Self-identified rurality in a nationally representative population in the US.

INTRODUCTION: In the US, health services research most often relies on Rural-Urban Commuting Area (RUCA) classification codes to measure rurality. This measure is known to misrepresent rurality and does not rely on individual experiences of rurality associated with healthcare inequities. We aimed to determine a patient-centered RUCA-based definition of rurality. METHODS: In this cross-sectional study, we conducted an online survey asking US residents, 'Do you live in a rural area?' and the rationale for their answer. We evaluated the concordance between their self-identified rurality and their ZIP code-derived RUCA designation of rurality by calculating Cohen's kappa (κ) statistic and percent agreement. RESULTS: Of the 774 participants, 456 (58.9%) and 318 (41.1%) individuals had conventional urban and rural RUCA classifications, respectively. There was only moderate agreement between perceived rurality and rural RUCA classification (κ=0.48; 95% confidence interval (CI)=0.42-0.54). Among people living within RUCA 2-3 defined urban areas (n=51), percent agreement was only 19.6%. Discordance was driven by their perception of the population density, proximity to the nearest neighbor, proximity to a metropolitan area, and the number of homes in their area. Based on our results, we reclassified RUCA 2-3 designations as rural, resulting in an increase in overall concordance (κ=0.56; 95%CI=0.50-0.62). DISCUSSION: Patient-centered rural-urban classification is required to effectively evaluate the impact of rurality on health disparities. This study presents a more patient-centric RUCA-based classification of rurality that can be easily operationalized in future research in situations in which self-reported rural status is missing or challenging to obtain. CONCLUSION: Reclassification of RUCA 2-3 as rural represents a more patient-centric definition of rurality.

Nudging During Pediatric Intensive Care Conferences With Family Members: Retrospective Analysis of Transcripts From a Single-Center, 2015-2019.

OBJECTIVES: Nudging, a behavioral economics concept, subtly influences decision-making without coercion or limiting choice. Despite its frequent use, the specific application of nudging techniques by clinicians in shared decision-making (SDM) is understudied. Our aim was to analyze clinicians' use of nudging in a curated dataset of family care conferences in the PICU. DESIGN: Between 2019 and 2020, we retrospectively studied and coded 70 previously recorded care conference transcripts that involved physicians and families from 2015 to 2019. We focused on decision-making discussions examining instances of nudging, namely salience, framing, options, default, endowment, commission, omission, recommend, expert opinion, certainty, and social norms. Nudging instances were categorized by decision type, including tracheostomy, goals of care, or procedures. SETTING: Single-center quaternary pediatric facility with general and cardiac ICUs. PATIENTS: None. INTERVENTIONS: None. MEASUREMENTS: We assessed the pattern and frequency of nudges in each transcript. MAIN RESULTS: Sixty-three of the 70 transcripts contained SDM episodes. These episodes represented a total of 11 decision categories based on the subject matter of nudging instances, with 308 decision episodes across all transcripts (median [interquartile range] 5 [4-6] per conference). Tracheostomy was the most frequently discussed decision. A total of 1096 nudging instances were identified across the conferences, with 8 (6-10) nudge types per conference. The most frequent nudging strategy used was gain frame (203/1096 [18.5%]), followed by loss frame (150/1096 [13.7%]). CONCLUSIONS: Nudging is routinely employed by clinicians to guide decision-making, primarily through gain or loss framing. This retrospective analysis aids in understanding nudging in care conferences: it offers insight into potential risks and benefits of these techniques; it highlights ways in which their application has been used by caregivers; and it may be a resource for future trainee curriculum development.

Accuracy of Expected Symptoms and Subsequent Quality of Life Measures Among Adults With COPD.

