Pulseira fotográfica como ferramenta inovadora no protocolo de identificação do paciente com transtorno mental agudo / Photographic bracelet as an innovative tool in the identification protocol for patients with acute mental disorder / Pulsera fotográfica como herramienta innovadora en el protocolo de identificación del paciente con transtorno mental agudo

Objetivo: descrever a elaboração de protocolo para a identificação do paciente com transtorno mental agudo. Método: estudo exploratório e qualitativo, realizado de maio 2018 a janeiro 2019, por meio das etapas: revisão integrativa da literatura, questionário online respondido por 17 profissionais de saúde vinculados à Sociedade Brasileira para a Qualidade do Cuidado e Segurança do Paciente, e grupo focal com 04 especialistas em Saúde Mental. Para tratamento dos dados, utilizou-se a análise descritiva e comparativa. Resultados: na revisão não se encontraram artigos sobre identificação do paciente com transtorno mental agudo. Na consulta aos especialistas da segurança do paciente identificou-se que 82,3% não possuíam em suas instituições protocolo específico. No grupo focal evidenciou-se dificuldade na identificação deste paciente. Conclusão: acreditase que o protocolo com a inserção da pulseira fotográfica apresenta-se como uma ferramenta inovadora na redução de riscos associados à identificação deste paciente.

Objective: to describe the development of a protocol for identification of patients with acute mental disorders. Method: this qualitative exploratory study was carried out from May 2018 to January 2019 through an integrative literature review, an online questionnaire answered by 17 health personnel belonging to the Brazilian Society for Quality of Care and Patient Safety, and a focus group of four mental health experts. Results: no articles specifically on identification for patients with acute mental disorders were found in the review. The consultation of patient safety experts found that 82.3% had no specific protocol in their institutions. The focal group highlighted difficulties communicating with these patients. Conclusion: the protocol including the photographic bracelet is believed to constitute an innovative tool for reducing risks associated with identification of these patients.

Objetivo: describir el desarrollo de un protocolo para la identificación de pacientes con trastornos mentales agudos. Método: este estudio exploratorio cualitativo se realizó de mayo de 2018 a enero de 2019 a través de una revisión integradora de la literatura, un cuestionario en línea respondido por 17 miembros del personal de salud pertenecientes a la Sociedad Brasileña de Calidad de Atención y Seguridad del Paciente, y un grupo focal de cuatro personas de salud mental expertos. Resultados: en la revisión no se encontraron artículos específicos sobre identificación de pacientes con trastornos mentales agudos. La consulta de expertos en seguridad del paciente encontró que el 82,3% no tenía un protocolo específico en sus instituciones. El grupo focal destacó las dificultades para comunicarse con estos pacientes. Conclusión: se cree que el protocolo que incluye la pulsera fotográfica constituye una herramienta innovadora para reducir los riesgos asociados a la identificación de estos pacientes.

Patients' Preferences after Recurrent Coronary Narrowing: Discrete Choice Experiments. / Preferências dos Pacientes após Estreitamento Coronário Recorrente: Experimentos de Escolha Discreta.

BACKGROUND: Selecting the optimal treatment strategy for coronary revascularization is challenging. A crucial endpoint to be considered when making this choice is the necessity to repeat revascularization since it is much more frequent after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) than after coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG). OBJECTIVE: This study intends to provide insights on patients' preferences for revascularization, strategies in the perspective of patients who had to repeat revascularization. METHODS: We selected a sample of patients who had undergone PCI and were hospitalized to repeat coronary revascularization and elicited their preferences for a new PCI or CABG. Perioperative death, long-term death, myocardial infarction, and repeat revascularization were used to design scenarios describing hypothetical treatments that were labeled as PCI or CABG. PCI was always presented as the option with lower perioperative death risk and a higher necessity to repeat procedure. A conditional logit model was used to analyze patients' choices using R software. A p value < 0.05 was considered statistically significant. RESULTS: A total of 144 patients participated, most of them (73.7%) preferred CABG over PCI (p < 0.001). The regression coefficients were statistically significant for PCI label, PCI long-term death, CABG perioperative death, CABG long-term death and repeat CABG. The PCI label was the most important parameter (p < 0.05). CONCLUSION: Most patients who face the necessity to repeat coronary revascularization reject a new PCI, considering realistic levels of risks and benefits. Incorporating patients' preferences into benefit-risk calculation and treatment recommendations could enhance patient-centered care.

