Psychosocial Outcomes of Pain and Pain Management in Adults with Osteogenesis Imperfecta: A Qualitative Study.

Osteogenesis imperfecta (OI) is a genetic disorder characterized by bone fragility and fractures, short stature, dental abnormalities, hearing loss, scoliosis, and chronic pain. Despite a growing literature on the functional outcomes of OI, limited research has explicitly examined the psychosocial outcomes of pain within OI. Adults with OI (N = 15) were interviewed to understand pain-related experiences through a thematic analysis of semi-structured interview data. Research team members, genetic research experts, and OI clinicians developed an interview guide focused on topics related to pain and mental health challenges. Participants' transcripts were coded by two independent coders; codes were then merged across coders and quotation outputs were subsequently abstracted (paraphrased then thematically classified) to identify common themes. Themes related to pain management variability regarding pain type, pain risk management and accessibility, pain outcomes (e.g., behavior, cognitive, affective), and pain exacerbating factors (e.g., individual, contextual) were identified. Participants reported chronic and acute pain, and despite the inaccessibility and stigmatization of pain medications (e.g., opioids), pharmacological treatments were the most common pain management approach. Participants reported negative pain outcomes, such as limited daily functioning and activity participation, fear, anger, anxiety, depression, and difficulty concentrating. Lastly, participants suggested that lack of physician and community knowledge on chronic pain in OI indirectly exacerbates both subjective pain intensity and outcomes. Although limited by a small, nondiverse sample, the current study provides valuable exploration of the unique pain experiences of adults with OI that may have implications for proactive management, treatment development, and clinician training.

A qualitative exploration of patient perspectives on psychosocial burdens and positive factors in adults with osteogenesis imperfecta.

Osteogenesis imperfecta (OI) is a pleiotropic, heritable connective tissue disorder associated with a wide range of health implications, including frequent bone fracture. While progress has been made to understand the spectrum of these physical health implications, the impact of OI on psychosocial well-being, as well as protective factors that buffer against adverse psychosocial outcomes, remain understudied. This present study relies on a qualitative approach to assess patient perspectives on both protective and adverse psychosocial factors specific to OI in 15 adults with varying disease status. Semi-structured interviews were conducted, subsequently coded, and themes extracted. Themes concerning psychosocial burdens (i.e., negative affective and behavioral impacts of disease status) and protective factors were identified from cooperatively-coded transcripts (two coders per transcript). Participants reported experiencing an increase in negative affect and disease-related distress after fracturing a bone and during recovery. Fear and concern specific to the uncertainty of future bone fractures and negative self-image was common. In contrast to these negative impacts, participants additionally described positive orientations toward their disease and attributed positive traits to their lived experience with a chronic disease. While limited due to small sample size and lack of ethno-racial diversity, findings highlight a need for continued research on the relationship between OI disease status and psychosocial outcomes, as well as the development of psychological interventions designed for OI populations. Findings have relevant clinical applications for healthcare providers working with those diagnosed with OI.

Clinical and Psychosocial Factors Considered When Deciding Whether to Offer Deep Brain Stimulation for Childhood Dystonia.

INTRODUCTION: Childhood dystonia is often nonresponsive to medications, and refractory cases are increasingly being treated with deep brain stimulation (DBS). However, many have noted that there is little consensus about when DBS should be offered, and there has been little examination of clinicians' decision-making process when determining whether to offer DBS for childhood dystonia. OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to identify and examine the factors considered by pediatric movement disorder specialists before offering DBS. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Semistructured interviews (N = 29) with pediatric dystonia clinicians were conducted, transcribed, and coded. Using thematic content analysis, nine central themes were identified when clinicians were asked about key factors, clinical factors, and psychosocial factors considered before offering pediatric DBS. RESULTS: Clinicians identified nine main factors. Five of these were classified primarily as clinical factors: early intervention and younger age (raised by 86% of respondents), disease progression and symptom severity (83%), etiology and genetic status (79%), clinicians' perceived risks and benefits of DBS for the patient (79%), and exhaustion of other treatment options (55%). The remaining four were classified primarily as psychosocial factors: social and family support (raised by 97% of respondents), patient and caregiver expectations about outcomes and understanding of DBS treatment (90%), impact of dystonia on quality of life (69%), and financial resources and access to care (31%). CONCLUSIONS: Candidacy determinations, in this context, are complicated by an interrelation of clinical and psychosocial factors that contribute to the decision. There is potential for bias when considering family support and quality of life. Uncertainty of outcomes related to the etiology of dystonia makes candidacy judgments challenging. More systematic examination of the characteristics and criteria used to identify pediatric patients with dystonia who can significantly benefit from DBS is necessary to develop clear guidelines and promote the well-being of these children.