Importance: Patients' expectations for future health guide their decisions and enable them to prepare, adapt, and cope. However, little is known about how inaccurate expectations may affect patients' illness outcomes. Objective: To assess the association between patients' expectation inaccuracies and health-related quality of life. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cohort study of patients with severe chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) was conducted from 2017 to 2021, which included a 24-month follow-up period. Eligible participants received outpatient primary care at pulmonary clinics of a single large US health system. Data were analyzed between 2021 and 2023. Exposure: Expectation accuracy, measured by comparing patients' self-reported expectations of their symptom burden with their actual physical and emotional symptoms 3, 12, and 24 months in the future. Main Outcome and Measure: Health-related quality of life, measured by the St George's Respiratory Questionnaire-COPD at 3, 12, and 24 months. Results: A total of 207 participants were included (median age, 65.5 years [range, 42.0-86.0 years]; 120 women [58.0%]; 118 Black [57.0%], 79 White [38.2%]). The consent rate among approached patients was 80.0%. Most patients reported no or only limited discussions of future health and symptom burdens with their clinicians. Across physical and emotional symptoms and all 3 time points, patients' expectations were more optimistic than their experiences. There were no consistent patterns of measured demographic or behavioral characteristics associated with expectation accuracy. Regression models revealed that overoptimistic expectations of future burdens of dyspnea (linear regression estimate, 4.68; 95% CI, 2.68 to 6.68) and negative emotions (linear regression estimate, -3.04; 95% CI, -4.78 to 1.29) were associated with lower health-related quality of life at 3 months after adjustment for baseline health-related quality of life, forced expiratory volume over 1 second, and interval clinical events (P < .001 for both). Similar patterns were observed at 12 months (dyspnea: linear regression estimate, 2.41; 95% CI, 0.45 to 4.37) and 24 months (negative emotions: linear regression estimate, -2.39; 95% CI, -4.67 to 0.12; dyspnea: linear regression estimate, 3.21; 95% CI, 0.82 to 5.60), although there was no statistically significant association between expectation of negative emotions and quality of life at 12 months. Conclusions and Relevance: In this cohort study of patients with COPD, we found that patients are overoptimistic in their expectations about future negative symptom burdens, and such inaccuracies were independently associated with worse well-being over time. Developing and implementing strategies to improve patients' symptom expectations may improve patient-centered outcomes.

Associations of Race With Sedation Depth Among Mechanically Ventilated Adults: A Retrospective Cohort Study.

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the association of race with proportion of time in deep sedation among mechanically ventilated adults. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study from October 2017 to December 2019. SETTING: Five hospitals within a single health system. PATIENTS: Adult patients who identified race as Black or White who were mechanically ventilated for greater than or equal to 24 hours in one of 12 medical, surgical, cardiovascular, cardiothoracic, or mixed ICUs. INTERVENTIONS: None. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: The exposure was White compared with Black race. The primary outcome was the proportion of time in deep sedation during the first 48 hours of mechanical ventilation, defined as Richmond Agitation-Sedation Scale values of -3 to -5. For the primary analysis, we performed mixed-effects linear regression models including ICU as a random effect, and adjusting for age, sex, English as preferred language, body mass index, Elixhauser comorbidity index, Laboratory-based Acute Physiology Score, Version 2, ICU admission source, admission for a major surgical procedure, and the presence of septic shock. Of the 3337 included patients, 1242 (37%) identified as Black, 1367 (41%) were female, and 1002 (30%) were admitted to a medical ICU. Black patients spent 48% of the first 48 hours of mechanical ventilation in deep sedation, compared with 43% among White patients in unadjusted analysis. After risk adjustment, Black race was significantly associated with more time in early deep sedation (mean difference, 5%; 95% CI, 2-7%; p < 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: There are disparities in sedation during the first 48 hours of mechanical ventilation between Black and White patients across a diverse set of ICUs. Future work is needed to determine the clinical significance of these findings, given the known poorer outcomes for patients who experience early deep sedation.

Education for Tobacco Use Disorder Treatment: Current State, Evidence, and Unmet Needs.

