RESUMO
OBJECTIVES: To quantify the frequency and patterns of clinicians' use of choice frames when discussing preference-sensitive care with surrogate decision-makers in the ICU. DESIGN: Secondary sequential content analysis. SETTING: One hundred one audio-recorded and transcribed conferences between surrogates and clinicians of incapacitated, critically ill adults from a prospective, multicenter cohort study. SUBJECTS: Surrogate decision-makers and clinicians. INTERVENTIONS: None. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Four coders identified preference-sensitive decision episodes addressed in the meetings, including topics such as mechanical ventilation, renal replacement, and overall goals of care. Prior critical care literature provided specific topics identified as preference-sensitive specific to the critical care context. Coders then examined each decision episode for the types of choice frames used by clinicians. The choice frames were selected a priori based on decision science literature. In total, there were 202 decision episodes across the 101 transcripts, with 20.3% of the decision episodes discussing mechanical ventilation, 19.3% overall goals of care, 14.4% renal replacement therapy, 14.4% post-discharge care (i.e., discharge location such as a skilled nursing facility), and the remaining 32.1% other topics. Clinicians used default framing, in which an option is presented that will be carried out if another option is not actively chosen, more frequently than any other choice frame (127 or 62.9% of decision episodes). Clinicians presented a polar interrogative, or a "yes or no question" to accept or reject a specific care choice, in 43 (21.3%) decision episodes. Clinicians more frequently presented options emphasizing both potential losses and gains rather than either in isolation. CONCLUSIONS: Clinicians frequently use default framing and polar questions when discussing preference-sensitive choices with surrogate decision-makers, which are known to be powerful nudges. Future work should focus on designing interventions promoting the informed use of these and the other most common choice frames used by practicing clinicians.
Assuntos
Unidades de Terapia Intensiva , Humanos , Feminino , Masculino , Estudos Prospectivos , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Tomada de Decisões , Comportamento de Escolha , Adulto , Cuidados Críticos , Relações Profissional-Família , Preferência do Paciente/estatística & dados numéricos , Idoso , Família/psicologiaRESUMO
A growing proportion of individuals adopt family caregiving roles. Family caregivers are the primary providers of long-term care in the United States yet limited federal policy supports exist, despite the known negative impacts of caregiving. There is also limited information about the prevalence of youth/young adult caregivers and the impacts of caregiving at formative ages in the United States. Our objective is to estimate the prevalence of youth caregivers and examine the association of caregiving with educational investments. We use the American Time Use Survey (2013-2019) to identify and describe youth caregivers (aged 15-18) and young adult caregivers (aged 19-22) and compare them with non-caregiving peers. We estimate that there are approximately 1,623,000 youth caregivers and 1,986,000 young adult caregivers, corresponding to 9.2% and 12.7% of these age groups, respectively. However, there is a wide range in the estimated prevalence per year, from approximately 364,000 to 2.8 million youth caregivers and from 353,000 to 2.2 million young adult caregivers, depending on caregiver definition. Unlike adult caregivers, we find that young men and women were nearly equally likely to provide care. We also find that non-White individuals are disproportionately represented as youth caregivers. Compared with non-caregiving peers, both youth and young adult caregivers are less likely to be enrolled in school and, among those enrolled in school, spend significantly less time on educational activities. Considering the association of caregiving among youth/young adults and education, policies supporting youth and young adult caregivers are critical.
Assuntos
Cuidadores , Escolaridade , Humanos , Cuidadores/estatística & dados numéricos , Adolescente , Estados Unidos , Masculino , Feminino , Adulto Jovem , Prevalência , Fatores Socioeconômicos , Fatores Sociodemográficos , Adulto , Fatores EtáriosRESUMO
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.
Assuntos
Tomada de Decisão Compartilhada , Unidades de Terapia Intensiva Pediátrica , Humanos , Estudos Retrospectivos , Unidades de Terapia Intensiva Pediátrica/organização & administração , Criança , Família/psicologia , Relações Profissional-Família , Masculino , Feminino , Cuidados CríticosRESUMO
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.