Attitudes and Beliefs of Patients With Left-Ventricular Assist Devices Toward COVID-19 Vaccination and Willingness to Seek Care During the Pandemic.

Given the stalling improvement in vaccine hesitancy rates in the United States (US), it is important to understand why a chronically ill group, patients with left-ventricular assist devices (LVADs), might not get vaccinated and to delineate the barriers they may face in seeking care. We conducted an online survey to characterize the attitudes of patients with LVADs toward COVID-19 vaccination, identify their willingness to seek care during the pandemic, and characterize barriers to doing so. Our survey showed that the rate of vaccine hesitancy among LVAD patients is similar to that of the general population in the US. This rate is higher than expected for a chronically ill group at risk of severe COVID-19 infection. We also found that LVAD patients perceive barriers to seeking care during the pandemic. We recommend that LVAD care teams emphasize that patients should seek care for emergency medical conditions despite their fears of contracting COVID-19. Based on our results, we also recommend vaccine uptake education for this population focused on patients' concerns about serious side effects and not enough research done on the vaccine.

Pressing ethical issues in considering pediatric deep brain stimulation for obsessive-compulsive disorder.

BACKGROUND: Refractory obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD) among adults is the first psychiatric indication of deep brain stimulation (DBS) to receive an FDA Humanitarian Device Exemption (HDE). Given the HDE approval and encouraging evidence that has since emerged, exploration of DBS for OCD may expand to adolescents in the future. More than 100,000 adolescents in the U.S. suffer from refractory OCD, and there is already a precedent for the transition of DBS in adults to children in the case of dystonia. However, the risk-benefit analysis of pediatric DBS for OCD may be more complex and raise different ethical questions compared to pediatric DBS for dystonia. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to gain insight into pressing ethical issues related to using DBS in adolescents with OCD. METHODS: Semi-structured interviews were conducted with clinicians (n = 25) caring for pediatric patients with refractory OCD. Interview transcripts were coded with MAXQDA 2018 software and analyzed using thematic content analysis to identify emergent themes. RESULTS: Five central themes were identified in clinician responses, three of which were exacerbated in the pediatric DBS setting. Clinicians expressed concerns related to conditions of decision-making including adolescents' capacity to assent (80%), the lack of evidence about the outcomes and potential unknown effects of using DBS in adolescents with OCD (68%), and the importance of exhausting other treatment options before considering DBS (20%). CONCLUSIONS: Strategies to address clinician concerns include implementation of validated decision support tools and further research into the outcomes of pediatric DBS for OCD to establish clear guidelines for patient selection.

Conceptualizations of consciousness and continuation of care among family members and health professionals caring for patients in a minimally conscious state.

BACKGROUND: The American Academy of Neurology recently emphasized the importance of communicating with patients' families to better reflect patient values in clinical care. However, little is known about how decisions about continuing rehabilitative care made by family caregivers and healthcare providers working with minimally conscious patients are informed by conceptualizations of consciousness and moral status. METHODS: We explored these issues in interviews with 18 family caregivers and 20 healthcare professionals caring for minimally conscious patients. Data were analyzed using thematic content analysis. RESULTS: Results suggest that family members and healthcare professionals share similar views of what consciousness is ("being there") and what it is indicated by ("a look in the eyes," and/or an "ability to do"/agency). They also share a belief that the presence (or "level") of consciousness does not determine whether rehabilitative care should be discontinued. Rather, it should be determined by considerations of suffering and well-being. Providers were more likely to view suffering as rationale for discontinuation of care, while family members viewed suffering as an indicator of and motivator for potential recovery. CONCLUSION: Findings can help optimize family-provider communications about minimally conscious patients by acknowledging shared assumptions and interpretations of consciousness, as well as key areas where perspectives diverge.Implications for rehabilitationFamily and professional caregivers' interpretations of consciousness and suffering are implicated in decisions about continuing rehabilitation for minimally conscious patients.Family members and healthcare providers both rely to some extent on non-observable evidence to evaluate consciousness, which may be an adaptive and philanthropic response to clinical uncertainty.Acknowledging shared assumptions and interpretations of consciousness, as well as diverging perspectives, can help to optimize family-provider communications.

A principal components analysis of factors associated with successful implementation of an LVAD decision support tool.