Background: Tobacco use is undertreated in the medical setting. One driver may be inadequate tobacco use disorder treatment (TUDT) training for clinicians in specialties treating tobacco-dependent patients. Objective: We sought to evaluate the current state of TUDT training for diverse professionals and how these skills are assessed in credentialing exams. Methods: We performed a focused review of current educational practices, evidence-based strategies, and accreditation exam contents focused on TUDT. Results: Among medical students, participants in reviewed studies reported anywhere from 45 minutes to 3 hours of TUDT training throughout their 4-year programs, most often in the form of didactic sessions. Similarly, little TUDT training was reported at the post-graduate (residency, fellowship, continuing medical education) levels, and reported training was typically delivered as time-based (expected hours of instruction) rather than competency-based (demonstration of mastery) learning. Multiple studies evaluated effective TUDT curricula at varied stages of training. More effective curricula incorporated longitudinal sessions and active learning, such as standardized patient encounters or proctored patient visits. Knowledge of TUDT is minimally evaluated on certification exams. For example, the American Board of Internal Medicine blueprint lists TUDT as <2% of one subtopic on both the internal medicine and pulmonary exams. Conclusion: TUDT training for most clinicians is minimal, does not assess competency, and is minimally evaluated on certification exams. Effective, evidence-based TUDT training incorporating active learning should be integrated into medical education at all levels, with attention paid to inclusion on subsequent certifying exams.

Deception, honesty, and professionalism: A persistent challenge in modern medicine.

Honesty and deception have unique antecedents and consequences within the context of healthcare, relative to other social contexts. While modern professional standards emphasize honesty and avoidance of deception as paramount, empirical work from clinical practice settings reveal that deception remains widespread. This paper provides an overview of the current theoretical and scientific evidence regarding the use and potential consequences of deception of patients by clinicians. This includes the evolving professional standards and the roles of therapeutic dishonesty, collaborative deception, truth and trust in medicine, informed consent, and the outcomes of deception.

Stakeholders' Views on Reducing Psychological Distress in Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease.

CONTEXT: Psychological distress is highly prevalent among patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), the top palliative care priority identified by such patients, and associated with poor outcomes. However, patients with COPD rarely receive care for psychological distress. OBJECTIVES: To identify the barriers and opportunities to reducing psychological distress among patients with COPD in the specialty pulmonary setting. METHODS: We conducted semi-structured interviews based on Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research constructs with key stakeholders at two pulmonary clinics, including clinicians, staff, patients, and caregivers. We focused on the relevance, identification, and management of psychological distress in COPD care. We identified emergent patterns and concepts, developed and applied codes to the text, and examined the content in each code to identify key themes. RESULTS: Thirty-one stakeholders participated in interviews (RR=64.6%). Nearly all pulmonary clinicians felt that psychological well-being was a critical, unmet patient need. Yet, most pulmonary clinicians reported that they lacked sufficient training and available resources to support patients, prioritized physical symptoms and medication management over emotional concerns, and perceived limited cultural support for such efforts in the pulmonary clinic setting. Patient and caregiver participants desired integration and prioritization of care addressing psychological distress into routine pulmonary care. CONCLUSION: Mitigating psychological distress is a palliative care priority in COPD. Integrating efficient, effective resources, such as tools or programs that address psychological distress, into pulmonary clinic settings serving a high volume of patients with COPD may improve the provision of supportive care to patients typically underserved by specialty palliative care.

Comparing Smoking Cessation Interventions among Underserved Patients Referred for Lung Cancer Screening: A Pragmatic Trial Protocol.