FUNDAMENTO: Selecionar a estratégia de tratamento ideal para a revascularização coronária é um desafio. Um desfecho crucial a ser considerado no momento dessa escolha é a necessidade de refazer a revascularização, uma vez que ela se torna muito mais frequente após a intervenção coronária percutânea (ICP) do que após a cirurgia de revascularização do miocárdio (CRM). OBJETIVO: Pretende-se, com este estudo, trazer reflexões acerca das preferências dos pacientes pelas estratégias de revascularização sob a perspectiva de pacientes que tiveram que refazer a revascularização. MÉTODOS: Selecionamos uma amostra de pacientes que haviam sido submetidos à ICP e hospitalizados para refazer a revascularização coronária e elicitamos suas preferências por nova ICP ou CRM. Morte perioperatória, mortalidade a longo prazo, infarto do miocárdio e repetir a revascularização foram utilizados para a construção de cenários a partir da descrição de tratamentos hipotéticos que foram rotulados como ICP ou CRM. A ICP era sempre apresentada como a opção com menor incidência de morte perioperatória e maior necessidade de se refazer o procedimento. O modelo logístico condicional foi empregado para analisar as escolhas dos pacientes, utilizando-se o software R. Valores de p <0,05 foram considerados estatisticamente significativos. RESULTADOS: Ao todo, 144 pacientes participaram, a maioria dos quais (73,7%) preferiram a CRM à ICP (p < 0,001). Os coeficientes de regressão foram estatisticamente significativos para o rótulo ICP, mortalidade a longo prazo da ICP, morte perioperatória da CRM, mortalidade a longo prazo da CRM e refazer a CRM. O rótulo ICP foi o parâmetro mais importante (p < 0,05). CONCLUSÃO: A maioria dos pacientes que enfrentam a necessidade de refazer a revascularização coronária rejeitam uma nova ICP, com base em níveis realistas de riscos e benefícios. Incorporar as preferências dos pacientes à estimativa do risco-benefício e às recomendações de tratamento poderia melhorar o cuidado centrado no paciente.

Preferências dos Pacientes após Estreitamento Coronário Recorrente: Experimentos de Escolha Discreta / Patients Preferences after Recurrent Coronary Narrowing: Discrete Choice Experiments

Resumo Fundamento: Selecionar a estratégia de tratamento ideal para a revascularização coronária é um desafio. Um desfecho crucial a ser considerado no momento dessa escolha é a necessidade de refazer a revascularização, uma vez que ela se torna muito mais frequente após a intervenção coronária percutânea (ICP) do que após a cirurgia de revascularização do miocárdio (CRM). Objetivo: Pretende-se, com este estudo, trazer reflexões acerca das preferências dos pacientes pelas estratégias de revascularização sob a perspectiva de pacientes que tiveram que refazer a revascularização. Métodos: Selecionamos uma amostra de pacientes que haviam sido submetidos à ICP e hospitalizados para refazer a revascularização coronária e elicitamos suas preferências por nova ICP ou CRM. Morte perioperatória, mortalidade a longo prazo, infarto do miocárdio e repetir a revascularização foram utilizados para a construção de cenários a partir da descrição de tratamentos hipotéticos que foram rotulados como ICP ou CRM. A ICP era sempre apresentada como a opção com menor incidência de morte perioperatória e maior necessidade de se refazer o procedimento. O modelo logístico condicional foi empregado para analisar as escolhas dos pacientes, utilizando-se o software R. Valores de p <0,05 foram considerados estatisticamente significativos. Resultados: Ao todo, 144 pacientes participaram, a maioria dos quais (73,7%) preferiram a CRM à ICP (p < 0,001). Os coeficientes de regressão foram estatisticamente significativos para o rótulo ICP, mortalidade a longo prazo da ICP, morte perioperatória da CRM, mortalidade a longo prazo da CRM e refazer a CRM. O rótulo ICP foi o parâmetro mais importante (p < 0,05). Conclusão: A maioria dos pacientes que enfrentam a necessidade de refazer a revascularização coronária rejeitam uma nova ICP, com base em níveis realistas de riscos e benefícios. Incorporar as preferências dos pacientes à estimativa do risco-benefício e às recomendações de tratamento poderia melhorar o cuidado centrado no paciente.

