Question banks: credit? Or debit? A qualitative exploration of their use among medical students.

BACKGROUND: Online question banks are the most widely used education resource amongst medical students. Despite this there is an absence of literature outlining how and why they are used by students. Drawing on Deci and Ryan's self-determination theory, our study aimed to explore why and how early-stage medical students use question banks in their learning and revision strategies. METHODS: The study was conducted at Newcastle University Medical School (United Kingdom and Malaysia). Purposive, convenience and snowball sampling of year two students were employed. Ten interviews were conducted. Thematic analysis was undertaken iteratively, enabling exploration of nascent themes. Data collection ceased when no new perspectives were identified. RESULTS: Students' motivation to use question banks was predominantly driven by extrinsic motivators, with high-stakes exams and fear of failure being central. Their convenience and perceived efficiency promoted autonomy and thus motivation. Rapid feedback cycles and design features consistent with gamification were deterrents to intrinsic motivation. Potentially detrimental patterns of question bank use were evident: cueing, avoidance and memorising. Scepticism regarding veracity of question bank content was absent. CONCLUSIONS: We call on educators to provide students with guidance about potential pitfalls associated with question banks and to reflect on potential inequity of access to these resources.

Guide to Utilization of the Microbiology Laboratory for Diagnosis of Infectious Diseases: 2024 Update by the Infectious Diseases Society of America (IDSA) and the American Society for Microbiology (ASM).

The critical nature of the microbiology laboratory in infectious disease diagnosis calls for a close, positive working relationship between the physician and the microbiologists who provide enormous value to the health care team. This document, developed by experts in both adult and pediatric laboratory and clinical medicine, provides information on which tests are valuable and in which contexts, and on tests that add little or no value for diagnostic decisions. Sections are divided into anatomic systems, including Bloodstream Infections and Infections of the Cardiovascular System, Central Nervous System Infections, Ocular Infections, Soft Tissue Infections of the Head and Neck, Upper Respiratory Infections, Lower Respiratory Tract infections, Infections of the Gastrointestinal Tract, Intraabdominal Infections, Bone and Joint Infections, Urinary Tract Infections, Genital Infections, and Skin and Soft Tissue Infections; or into etiologic agent groups, including arboviral Infections, Viral Syndromes, and Blood and Tissue Parasite Infections. Each section contains introductory concepts, a summary of key points, and detailed tables that list suspected agents; the most reliable tests to order; the samples (and volumes) to collect in order of preference; specimen transport devices, procedures, times, and temperatures; and detailed notes on specific issues regarding the test methods, such as when tests are likely to require a specialized laboratory or have prolonged turnaround times. In addition, the pediatric needs of specimen management are also addressed. There is redundancy among the tables and sections, as many agents and assay choices overlap. The document is intended to serve as a reference to guide physicians in choosing tests that will aid them to diagnose infectious diseases in their patients.

Decision aids for people facing health treatment or screening decisions.