Smoking burdens are greatest among underserved patients. Lung cancer screening (LCS) reduces mortality among individuals at risk for smoking-associated lung cancer. Although LCS programs must offer smoking cessation support, the interventions that best promote cessation among underserved patients in this setting are unknown. This stakeholder-engaged, pragmatic randomized clinical trial will compare the effectiveness of four interventions promoting smoking cessation among underserved patients referred for LCS. By using an additive study design, all four arms provide standard "ask-advise-refer" care. Arm 2 adds free or subsidized pharmacologic cessation aids, arm 3 adds financial incentives up to $600 for cessation, and arm 4 adds a mobile device-delivered episodic future thinking tool to promote attention to long-term health goals. We hypothesize that smoking abstinence rates will be higher with the addition of each intervention when compared with arm 1. We will enroll 3,200 adults with LCS orders at four U.S. health systems. Eligible patients include those who smoke at least one cigarette daily and self-identify as a member of an underserved group (i.e., is Black or Latinx, is a rural resident, completed a high school education or less, and/or has a household income <200% of the federal poverty line). The primary outcome is biochemically confirmed smoking abstinence sustained through 6 months. Secondary outcomes include abstinence sustained through 12 months, other smoking-related clinical outcomes, and patient-reported outcomes. This pragmatic randomized clinical trial will identify the most effective smoking cessation strategies that LCS programs can implement to reduce smoking burdens affecting underserved populations. Clinical trial registered with clinicaltrials.gov (NCT04798664). Date of registration: March 12, 2021. Date of trial launch: May 17, 2021.

Family Presence for Critically Ill Patients During a Pandemic.

Family engagement is a key component of high-quality critical care, with known benefits for patients, care teams, and family members themselves. The COVID-19 pandemic led to rapid enactment of prohibitions or restrictions on visitation that now persist, particularly for patients with COVID-19. Reevaluation of these policies in response to advances in knowledge and resources since the early pandemic is critical because COVID-19 will continue to be a public health threat for months to years, and future pandemics are likely. This article reviews rationales and evidence for restricting or permitting family members' physical presence and provides broad guidance for health care systems to develop and implement policies that maximize benefit and minimize risk of family visitation during COVID-19 and future similar public health crises.

Preferences for Predictive Model Characteristics among People Living with Chronic Lung Disease: A Discrete Choice Experiment.

Background. Patients may find clinical prediction models more useful if those models accounted for preferences for false-positive and false-negative predictive errors and for other model characteristics. Methods. We conducted a discrete choice experiment to compare preferences for characteristics of a hypothetical mortality prediction model among community-dwelling patients with chronic lung disease recruited from 3 clinics in Philadelphia. This design was chosen to allow us to quantify "exchange rates" between different characteristics of a prediction model. We provided previously validated educational modules to explain model attributes of sensitivity, specificity, confidence intervals (CI), and time horizons. Patients reported their interest in using prediction models themselves or having their physicians use them. Patients then chose between 2 hypothetical prediction models each containing varying levels of the 4 attributes across 12 tasks. Results. We completed interviews with 200 patients, among whom 95% correctly chose a strictly dominant model in an internal validity check. Patients' interest in predictive information was high for use by themselves (n = 169, 85%) and by their physicians (n = 184, 92%). Interest in maximizing sensitivity and specificity were similar (0.88 percentage points of specificity equivalent to 1 point of sensitivity, 95% CI 0.72 to 1.05). Patients were willing to accept a reduction of 6.10 months (95% CI 3.66 to 8.54) in the predictive time horizon for a 1% increase in specificity. Discussion. Patients with chronic lung disease can articulate their preferences for the characteristics of hypothetical mortality prediction models and are highly interested in using such models as part of their care. Just as clinical care should become more patient centered, so should the characteristics of predictive models used to guide that care.

Family-Centered Care During the COVID-19 Era.

