Commentary: The Broader Context of Long-Term Care Ethics.

Ethical issues in long-term care settings, although having received attention in the literature, have not in our opinion received the appropriate level they require. Thus, we applaud the Cambridge Quarterly for publishing this case. We can attest to the significance of ethical issues arising in long-term care facilities, as Mr. Hope's case is all too familiar to those practicing in these settings. What is unique about this case is that an actual ethics consult was made in a long-term care setting. We have seen very little in the published literature on the use of ethics structures in long-term care populations. Our experience is that these healthcare settings are ripe for ethical concerns and that providers, patients, families, and staff need/desire ethics resources to actively and preventively address ethical concerns. The popular press has begun to recognize the ethical issues involved in long-term care settings and the need for ethics structures. Recently, in California a nurse refused to initiate CPR for an elderly patient in a senior residence. In that case, the nurse was quoted as saying that the facility had a policy that nurses were not to start CPR for elderly patients. 1 Although this case is not exactly the same as that of Mr. Hope, it highlights the need for developing robust ethics program infrastructures in long-term care settings that work toward addressing ethical issues through policy, education, and active consultation.

Noninvasive monitoring of left ventricular end-diastolic pressure reduces rehospitalization rates in patients hospitalized for heart failure: a randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: In patients admitted for heart failure (HF), unrecognized elevation of left ventricular end-diastolic pressure (LVEDP) at the time of discharge may have a role in the high rehospitalization rate for HF on follow-up. METHODS AND RESULTS: In a small, prospective study (n = 50), patients admitted for HF were randomized to management guided by daily noninvasive estimated LVEDP monitoring (Group I, open) to a target LVEDP of <20 mm Hg or management based on clinical assessment alone without knowledge of the estimated LVEDP (Group II, blinded). Noninvasive estimated LVEDP was measured by the VeriCor monitor, which uses the Valsalva maneuver to derive the LVEDP. The primary endpoints were the reduction of estimated LVEDP at discharge and the HF rehospitalization rate on follow-up. Estimated LVEDP was significantly reduced at discharge in the open group compared with the blinded group (mean estimated LVEDP 19.7 ± 1.3 mm Hg vs 25.6 ± 1.5 mm Hg, respectively, P = 0.01). The rehospitalization rates for HF on follow-up were significantly improved in the open group compared with the blinded group (at 1 month: 0% vs 25%, respectively [P = .05]; at 3 months: 0% vs 32% [P = .01]; at 6 months: 4% vs 36% [P = .01]; at 1 year: 16% vs 48% [P = .03]). CONCLUSIONS: When HF is managed by clinical assessment only, estimated LVEDPs remain high at discharge, resulting in early and frequent rehospitalization for HF. Therapy guided by estimated LVEDP monitoring optimizes filling pressures and reduces HF rehospitalization rates.

Correlates of MMPI--a scales in acute psychiatric and forensic samples.

The purpose of this study was to expand the empirical basis for interpretation of the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory-Adolescent (MMPI-A; Butcher et al., 1992). Participants were 157 boys from a forensic setting and 197 girls from an acute psychiatric inpatient setting. Criterion variables were identified from sources such as psychiatrist report, parent report, and psychosocial history. Results generally support the construct validity of MMPI-A scales. Scales measuring internalizing problems were more highly correlated with criterion measures of internalizing behaviors than measures of externalizing behaviors, whereas scales measuring externalizing problems were more highly correlated with externalizing variables than with internalizing criteria. Implications of this study include an expanded empirical foundation for interpretation of the MMPI-A, greater understanding of the constructs it measures, and evidence supporting the generalizability of these constructs across settings.