BACKGROUND: Patient decision aids are interventions designed to support people making health decisions. At a minimum, patient decision aids make the decision explicit, provide evidence-based information about the options and associated benefits/harms, and help clarify personal values for features of options. This is an update of a Cochrane review that was first published in 2003 and last updated in 2017. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effects of patient decision aids in adults considering treatment or screening decisions using an integrated knowledge translation approach. SEARCH METHODS: We conducted the updated search for the period of 2015 (last search date) to March 2022 in CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, EBSCO, and grey literature. The cumulative search covers database origins to March 2022. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included published randomized controlled trials comparing patient decision aids to usual care. Usual care was defined as general information, risk assessment, clinical practice guideline summaries for health consumers, placebo intervention (e.g. information on another topic), or no intervention. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two authors independently screened citations for inclusion, extracted intervention and outcome data, and assessed risk of bias using the Cochrane risk of bias tool. Primary outcomes, based on the International Patient Decision Aid Standards (IPDAS), were attributes related to the choice made (informed values-based choice congruence) and the decision-making process, such as knowledge, accurate risk perceptions, feeling informed, clear values, participation in decision-making, and adverse events. Secondary outcomes were choice, confidence in decision-making, adherence to the chosen option, preference-linked health outcomes, and impact on the healthcare system (e.g. consultation length). We pooled results using mean differences (MDs) and risk ratios (RRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs), applying a random-effects model. We conducted a subgroup analysis of 105 studies that were included in the previous review version compared to those published since that update (n = 104 studies). We used Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) to assess the certainty of the evidence. MAIN RESULTS: This update added 104 new studies for a total of 209 studies involving 107,698 participants. The patient decision aids focused on 71 different decisions. The most common decisions were about cardiovascular treatments (n = 22 studies), cancer screening (n = 17 studies colorectal, 15 prostate, 12 breast), cancer treatments (e.g. 15 breast, 11 prostate), mental health treatments (n = 10 studies), and joint replacement surgery (n = 9 studies). When assessing risk of bias in the included studies, we rated two items as mostly unclear (selective reporting: 100 studies; blinding of participants/personnel: 161 studies), due to inadequate reporting. Of the 209 included studies, 34 had at least one item rated as high risk of bias. There was moderate-certainty evidence that patient decision aids probably increase the congruence between informed values and care choices compared to usual care (RR 1.75, 95% CI 1.44 to 2.13; 21 studies, 9377 participants). Regarding attributes related to the decision-making process and compared to usual care, there was high-certainty evidence that patient decision aids result in improved participants' knowledge (MD 11.90/100, 95% CI 10.60 to 13.19; 107 studies, 25,492 participants), accuracy of risk perceptions (RR 1.94, 95% CI 1.61 to 2.34; 25 studies, 7796 participants), and decreased decisional conflict related to feeling uninformed (MD -10.02, 95% CI -12.31 to -7.74; 58 studies, 12,104 participants), indecision about personal values (MD -7.86, 95% CI -9.69 to -6.02; 55 studies, 11,880 participants), and proportion of people who were passive in decision-making (clinician-controlled) (RR 0.72, 95% CI 0.59 to 0.88; 21 studies, 4348 participants). For adverse outcomes, there was high-certainty evidence that there was no difference in decision regret between the patient decision aid and usual care groups (MD -1.23, 95% CI -3.05 to 0.59; 22 studies, 3707 participants). Of note, there was no difference in the length of consultation when patient decision aids were used in preparation for the consultation (MD -2.97 minutes, 95% CI -7.84 to 1.90; 5 studies, 420 participants). When patient decision aids were used during the consultation with the clinician, the length of consultation was 1.5 minutes longer (MD 1.50 minutes, 95% CI 0.79 to 2.20; 8 studies, 2702 participants). We found the same direction of effect when we compared results for patient decision aid studies reported in the previous update compared to studies conducted since 2015. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Compared to usual care, across a wide variety of decisions, patient decision aids probably helped more adults reach informed values-congruent choices. They led to large increases in knowledge, accurate risk perceptions, and an active role in decision-making. Our updated review also found that patient decision aids increased patients' feeling informed and clear about their personal values. There was no difference in decision regret between people using decision aids versus those receiving usual care. Further studies are needed to assess the impact of patient decision aids on adherence and downstream effects on cost and resource use.

'That's someone's grandma': Teaching person-centred care in a frailty context.

BACKGROUND: The ability to provide person-centred care (PCC) is an essential skill for doctors and requires therapeutic empathy. We sought to evaluate a novel teaching approach to understand how medical students' personal reflections on an older person impact their views about PCC and frailty. APPROACH: We designed a teaching session where students prepared an image and story about an older person they knew. Given the innovative nature of this, we set it in the context of a Plan Do Study Act cycle to ensure evaluation and continuous improvement at each stage. Students' contributions were discussed in a supportive environment, weaving together stories about individuals with the impacts of ageing they experienced. We evaluated the teaching with a pre- and post-session 'frailty' word cloud and an online focus group. EVALUATION: Word cloud analysis showed a shift in the words students used when considering 'frailty', from words associated with illness and vulnerability to those associated with character and experience. Focus group themes supported these findings. Students expressed a change in their perception of frailty to consider 'the person behind the patient', which, unexpectedly, led to them also seeing 'the person behind the medical student'. The session stimulated student reflection on challenges that may impact on delivery of truly person-centred care. IMPLICATIONS: This flexible teaching technique was an effective stimulus for medical students to consider the person behind the patient. Future work could consider how to promote retention of empathy as medical students make the transition to working as a doctor.