Family support is more, not less, important during crisis. However, during the COVID-19 pandemic, maintaining public safety necessitates restricting the physical presence of families for hospitalized patients. In response, health systems must rapidly adapt family-centric procedures and tools to circumvent restrictions on physical presence. Strategies for maintaining family integrity must acknowledge clinicians' limited time and attention to devote to learning new skills. Internet-based solutions can facilitate the routine, predictable, and structured communication, which is central to family-centered care. But the reliance on technology may compromise patient privacy and exacerbate racial, socioeconomic, and geographic disparities for populations that lack access to reliable internet access, devices, or technological literacy. We provide a toolbox of strategies for supporting family-centered inpatient care during physical distancing responsive to the current clinical climate. Innovations in the implementation of family involvement during hospitalizations may lead to long-term progress in the delivery of family-centered care.

Effect of Intensivist Communication in a Simulated Setting on Interpretation of Prognosis Among Family Members of Patients at High Risk of Intensive Care Unit Admission: A Randomized Trial.

Importance: Discordance about prognosis between a patient's health care decision-making surrogate and the treating intensivist is common in the intensive care unit (ICU). Empowering families, friends, and caregivers of patients who are critically ill to make informed decisions about care is important, but it is unclear how best to communicate prognostic information to surrogates when a patient is expected to die. Objective: To determine whether family members, who are often health care decision-making surrogates, interpret intensivists as being more optimistic when questions about prognosis in the ICU are answered indirectly. Design, Setting, and Participants: This web-based randomized trial was conducted between September 27, 2019, and October 17, 2019, among a national sample of adult children, spouses, partners, or siblings of people with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease who were receiving long-term oxygen therapy. Participants were shown video vignettes depicting an intensivist answering a standardized question about the prognosis of a patient at high risk of death on day 3 of ICU admission. Participants were excluded if they had worked as a physician, nurse, or advanced health care practitioner. Data were analyzed from October 18, 2019, to November 12, 2019. Interventions: Participants were randomized to view 1 of 4 intensivist communication styles in response to the question "What do you think is most likely to happen?": (1) a direct response (control), (2) an indirect response comparing the patient's condition with that of other patients, (3) an indirect response describing the patient's deteriorating physiological condition, or (4) redirection to a discussion of the patient's values and goals. Main Outcomes and Measures: Participant responses to 2 questions: (1) "If you had to guess, what do you think the doctor thinks is the chance that your loved one will survive this hospitalization?" and (2) "What do you think are the chances that your loved one will survive this hospitalization?" answered using a 0% to 100% probability scale. Results: Among 302 participants (median [interquartile range] age, 49 [38-59] years; 204 [68%] women) included in the trial, 165 (55%) were adult children of the individual with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease; 77 participants were randomized to view a direct response, 77 participants were randomized to view an indirect response referencing other patients, 68 participants were randomized to view an indirect response referencing physiological condition, and 80 participants were randomized to view a redirection response. Compared with participants who viewed a direct response, participants who viewed an indirect response referencing other patients (ß = 10 [95% CI, 1-19]; P = .03), physiological condition (ß = 10 [95% CI, 0-19]; P = .04), or redirection to a discussion of the patient's values and goals (ß = 19 [95% CI, 10-28]; P < .001) perceived the intensivist to have a significantly more optimistic prognostic estimate. Conclusions and Relevance: These findings suggest that family members interpret indirect or redirection responses to questions about prognosis in the ICU setting as more optimistic than direct responses. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04239209.

What's behind the white coat: Potential mechanisms of physician-attributable variation in critical care.