BACKGROUND: A central goal among researchers and policy makers seeking to implement clinical interventions is to identify key facilitators and barriers that contribute to implementation success. Despite calls from a number of scholars, empirical insights into the complex structural and cultural predictors of why decision aids (DAs) become routinely embedded in health care settings remains limited and highly variable across implementation contexts. METHODS: We examined associations between "reach", a widely used indicator (from the RE-AIM model) of implementation success, and multi-level site characteristics of nine LVAD clinics engaged over 18 months in implementation and dissemination of a decision aid for left ventricular assist device (LVAD) treatment. Based on data collected from nurse coordinators, we explored factors at the level of the organization (e.g. patient volume), patient population (e.g. health literacy; average sickness level), clinician characteristics (e.g. attitudes towards decision aid; readiness for change) and process (how the aid was administered). We generated descriptive statistics for each site and calculated zero-order correlations (Pearson's r) between all multi-level site variables including cumulative reach at 12 months and 18 months for all sites. We used principal components analysis (PCA) to examine any latent factors governing relationships between and among all site characteristics, including reach. RESULTS: We observed strongest inclines in reach of our decision aid across the first year, with uptake fluctuating over the second year. Average reach across sites was 63% (s.d. = 19.56) at 12 months and 66% (s.d. = 19.39) at 18 months. Our PCA revealed that site characteristics positively associated with reach on two distinct dimensions, including a first dimension reflecting greater organizational infrastructure and standardization (characteristic of larger, more established clinics) and a second dimension reflecting positive attitudinal orientations, specifically, openness and capacity to give and receive decision support among coordinators and patients. CONCLUSIONS: Successful implementation plans should incorporate specific efforts to promote supportive and mutually informative interactions between clinical staff members and to institute systematic and standardized protocols to enhance the availability, convenience and salience of intervention tool in routine practice. Further research is needed to understand whether "core predictors" of success vary across different intervention types.

Researcher Perspectives on Ethical Considerations in Adaptive Deep Brain Stimulation Trials.

Interest and investment in closed-loop or adaptive deep brain stimulation (aDBS) systems have quickly expanded due to this neurotechnology's potential to more safely and effectively treat refractory movement and psychiatric disorders compared to conventional DBS. A large neuroethics literature outlines potential ethical concerns about conventional DBS and aDBS systems. Few studies, however, have examined stakeholder perspectives about ethical issues in aDBS research and other next-generation DBS devices. To help fill this gap, we conducted semi-structured interviews with researchers involved in aDBS trials (n = 23) to gain insight into the most pressing ethical questions in aDBS research and any concerns about specific features of aDBS devices, including devices' ability to measure brain activity, automatically adjust stimulation, and store neural data. Using thematic content analysis, we identified 8 central themes in researcher responses. The need to measure and store neural data for aDBS raised concerns among researchers about data privacy and security issues (noted by 91% of researchers), including the avoidance of unintended or unwanted third-party access to data. Researchers reflected on the risks and safety (83%) of aDBS due to the experimental nature of automatically modulating then observing stimulation effects outside a controlled clinical setting and in relation to need for surgical battery changes. Researchers also stressed the importance of ensuring informed consent and adequate patient understanding (74%). Concerns related to automaticity and device programming (65%) were discussed, including current uncertainties about biomarker validity. Additionally, researchers discussed the potential impacts of automatic stimulation on patients' autonomy and control over stimulation (57%). Lastly, researchers discussed concerns related to patient selection (defining criteria for candidacy) (39%), challenges of ensuring post-trial access to care and device maintenance (39%), and potential effects on personality and identity (30%). To help address researcher concerns, we discuss the need to minimize cybersecurity vulnerabilities, advance biomarker validity, promote the balance of device control between patients and clinicians, and enhance ongoing informed consent. The findings from this study will help inform policies that will maximize the benefits and minimize potential harms of aDBS and other next-generation DBS devices.

Using Nudges to Enhance Clinicians' Implementation of Shared Decision Making With Patient Decision Aids.

Background. Although effective interventions for shared decision making (SDM) exist, there is a lack of uptake of these tools into clinical practice. "Nudges," which draw on behavioral economics and target automatic thinking processes, are used by policy makers to influence population-level behavior change. Nudges have not been applied in the context of SDM interventions but have potential to influence clinician motivation, a primary barrier to long-term adoption of SDM tools. Objective. Describe, evaluate, and propose recommendations for the use of a behavioral economics framework (MINDSPACE) on clinician motivation and behavior during implementation of a validated decision aid (DA) for left ventricular assist device at nine hospitals. Methods. Qualitative thematic analysis of process notes from stakeholder meetings during the first 6 months of implementation to identify examples of how the MINDSPACE framework was operationalized. Quantitative implementation progress was evaluated using the RE-AIM framework. Results. MINDSPACE components were translated into concrete approaches that leveraged influential stakeholders, fostered ownership over the DA and positive emotional associations, spread desirable norms across sites, and situated the DA within established default processes. DA reach to eligible patients increased from 9.8% in the first month of implementation to 70.0% in the sixth month. Larger gains in reach were observed following meetings using MINDSPACE approaches. Limitations. The MINDSPACE framework does not capture all possible influences on behavior and responses to nudges may differ across populations. Conclusions. Behavioral economics can be applied to implementation science to foster uptake of SDM tools by increasing clinician motivation. Our recommendations can help other researchers effectively apply these approaches in real-world settings when there are often limited incentives and opportunities to change organizational- or structural-level factors.