Abstract Background: Selecting the optimal treatment strategy for coronary revascularization is challenging. A crucial endpoint to be considered when making this choice is the necessity to repeat revascularization since it is much more frequent after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) than after coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG). Objective: This study intends to provide insights on patients' preferences for revascularization, strategies in the perspective of patients who had to repeat revascularization. Methods: We selected a sample of patients who had undergone PCI and were hospitalized to repeat coronary revascularization and elicited their preferences for a new PCI or CABG. Perioperative death, long-term death, myocardial infarction, and repeat revascularization were used to design scenarios describing hypothetical treatments that were labeled as PCI or CABG. PCI was always presented as the option with lower perioperative death risk and a higher necessity to repeat procedure. A conditional logit model was used to analyze patients' choices using R software. A p value < 0.05 was considered statistically significant. Results: A total of 144 patients participated, most of them (73.7%) preferred CABG over PCI (p < 0.001). The regression coefficients were statistically significant for PCI label, PCI long-term death, CABG perioperative death, CABG long-term death and repeat CABG. The PCI label was the most important parameter (p < 0.05). Conclusion: Most patients who face the necessity to repeat coronary revascularization reject a new PCI, considering realistic levels of risks and benefits. Incorporating patients' preferences into benefit-risk calculation and treatment recommendations could enhance patient-centered care.

Feasibility of visual aids for risk evaluation by hospitalized patients with coronary artery disease: results from face-to-face interviews.

PURPOSE: Communicating information about risk and probability to patients is considered a difficult task. In this study, we aim to evaluate the use of visual aids representing perioperative mortality and long-term survival in the communication process for patients diagnosed with coronary artery disease at the National Institute of Cardiology, a Brazilian public hospital specializing in cardiology. PATIENTS AND METHODS: One-on-one interviews were conducted between August 1 and November 20, 2017. Patients were asked to imagine that their doctor was seeking their input in the decision regarding which treatment represented the best option for them. Patients were required to choose between alternatives by considering only the different benefits and risks shown in each scenario, described as the proportion of patients who had died during the perioperative period and within 5 years. Each participant evaluated the same eight scenarios. We evaluated their answers in a qualitative and quantitative analysis. RESULTS: The main findings were that all patients verbally expressed concern about perioperative mortality and that 25% did not express concern about long-term mortality. Twelve percent considered the probabilities irrelevant on the grounds that their prognosis would depend on "God's will." Ten percent of the patients disregarded the reported likelihood of perioperative mortality, deciding to focus solely on the "chance of being cured." In the quantitative analysis, the vast majority of respondents chose the "correct" alternatives, meaning that they made consistent and rational choices. CONCLUSION: The use of visual aids to present risk attributes appeared feasible in our sample. The impact of heuristics and religious beliefs on shared health decision making needs to be explored better in future studies.

Patient and physician preferences for attributes of coronary revascularization.

BACKGROUND: Patients with a diagnosis of coronary artery disease (CAD) may face important decisions regarding treatment options, with the "right choice" depending on the relative weights of risks and benefits. Studies performed as discrete choice experiments are used to estimate these weights, and attribute selection is an essential step in the design of these studies. Attributes not included in the design cannot be analyzed. In this study, we aimed to elicit, rank, and rate attributes that may be considered important to patients and physicians who must choose between angioplasty and surgery for coronary revascularization. METHODS: The elicitation process involved performing a systematic review to search for attributes cited in declared preference studies in addition to face-to-face interviews with cardiologists and experts. The interviews were audio-recorded in digital format, and the collected data were transcribed and searched to identify new attributes. The criterion used to finish the data collection process was sampling saturation. RESULTS: A systematic review resulted in the selection of the following 14 attributes: atrial fibrillation, heart failure, incision scar, length of stay, long-term survival, myocardial infarction, periprocedural death, postoperative infection, postprocedural angina, pseudoaneurysm, renal failure, repeat coronary artery bypass grafting, repeat percutaneous coronary intervention, and stroke. The interviews added no new attributes. After rating, we identified significant differences in the values that patients and cardiologists placed on renal insufficiency (p<0.001), periprocedural death (p<0.001), and long-term survival (p<0.001). CONCLUSION: Decisions regarding the best treatment option for patients with CAD should be made based on differences in risk and the patient's preference regarding the most relevant endpoints. We elicited, ranked, and rated 14 attributes related to CAD treatment options. This list of attributes may help researchers who seek to perform future preference studies of CAD treatment options.