BACKGROUND: Critical care intensity is known to vary across regions and centers, yet the mechanisms remain unidentified. Physician behaviors have been implicated in the variability of intensive care near the end of life, but physician characteristics that may underlie this association have not been determined. PURPOSE: We sought to identify behavioral attributes that vary among intensivists to generate hypotheses for mechanisms of intensivist-attributable variation in critical care delivery. METHODS: We administered a questionnaire to intensivists who participated in a prior cohort study in which intensivists made prognostic estimates. We evaluated the degree to which scores on six attribute measures varied across intensivists. Measures were selected for their relevance to preference-sensitive critical care: a modified End-of-Life Preferences (EOLP) scale, Life Orientation Test-Revised (LOT-R), Jefferson Scale of Empathy (JSE), Physicians' Reactions to Uncertainty (PRU) scale, Collett-Lester Fear of Death (CLFOD) scale, and a test of omission bias. We conducted regression analyses assessing relationships between intensivists' attribute scores and their prognostic accuracy, as physicians' prognostic accuracy may influence preference-sensitive decisions. RESULTS: 20 of 25 eligible intensivists (80%) completed the questionnaire. Intensivists' scores on the EOLP, LOT-R, PRU, CLFOD, and omission bias measures varied considerably, while their responses on the JSE scale did not. There were no consistent associations between attribute scores and prognostic accuracy. CONCLUSIONS: Intensivists vary in feasibly measurable attributes relevant to preference-sensitive critical care delivery. These attributes represent candidates for future research aimed at identifying mechanisms of clinician-attributable variation in critical care and developing effective interventions to reduce undue variation.

Patients' Perspectives on Approaches to Facilitate Completion of Advance Directives.

BACKGROUND: Little is understood about the different ways patients complete advance directives (ADs), which is most commonly through lawyers and increasingly using websites. OBJECTIVE: To understand patients' perspectives on different approaches to facilitating AD completion, the value of legal regulation of ADs, and the use of a web-based platform to create an AD. DESIGN: Semi-structured interviews with patients. SETTING/PARTICIPANTS: We purposively sampled 25 patients at least 70 years of age or with a chronic disease from 2 internal medicine clinics. MEASUREMENTS: Interviews focused on experiences and perspectives creating ADs, including facilitation by lawyers, health-care professionals, and websites. Feedback on a website prototype was also obtained. Responses were analyzed with modified grounded theory until thematic saturation was achieved. RESULTS: Although a majority of participants with ADs had used lawyers, participants were ambivalent about the benefits of lawyer facilitation. Most valued both the medical perspective of a health-care professional and a lawyer's attention to legal requirements for AD validity. Participants had positive impressions of the web platform, but some were concerned about privacy with online storage. Trust emerged as an overarching theme, and participants valued legal regulation of ADs to ensure document authenticity and delivery of preference-concordant care. CONCLUSION: Efforts to improve documentation of care planning need to address the disparate methods by which participants complete ADs. Creating options that combine the perceived benefits of a legal approach with greater health professional involvement could appeal to participants. Privacy concerns may limit web use by some patients.

Perspectives on using decision-making nudges in physician-patient communications.

Patients engaging in shared decision making must weigh the likelihood of positive and negative outcomes and deal with uncertainty and negative emotions in the situations where desirable options might not be available. The use of "nudges," or communication techniques that influence patients' choices in a predictable direction, may assist patients in making complex decisions. However, nudging patients may be perceived as inappropriate influence on patients' choices. We sought to determine whether key stakeholders, physicians, and laypersons without clinical training consider the use of nudges to be ethical and appropriate in medical decision making. Eighty-nine resident-physicians and 336 Mechanical-Turk workers (i.e., non-clinicians) evaluated two hypothetical preference-sensitive situations, in which a patient with advanced cancer chooses between chemotherapy and hospice care. We varied the following: (1) whether or not the patient's decision was influenced by a mistaken judgment (i.e., decision-making bias) and (2) whether or not the physician used a nudge. Each participant reported the extent to which the communication was ethical, appropriate, and desirable. Both physicians and non-clinicians considered using nudges more positively than not using them, regardless of an initial decision-making bias in patients' considerations. Decomposing this effect, we found that physicians viewed the nudge that endorsed hospice care more favorably than the nudge that endorsed chemotherapy, while non-clinicians viewed the nudge that endorsed chemotherapy more favorably than the nudge that endorsed hospice care. We discuss implications and propose exploring further physicians' and patients' differences in the perception of nudges; the differences may suggest limitations for using nudges in medical decisions.