Researcher Perspectives on Data Sharing in Deep Brain Stimulation.

The expansion of research on deep brain stimulation (DBS) and adaptive DBS (aDBS) raises important neuroethics and policy questions related to data sharing. However, there has been little empirical research on the perspectives of experts developing these technologies. We conducted semi-structured, open-ended interviews with aDBS researchers regarding their data sharing practices and their perspectives on ethical and policy issues related to sharing. Researchers expressed support for and a commitment to sharing, with most saying that they were either sharing their data or would share in the future and that doing so was important for advancing the field. However, those who are sharing reported a variety of sharing partners, suggesting heterogeneity in sharing practices and lack of the broad sharing that would reflect principles of open science. Researchers described several concerns and barriers related to sharing, including privacy and confidentiality, the usability of shared data by others, ownership and control of data (including potential commercialization), and limited resources for sharing. They also suggested potential solutions to these challenges, including additional safeguards to address privacy issues, standardization and transparency in analysis to address issues of data usability, professional norms and heightened cooperation to address issues of ownership and control, and streamlining of data transmission to address resource limitations. Researchers also offered a range of views on the sensitivity of neural activity data (NAD) and data related to mental health in the context of sharing. These findings are an important input to deliberations by researchers, policymakers, neuroethicists, and other stakeholders as they navigate ethics and policy questions related to aDBS research.

Psychiatric genomics researchers' perspectives on best practices for returning results to individual participants.

PURPOSE: Large-scale array-based and sequencing studies have advanced our understanding of the genetic architecture of psychiatric disorders, but also increased the potential to generate an exponentially larger amount of clinically relevant findings. As genomic testing becomes more widespread in psychiatry research, urgency grows to establish best practices for offering return of results (RoR) to individuals at risk or diagnosed with a psychiatric disorder. METHODS: We interviewed an international sample (n = 39) of psychiatric genetics researchers to examine conceptualizations of "best practices" for RoR to individual research participants. RESULTS: While the vast majority of researchers do not offer RoR, most believed medically actionable findings (85%) and clinically valid but non-medically actionable findings (54%) should be offered. Researchers identified three main areas for improvement: interfacing with individual participants; interdisciplinary training, guidance, and integration; and quality planning and resource allocation for returning results. CONCLUSION: There are significant gaps between researchers' visions for "best" versus "actual" RoR practices. While researchers call for participant-centered practices, including consent practices that consider any special needs of participants with psychiatric disorders, return of individually meaningful results, and effective follow-up and provisions for treatment, the current reality is that consent and RoR practices lack standardized and evidence-based norms.

Seeing minds in patients with disorders of consciousness.

Objective: To explore the ways in which health care professionals and families understand terms and concepts associated with disorders of consciousness.Methods: Open-ended, semi-structured interviews were conducted with 20 health care professionals and 18 family caregivers affiliated with a disorders of consciousness program within a nationally ranked rehabilitation facility in the United States.Results: Analysis revealed that: (1) disagreement between some health care professionals and family caregivers regarding the presence of consciousness can arise due to differing beliefs about a patient experiencing pain, and differences in the length of time family caregivers spend with patients relative to clinical staff; (2) some health care professionals and family caregivers use nonclinical terms and concepts to describe consciousness; and (3) some family caregivers might attribute complex mental capacities to patients, which extend beyond the clinical evidence.Conclusion: The beliefs of health care professionals and families regarding disorders of consciousness are complex and could be influenced by broader psychological proclivities to "see minds" in patients who have a liminal neurological status. Awareness of these dynamics may assist health care professionals when interacting with family caregivers.

A matter of life and longer life.

While the major scientific discoveries that would extend the length and health of human lives are not yet here, the research that could create them is already underway. As prospects for a world in which extended and improved lives inches closer into reality, the discourse about what to consider as we move forward grows richer, with corporate executives, ideologues, scientists, theologians, ethicists, investigative journalists, and philosophers taking part in imagining and anticipating the rich array of humanity's possible futures. Drawing from in-depth interviews with key stakeholders (n = 22), we offer empirical insights into key values and beliefs animating the "longevity movement," including what constitutes an ideal human state, the imperative to intervene, and the role of individual liberty and concerns for equality. Emerging from these interviews are common concerns about reducing suffering, preserving diversity in visions of successful aging and how best to promote access to a future that may not remain hypothetical for long.