thematic content analysis. PARTICIPANTS: Three focus groups with family caregiver consultants, palliative care volunteers, and healthcare professionals (total N = 23) who supported family caregivers; and individual telephone interviews with family caregivers to whom the book was presented (N = 4). RESULTS: Barriers and facilitators related to: (1) the family caregiver, (2) impact on the family caregiver, (3) impact on the conversation between the person who provides support and the family caregiver, (4) their relationship, and (5) the person who provides support. Naasten was reported as recognizable and supportive, and powerful in raising emotions, awareness and conversation. Barriers concerned the book's impact due to its style and guidance of a conversation, and doubts about its surplus-value. CONCLUSIONS: Emotionally impactful comics may support bereaved family caregivers, but should be introduced with care among current family caregivers, for example, ensuring a right fit, introduction, and follow-up-while taking into account a caregiver's individual situation, needs, abilities, and affinity with the medium. Comics are preferably used in educational settings, contributing to professional awareness and tailored support of family caregivers.

Integrating Palliative Care by Virtue of Diplomacy; A Cross-sectional Group Interview Study of the Roles and Attitudes of Palliative Care Professionals to Further Integrate Palliative Care in Europe.

BACKGROUND: Palliative care involves the care for patients with severe and advanced diseases with a focus on quality of life and symptom management. Integration of palliative care with curative and/or chronic care is expected to lead to better results in terms of quality of life and reduced costs. Although initiatives in different countries in Europe choose different structures to integrate care, they face similar challenges when it comes to creating trust and aligning visions, cultures and professional values. This paper sets out to answer the following research question: what roles and attitudes do palliative care professionals need to adopt to further integrate palliative care in Europe? METHODS: As part of the European Union (EU)-funded research project InSup-C (Integrated Supportive and Palliative Care). (2012-2016), 19 semi-structured group interviews with 136 (palliative) care professionals in 5 European countries (Germany, the United Kingdom, Belgium, the Netherlands, Hungary) were conducted. A thematic analysis was conducted. RESULTS: Integration of palliative care calls for diplomatic professionals that can bring a cultural shift: to get palliative care, with its particular focus on the four dimensions (physical, psychological, social, spiritual), integrated into historically established medical procedures and guidelines. This requires (a) to find an entrance (for telling a normative story), and (b) to maintain and deepen relationships (in order to build trust). It means using the appropriate words and sending a univocal team message to patients and being grateful, modest, and aiming for a quiet revolution with curation oriented healthcare professionals. CONCLUSION: Diplomacy appears to be essential to palliative care providers for realizing trust and what can be defined as normative integration between palliative and curative and/or chronic medicine. It requires a practical wisdom about the culture and goals of regular care, as well as keeping a middle road between assimilating with values in regular medicine and standing up for the basic values central to palliative care.

Feeling called to care: a qualitative interview study on normativity in family caregivers' experiences in Dutch home settings in a palliative care context.

BACKGROUND: Family caregivers, such as partners or other family members, are highly important to people who desire to stay at home in the last phase of their life-limiting disease. Despite the much-investigated challenges of family caregiving for a patient from one's direct social network, lots of caregivers persevere. To better understand why, we aimed to specify how normative elements - i.e. what is considered good or valuable - shape family caregivers' experiences in Dutch home settings. METHODS: From September 2017 to February 2019, a total of 15 family caregivers, 13 bereaved family caregivers, and 9 patients participated in one-time in-depth interviews. The data were qualitatively analyzed following a grounded theory approach. RESULTS: Central to this study is the persistent feeling of being called to care. By whom, why, and to what? Family caregivers feel called by the patient, professionals entering normal life, family and friends, or by oneself; because of normative elements of love, duty, or family dynamics; to be constantly available, attentive to the patient while ignoring their own needs, and assertive in managing the caring situation. The prospect of death within the palliative care context intensifies these mechanisms with a sense of urgency. CONCLUSIONS: Our analysis showed a difference between feeling called upon in the caring situation on the one hand, and how caregivers tend to respond to these calls on the other. Taking into account the inherent normative and complex nature of family caregiving, the pressing feeling of being called cannot - and perhaps should not - simply be resolved. Caring might be something families just find themselves in due to being related. Rather than in feeling called upon per se, the burden of care might lie in the seeming limitlessness to which people feel called, reinforced by (implicit) social expectations. Support, we argue, should enable caregivers to reflect on what norms and values guide their responses while acknowledging that caring, despite being burdensome, can be a highly important and rewarding part of the relationship between partners or family members.

Frames and counter-frames giving meaning to palliative care and euthanasia in the Netherlands.

BACKGROUND: Based on the case of palliative care and euthanasia in the Netherlands, this paper presents an analysis of frames and counter-frames used in the ongoing public debate about these two intertwined topics. Each (counter)frame presents a cultural theme that can act as a prism to give meaning to palliative care and/or euthanasia. Each frame comprehends a different problem definition, consequences and policy options. Typical word choices and metaphors are identified that can evoke these frames and the underlying reasoning. The frames do not belong to a specific stakeholder but a pattern can be seen in their use that is related to interests and ideology. METHODS: An inductive framing analysis was conducted of 2,700 text fragments taken from various Dutch newspapers, websites of stakeholders and policy documents in the period 2016-2018. After an extensive process of thematic coding, axial coding, selective coding and peer review seven frames and seven counter-frames about palliative care and euthanasia were constructed. Fifteen experts in the field of palliative and/or end-of-life care commented on the overview during a member check. RESULTS: Two frames about palliative care were constructed: the Fear of death frame, which stresses the hopeless 'terminality' of palliative care and the Heavy burden frame, in which palliative care is too big a responsibility for the relatives of the patient. In addition, two counter-frames were constructed: palliative care as a contributor to Quality of life and Completion. With regard to euthanasia, five frames were identified that lead to a problematising definition: Thou shalt not kill, Slippery slope, Lack of willpower, I am not God, and Medical progress. Five counter-frames offer a non-problematising definition of euthanasia in the debate: Mercy, Prevention, Triumph of reason, Absolute autonomy, and Economic utility thinking. CONCLUSIONS: The debate in the Netherlands on euthanasia and palliative care is characterized by a plurality of angles that goes beyond the bipolar distinction between the pros and cons of euthanasia and palliative care. Only with an overview of all potential frames in mind can an audience truly make informed decisions. The frame matrix is not only useful for policy makers to know all perspectives when joining public debate, but also to health care workers to get into meaningful conversations with their patients and families.