Information provision and decision-making in the treatment of abdominal aortic aneurysm: A qualitative study of patient experience.

INTRODUCTION: Shared decision making (SDM) refers to patients and health care professionals working together to reach a decision about treatment/care. In abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) treatment options are influenced by patients' clinical characteristics, their preferences, and potential trade-offs between alternative interventions. This is a prime example of where SDM is essential to ensure the right decision is made for the right patient, yet we have little understanding of what happens in practice. This study explored patient experiences to understand SDM practice in AAA surgery. METHODS: We used a qualitative approach to describe, and identify improvements to, current treatment decision making in abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) surgery. Two groups of patients were interviewed: those at the point of discussing treatment options (with corresponding digitally recorded consultation data) and following surgical intervention from one hospital. Framework analysis was used. RESULTS: Fifteen patients were interviewed, seven at the point of discussing treatment options and eight following surgical intervention. Timing, format and sources of information, verbal framing of interventions and level of patient engagement were key themes. Four areas for improvement were identified: earlier provision and more detailed written information along with signposting to quality on-line information; both intervention options, risks, benefits, and consequences, were not always discussed; some clinicians were somewhat directive in the decision-making process; and patients' treatment values/preferences were not explored-the only example was in one of the eight recorded consultations. Patients could feel overwhelmed by the information and decision and fearful of the impending surgery. CONCLUSIONS: More emphasis should be placed on the provision of full information and the exploration of patient values and preferences for treatment. Clinician training and support for patients, including decision aids, could facilitate the decision-making process. Providing written information earlier and guidance on reliable on-line resources would benefits patients and their families.

Inclusion of person-centred care in UK postgraduate medical education curricula: Interviews and documentary analysis.

BACKGROUND: Person-centred care (PCC) involves placing people at the centre of their healthcare decision making to ensure it meets their needs, values, and personal circumstances. Increasingly, PCC is promoted in healthcare policy and guidance, but little is known about how this is embedded in postgraduate medical training. The aim of this research was to understand how PCC is embedded in UK postgraduate medical training and explore factors influencing inclusion of PCC in curricula content. METHODS: To explore this, we interviewed senior professionals with key roles in the curricula from four UK Royal Colleges (Psychiatrists; Physicians; Surgeons; and GPs) and used framework analysis on interviews and relevant curricula documents to identify themes. RESULTS: Legislation and professional/educational guidance influenced inclusion. PCC definitions and terminology differed and placement within curricula was variable. Royal Colleges defined the curriculum and provided training to ensure competence, but local deaneries independently implemented the curriculum. Trainer engagement was greater than trainee buy in. Quality assurance focused on feedback from trainers and trainees rather than patients, and patient and public involvement in curriculum development, teaching, and assessment was limited. CONCLUSIONS: There is a need for cross-organisation collaboration to develop a PCC competence framework that defines the skills and level of competence required at different points in training, with clarity around the differences between undergraduate and postgraduate requirements. Greater auditing and quality assurance of programme delivery would help identify successful practices to share within and across Royal Colleges, while still maintaining the flexibility of local provision. Engagement with patients and the public in this work can only strengthen provision.

Hyaluronic Acid Fillers to Correct Cleft Lip Asymmetry in Adults: Description of Technique and Patient Reported Outcome Measure Using CLEFT-Q.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the efficacy of hyaluronic acid (HLA) lip filler to correct subtle cleft lip asymmetries in adults using a validated patient reported outcome measure (PROM). DESIGN: Prospective cross sectional. SETTING: UK National Health Service. PATIENTS, PARTICIPANTS: Over 18 years old with repaired cleft lip and dissatisfaction of their lip appearance. INTERVENTIONS: HLA lip filler injection. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: A validated, cleft specific PROM, the lip module of CLEFT-Q™ prior to treatment and again after six weeks. RESULTS: 24 patients included. A mean total CLEFT-Q™ score pre-procedure was 14.9 (Stand deviation (SD) = 4.91) and 24 (SD = 6.08) post-procedure. Difference in mean total score pre- and post-procedure were statically significant (P = .0001) in all domains on the CLEFT-Q™. No adverse outcomes. CONCLUSION: HLA filler to correct subtle cleft lip asymmetries in adults is a simple low risk technique, which can significantly improve the patient's perception of lip appearance. CONCLUSION: HLA lip filler to correct subtle cleft lip asymmetries in adults is a simple technique, low risk procedure which can significantly improve the patient's perception of lip appearance.