Identifying patient values impacting the decision whether to participate in early phase clinical cancer trials: A systematic review.

BACKGROUND: For many patients with advanced cancer, the decision whether to participate in early phase clinical trials or not is complex. The decision-making process requires an in-depth discussion of patient values. We therefore aimed to synthesize and describe patient values that may affect early phase clinical trial participation. METHODS: We conducted a systematic search in seven electronic databases on patient values in relation to patients' decisions to participate in early phase clinical cancer trials. RESULTS: From 3072 retrieved articles, eleven quantitative and five qualitative studies fulfilled our inclusion criteria. We extracted ten patient values that can contribute to patients' decisions. Overall, patients who seek trial participation usually report hope, trust, quantity of life, altruism, perseverance, faith and/or risk tolerance as important values. Quality of life and humanity are main values of patients who refuse trial participation. Autonomy and social adherence can be reported by both trial seekers or refusers, dependent upon how they are manifested in a patient. CONCLUSIONS: We identified patient values that frequently play a role in the decision-making process. In the setting of discussing early phase clinical trial participation with patients, healthcare professionals need to be aware of these values. This analysis supports the importance of individual exploration of values. Patients that become aware of their values, e.g. by means of interventions focused on clarifying their values, could feel more empowered to choose. Subsequently, healthcare professionals could improve their support in a patients' decision-making process and reduce the chance of decisional conflict.

Coronavirus Disease 2019 Immediately Increases Burnout Symptoms in ICU Professionals: A Longitudinal Cohort Study.

OBJECTIVES: ICU professionals are at risk of developing burnout due to coronavirus disease 2019. This study assesses the prevalence and incidence of burnout symptoms and moral distress in ICU professionals before and during the coronavirus disease 2019 crisis. DESIGN: This is a longitudinal open cohort study. SETTING: Five ICUs based in a single university medical center plus another adult ICU based on a separate teaching hospital in the Netherlands. SUBJECTS: All ICU professionals were sent a baseline survey in October-December 2019 (252 respondents, response rate: 53%), and a follow-up survey was sent in May-June 2020 (233 respondents, response rate: 50%). INTERVENTIONS: None. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Burnout symptoms and moral distress measured with the Maslach Burnout Inventory and the Moral Distress Scale, respectively. The prevalence of burnout symptoms was 23.0% before coronavirus disease 2019 and 36.1% at postpeak time, with higher rates in nurses (38.0%) than in physicians (28.6%). Reversely, the incidence rate of new burnout cases among physicians was higher (26.7%) than nurses (21.9%). Higher prevalence of burnout symptoms was observed in the postpeak coronavirus disease 2019 period (odds ratio, 1.83; 95% CI, 1.32-2.53), for nurses (odds ratio, 1.77; 95% CI, 1.03-3.04), for professionals working overtime (odds ratio 2.11; 95% CI, 1.48-3.02), and for professionals directly engaged with care for coronavirus disease 2019 patients (odds ratio, 1.87; 95% CI, 1.35-2.60). Physicians were more likely than nurses to develop burnout symptoms due to coronavirus disease 2019 (odds ratio, 3.56; 95% CI, 1.06-12.21). CONCLUSIONS: This study shows that overburdening of ICU professionals during an extended period of time leads to symptoms of burnout. Working long hours and under conditions of scarcity of staff, time, and resources comes at the price of ICU professionals' mental health.

Living and dying with incurable cancer: a qualitative study on older patients' life values and healthcare professionals' responsivity.

BACKGROUND: In ageing Western societies, many older persons live with and die from cancer. Despite that present-day healthcare aims to be patient-centered, scientific literature has little knowledge to offer about how cancer and its treatment impact older persons' various outlooks on life and underlying life values. Therefore, the aims of this paper are to: 1) describe outlooks on life and life values of older people (≥ 70) living with incurable cancer; 2) elicit how healthcare professionals react and respond to these. METHODS: Semi-structured qualitative interviews with 12 older persons with advanced cancer and two group interviews with healthcare professionals were held and followed by an analysis with a grounded theory approach. RESULTS: Several themes and subthemes emerged from the patient interview study: a) handling incurable cancer (the anticipatory outlook on "a reduced life", hope and, coping with an unpredictable disease) b) being supported by others ("being there", leaving a legacy, and having reliable healthcare professionals) and; c) making end-of-life choices (anticipatory fears, and place of death). The group interviews explained how healthcare professionals respond to the abovementioned themes in palliative care practice. Some barriers for (open) communication were expressed too by the latter, e.g., lack of continuity of care and advance care planning, and patients' humble attitudes. CONCLUSIONS: Older adults living with incurable cancer showed particular outlooks on life and life values regarding advanced cancer and the accompanying last phase of life. This paper could support healthcare professionals and patients in jointly exploring and formulating these outlooks and values in the light of treatment plans.