Piezoelectric instrumentation in secondary cleft rhinoplasty: Techniques and clinical experience.

INTRODUCTION: Cleft rhinoplasty is a challenging procedure, with precision required to achieve good results. Cases often present with more complex structural and soft tissue asymmetries than non-cleft cases. Piezoelectric instrumentation uses ultrasonic vibrations to cut bone. At certain frequency, it will only cut bone, sparing soft tissue and is reported to decrease postoperative pain, oedema and echymosis. It allows nasal bony work to be performed under direct vision without losing stability of the bony fragments by preserving the underlying periosteum. There is good evidence on the use of piezoelectric instrumentation in cosmetic rhinoplasty; however, none to date has focused exclusively on cleft rhinoplasty. We present a single surgeon experience using piezoelectric instrumentation in cleft rhinoplasty. METHODS AND PATIENTS: We reviewed the case histories of 21 consecutive patients who had Piezo-assisted cleft rhinoplasty surgery between 2017 and 2021. We present our operative techniques and results of piezoelectric cleft rhinoplasty and compare it with 19 patients undergoing cleft rhinoplasty with conventional instrumentation over the same time period, by the same surgeon. RESULTS: Piezo-assisted rhinoplasty steps included bony osteotomies, dorsal hump removal, modification of composite cartilage/ ethmoid grafts and instrumentation of the anterior nasal spine. There were no significant complications and no revision surgeries. There was no difference in operative time compared to conventional instruments. CONCLUSION: Piezoelectric instrumentation is a valuable and efficient tool in cleft rhinoplasty. It offers potentially significant advantages in terms of the precision of bony work, whilst minimising trauma to the surrounding soft tissues.

Co-design to deliver service improvement: What does this mean and how can we do it? A qualitative study with upper gastrointestinal cancer patients and professionals.

BACKGROUND: There is strategic objective to incorporate the principles and practice of co-design into routine service development and improvement. AIM: The aim was to explore the concept and feasibility of service co-design with patients and health professionals with regards to the upper gastrointestinal (UGI) cancer care pathway. METHODS AND RESULTS: Qualitative telephone interviews and face-to-face focus groups in one region of England. Twenty patients completed interviews. Nine patients and ten professionals formed two focus groups. Patients were referred through the urgent (two week) GP referral route and were within six months of receiving their first treatment for an UGI cancer. Professionals were working as service planners and providers of the UGI cancer care pathway. Thematic analysis was undertaken. Six themes emerged: Responsibilities and expectations, Knowledge and understanding, Valuing patient input, Building relationships, Environment for co-design activities, Impact and effectiveness. Based on the themes a checklist has been created to provide practical suggestions for both professionals and patients on approaching co-design for service improvement. CONCLUSION: This study offers policy and practice partners a clearer understanding of co-design and factors to consider when approaching co-design in real life settings.

How do patients make decisions in the context of a multidisciplinary team: an ethnographic study of four head and neck cancer centres in the north of England.

OBJECTIVES: To describe how patients are engaged with cancer decisions in the context of multidisciplinary team (MDT) and how MDT recommendations are operationalised in the context of a shared decision. DESIGN: Ethnographic qualitative study. SETTING: Four head and neck cancer centres in the north of England. PARTICIPANTS: Patients with a diagnosis of new or recurrent head and neck cancer; non-participant observation of 35 MDT meetings and 37 MDT clinics, informal interviews, and formal, semistructured interviews with 20 patients and 9 MDT staff members. METHODS: Ethnographic methods including non-participant observation of MDT meetings and clinic appointments, informal interviews, field notes and formal semistructured interviews with patients and MDT members. RESULTS: MDT discussions often conclude with a firm recommendation for treatment. When delivered to a patient in clinic, this recommendation is often accepted by the patient, but this response may result from the disempowered position in which they find themselves. While patient behaviour may thus appear to endorse clinicians' views that a paternalistic approach is desired by patients (creating a 'cycle of paternalism'), the rigidity of the MDT treatment recommendation can act as a barrier to discussion of options and the exploration of patient values. CONCLUSIONS: The current model of MDT decision-making does not support shared decision-making and may actively undermine it. A model should be developed whereby the individual patient perspective has more input into MDT discussions, and where decisions are made on potential treatment options rather than providing a single recommendation for discussion with the patient. Deeper consideration should be given to how the MDT incorporates the patient perspective and/or delivers its discussion of options to the patient. In order to achieve these objectives, a new model of MDT working is required.

Enhancing national audit through addressing the quality improvement capabilities of feedback recipients: a multi-phase intervention development study.

BACKGROUND: National audits are a common, but variably effective, intervention to improve services. This study aimed to design an intervention to increase the effectiveness of national audit. METHODS: We used interviews, documentary analysis, observations, co-design and stakeholder engagement methods. The intervention was described in an intervention manual and illustrated using a logic model. Phase 1 described the current hospital response to a national audit. Phase 2 identified potential enhancements. Phase 3 developed a strategy to implement the enhancements. Phase 4 explored the feasibility of the intervention alongside the National Audit of Dementia and refined the intervention. Phase 5 adapted the intervention to a second national audit (National Diabetes Audit). Phase 6 explored the feasibility and fidelity of the intervention alongside the National Diabetes Audit and used the findings to further refine the intervention. RESULTS: The developed intervention is a quality improvement collaborative (QIC), containing virtual educational workshop, virtual outreach for local team leads and virtual facilitation of a learning collaborative delivered after feedback has been received. The QIC aims to support national audit recipients to undertake improvement actions tailored to their local context. The target audience is clinical and clinical governance leaders. We found that actions from national audit were constrained by what the clinical lead perceived they deliver personally, these actions were not aligned to identified influences upon performance. We found that the hospital response could be enhanced by targeting low baseline performance, identifying and addressing influences upon to performance, developing trust and credibility, addressing recipient priorities, presenting meaningful comparisons, developing a conceptual model, involving stakeholders and considering the opportunity cost. Phase 3 found that an educational workshop and outreach strategy could support implementation of the enhancements through developing coherence and cognitive participation. We found feasibility could be increased by revising the content, re-naming the intervention, amending activities to address time commitment, incorporating a more structured analysis of influences, supporting collaboration and developing local feedback mechanisms. Phase 5 found adaptation to a second national audit involved reflecting differences in the clinical topic, context and contractual requirements. We found that the behaviour change techniques identified in the manual were delivered by facilitators. Participants reported positive attitudes towards the intervention and that the intervention was appropriate. CONCLUSIONS: The QIC supports local teams to tailor their actions to local context and develop change commitment. Future work will evaluate the effectiveness of the intervention as an adjunct to the National Diabetes Audit.

Development and user-testing of a digital patient decision aid to facilitate shared decision-making for people with stable angina.

BACKGROUND: Research shows that people with stable angina need decision support when considering elective treatments. Initial treatment is with medicines but patients may gain further benefit with invasive percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). Choosing between these treatments can be challenging for patients because both confer similar benefits but have different risks. Patient decision aids (PtDAs) are evidence-based interventions that support shared decision-making (SDM) when making healthcare decisions. This study aimed to develop and user-test a digital patient decision aid (CONNECT) to facilitate SDM for people with stable angina considering invasive treatment with elective PCI. METHODS: A multi-phase study was conducted to develop and test CONNECT (COroNary aNgioplasty dECision Tool) using approaches recommended by the International Patient Decision Aid Standards Collaboration: (i) Steering Group assembled, (ii) review of clinical guidance, (iii) co-design workshops with patients and cardiology health professionals, (iv) first prototype developed and 'alpha' tested (semi-structured cognitive interviews and 12-item acceptability questionnaire) with patients, cardiologists and cardiac nurses, recruited from two hospitals in Northern England, and (v) final PtDA refined following iterative user-feedback. Quantitative data were analysed descriptively and qualitative data from the interviews analysed using deductive content analysis. RESULTS: CONNECT was developed and user-tested with 34 patients and 29 cardiology health professionals. Findings showed that CONNECT was generally acceptable, usable, comprehensible, and desirable. Participants suggested that CONNECT had the potential to improve care quality by personalising consultations and facilitating SDM and informed consent. Patient safety may be improved as CONNECT includes questions about symptom burden which can identify asymptomatic patients unlikely to benefit from PCI, as well as those who may need to be fast tracked because of worsening symptoms. CONCLUSIONS: CONNECT is the first digital PtDA for people with stable angina considering elective PCI, developed in the UK using recommended processes and fulfilling international quality criteria. CONNECT shows promise as an approach to facilitate SDM and should be evaluated in a clinical trial. Further work is required to standardise the provision of probabilistic risk information for people considering elective PCI and to understand how CONNECT can be accessible to underserved communities.

Implementing shared decision-making in UK: Progress 2017-2022.

Shared decision making has been on the policy agenda in the UK for at least twelve years, but it lacked a comprehensive approach to delivery. That has changed over the past five years, and we can now see significant progress across all aspects of a comprehensive approach, including leadership at policy, professional and patient levels; infrastructure developments, including the provision of training, tools and campaigns; and practice improvements, such as demonstrations, measurement and coordination. All these initiatives were necessary, but the last, central coordination, would appear to be key to success.

Twelve tips for small group teaching 2.0 - Rebooted for remote and HyFlex learning.

Small group teaching (SGT) is not just the delivery of teaching to a small number of learners - it is, instead, underpinned by learner-learner interaction, discussion, and collaboration. The advent of readily available technology, combined with the need to maintain learner and teacher safety during the COVID-19 pandemic, has led to a surge in remote learning, and significant increases in synchronous hybrid learning environments, also known as HyFlex learning, in which some learners join remotely and others do so in-person. Teaching in this manner brings new challenges and opportunities and, when compared to face-to-face SGT, requires teachers to employ a complementary repertoire of skills. Against this backdrop, and with the pressing need to up-skill teachers in this domain, we take a fresh look at previously published tips for SGT and reboot these strategies in the context of remote and HyFlex SGT. The challenges of adapting these tips in a changed environment will be considered, and refashioned strategies for their application will be offered.

Development and piloting of four decision aids for implantable cardioverter-defibrillators in different media formats.

BACKGROUND: Using DAs for preference-sensitive decisions is an evidence-based way to improve patient-centered decisions. Reimbursement mandates have increased the need for DAs in ICD care, although none have been formally evaluated. The objectives were to develop and pilot implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) decision aids (DAs) for patients considering primary prevention ICDs. METHODS: Development Phase: An expert panel, including patients and physicians, iteratively developed four DAs: a one-page Option GridTM conversation aid, a four-page in-depth paper tool, a 17-minute video, and an interactive website. Trial Phase: At three sites, patients with heart failure who were eligible for primary prevention ICDs were randomly assigned 2:1 to intervention (received DAs) or control (usual care). We conducted a mixed-methods evaluation exploring acceptability and feasibility. RESULTS: Twenty-one eligible patients enrolled (15 intervention). Most intervention participants found the DAs to be unbiased (67%), helpful (89%), and would recommend them to others (100%). The pilot was feasible at all sites; however, using clinic staff to identify eligible patients was more efficient than chart review. Although the main goals were to measure acceptability and feasibility, intervention participants trended towards increased concordance between longevity values and ICD decisions (71% concordant vs. 29%, p = .06). Participants preferred the in-depth paper tool and video DAs. Access to a nurse during the decision-making window encouraged questions and improved participant-perceived confidence. CONCLUSIONS: Participants felt the DAs provided helpful, balanced information that they would recommend to other patients. Further exploration of this larger context of DA use and strategies to promote independent use related to electrophysiology (EP) visits are needed.

'You can't start a car when there's no petrol left': a qualitative study of patient, family and clinician perspectives on implantable cardioverter defibrillator deactivation.

OBJECTIVE: To explore the attitudes towards implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) deactivation and initiation of deactivation discussions among patients, relatives and clinicians. DESIGN: A multiphase qualitative study consisting of in situ hospital ICD clinic observations, and semistructured interviews of clinicians, patients and relatives. Data were analysed using a constant comparative approach. SETTING: One tertiary and two district general hospitals in England. PARTICIPANTS: We completed 38 observations of hospital consultations prior to ICD implantation, and 80 interviews with patients, family members and clinicians between 2013 and 2015. Patients were recruited from preimplantation to postdeactivation. Clinicians included cardiologists, cardiac physiologists, heart failure nurses and palliative care professionals. RESULTS: Four key themes were identified from the data: the current status of deactivation discussions; patients' perceptions of deactivation; who should take responsibility for deactivation discussions and decisions; and timing of deactivation discussions. We found that although patients and doctors recognised the importance of advance care planning, including ICD deactivation at an early stage in the patient journey, this was often not reflected in practice. The most appropriate clinician to take the lead was thought to be dependent on the context, but could include any appropriately trained member of the healthcare team. It was suggested that deactivation should be raised preimplantation and regularly reviewed. Identification of trigger points postimplantation for deactivation discussions may help ensure that these are timely and inappropriate shocks are avoided. CONCLUSIONS: There is a need for early, ongoing and evolving discussion between ICD recipients and clinicians regarding the eventual need for ICD deactivation. The most appropriate clinician to instigate deactivation discussions is likely to vary between patients and models of care. Reminders at key trigger points, and routine discussion of deactivation at implantation and during advance care planning could prevent distressing experiences for both the patient and their family at the end of life.

Chondroid syringoma: an unusual presentation in a 7-year-old boy.

Coined in 1961 by Hirsch and Helwig, the term chondroid syringoma refers to a rare mixed tumour of subcutaneous tissue. Histologically, these tumours are almost identical to pleomorphic adenomas, arising from salivary glands. With the obvious difference being the presence of sweat gland tissue (syringoma) within a matrix of cartilage (chondroid). These mixed tumours remain scarce throughout the world, with an incidence of less than 0.098%. The vast majority of cases are reported in middle-aged and older adults, where they typically present as painless swellings in the head and neck, which gradually grow in size.

Are We Improving? Update and Critical Appraisal of the Reporting of Decision Process and Quality Measures in Trials Evaluating Patient Decision Aids.

BACKGROUND: In 2014, a systematic review found large gaps in the quality of reporting of measures used in 86 published trials evaluating the effectiveness of patient decision aids (PtDAs). The purpose of this study was to update that review. METHODS: We examined measures of decision making used in 49 randomized controlled trials included in the 2014 and 2017 Cochrane Collaboration systematic review of PtDAs. Data on development of the measures, reliability, validity, responsiveness, precision, interpretability, feasibility, and acceptability were independently abstracted by 2 paired reviewers. RESULTS: Information from 273 measures was abstracted, and 109 of these covered the core domains of decision processes (n = 55) and decision quality including informed choice/knowledge (n = 48) and values-choice concordance (n = 12). Very few studies reported data on the performance and clinical sensibility of measures, with reliability (23%) and validity (6%) being the most common. Studies using new measures were less likely to include information about their psychometric performance compared with previously published measures. LIMITATIONS: The review was limited to reporting of measures in studies included in the Cochrane review and did not consult prior publications. CONCLUSION: There continues to be very little reported about the development or performance of measures used to evaluate the effectiveness of PtDAs in published trials. Minimum reporting standards have been published, and efforts to require investigators to use them are needed.

The mental health of Australian medical practitioners during Covid-19.

OBJECTIVES: To ascertain whether doctors were experiencing higher rates of distress during Covid-19 and whether this was impacted by demographic factors. Our hypotheses were that being a junior doctor, having a previous mental health diagnosis and treating Covid-19 positive patients would predict higher rates of distress. METHODS: Cross-sectional survey conducted via Survey Monkey. Voluntary participants were recruited from the mailing list of a national-based referral service for doctors to psychiatrists. Distress was measured using the Kessler Psychological Distress Scale (K10). Demographic factors were analysed for predictive value of a higher rating on the K10. Areas of concern in relation to Covid-19 and preference for support services were measured on a Likert scale and compared to levels of distress. RESULTS: The rate of very high distress was 15%. Being a junior doctor and having a previous mental health diagnosis were predictive factors of a higher K10 score. K10 was not affected by likelihood of contact with Covid-19-positive patients. Social isolation had a larger impact on mental health in the context of a previous psychiatric diagnosis. Face-to-face assessments were preferred. CONCLUSIONS: Rates of distress in doctors have been higher than baseline during Covid-19. Some groups have been particularly vulnerable.