Assuntos
Pesquisa sobre Serviços de Saúde , População Rural , Humanos , População Urbana , Estudos Transversais , Inquéritos e QuestionáriosRESUMO
RATIONALE: The goal of shared decision making is to match patient preferences, including evaluation of potential future outcomes, with available management options. Yet, it is unknown how patients with smoking-related thoracic diseases or their surrogates display future-oriented thinking. OBJECTIVES: To document prevalent themes in patients' and potential surrogate decision makers' future-oriented thinking when facing preference-sensitive choices. METHODS: We conducted 44 scenario-based semistructured interviews among a diverse group of outpatients with smoking-associated thoracic diseases and potential surrogates for whom one of three preference-sensitive decisions would be medically relevant. Using content analysis, we documented prevalent themes to understand how these individuals display future-oriented thinking. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Patients and potential surrogates generally expressed expectations for future outcomes but also acknowledged their limitations in doing so. When thinking about potential outcomes, decision makers relied on past experiences, including those only loosely related; perceived familiarity with treatment options; and spirituality. The content of these expectations included effects on family, emotional predictions, and prognostication. For surrogates, a tension existed between hope-based and fact-based expectations. CONCLUSIONS: Patients and surrogates may struggle to generate expectations, and these future-oriented thoughts may be based on loosely related past experiences or unrealistic optimism. These tendencies may lead to errors, preventing selection of treatments that promote true preferences. Clinicians should explore how decision makers engage in future-oriented thinking and what their expectations are as a component of the shared decision-making process. Future research should evaluate whether targeted guidance in future-oriented thinking may improve outcomes important to patients.
Assuntos
Fumar/efeitos adversos , Fumar/psicologia , Idoso , Idoso de 80 Anos ou mais , Carcinoma Pulmonar de Células não Pequenas/etiologia , Carcinoma Pulmonar de Células não Pequenas/psicologia , Cuidadores/psicologia , Tomada de Decisões , Feminino , Humanos , Entrevista Psicológica , Neoplasias Pulmonares/etiologia , Neoplasias Pulmonares/psicologia , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Doença Pulmonar Obstrutiva Crônica/etiologia , Doença Pulmonar Obstrutiva Crônica/psicologia , PensamentoRESUMO
BACKGROUND: Social determinants of health (SDOHs) mediate outcomes of critical illness. Increasingly, professional organizations recommend screening for social risks. Yet, how clinicians should identify and then incorporate SDOHs into acute care practice is poorly defined. RESEARCH QUESTION: How do medical ICU clinicians currently operationalize SDOHs within patient care, given that SDOHs are known to mediate outcomes of critical illness? STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: Using ethnographic methods, we observed clinical work rounds in three urban ICUs within a single academic health system to capture use of SDOHs during clinical care. Adults admitted to the medical ICU with respiratory failure were enrolled prospectively sequentially. Observers wrote field notes and narrative excerpts from rounding observations. We also reviewed electronic medical record documentation for up to 90 days after ICU admission. We then qualitatively coded and triangulated data using a constructivist grounded theory approach and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Healthy People SDOHs framework. RESULTS: Sixty-six patients were enrolled and > 200 h of observation of clinical work rounds were included in the analysis. ICU clinicians infrequently integrated social structures of patients' lives into their discussions. Social structures were invoked most frequently when related to: (1) causes of acute respiratory failure, (2) decisions regarding life-sustaining therapies, and (3) transitions of care. Data about common SDOHs were not collected in any systematic way (eg, food and housing insecurity), and some SDOHs were discussed rarely or never (eg, access to education, discrimination, and incarceration). INTERPRETATION: We found that clinicians do not incorporate many areas of known SDOHs into ICU rounds. Improvements in integration of SDOHs should leverage the multidisciplinary team, identifying who is best suited to collect information on SDOHs during different time points in critical illness. Next steps include clinician-focused, patient-focused, and caregiver-focused assessments of feasibility and acceptability of an ICU-based SDOHs assessment.
RESUMO
INTRODUCTION: Current critical care practice does not integrate social determinants of health (SDOH) in systematic or standardized ways. Routine assessment of SDOH in the intensive care unit (ICU) may improve clinical decision-making, patient- and family-centered outcomes, and clinician well-being. Given the appropriateness and feasibility of SDOH assessment in the ICU is unknown, we aimed to understand how ICU clinicians think about and use SDOH. METHODS: We conducted semi-structured interviews with clinicians focused on barriers to and facilitators of assessing SDOH during critical illness and perceptions on screening for SDOH in the ICU. We used chart-stimulated recall to assist clinicians in reflecting on how SDOH applied to and was used in patients' care. After deidentifying interviews, we analyzed transcripts guided by a thematic analysis approach using a combination of inductive and deductive coding, the latter framed within the Centers for Disease Control SDOH Healthy People framework. RESULTS: We completed interviews with 30 clinicians, in a variety of professional roles. The majority of clinicians self-identified as men (17, 56.7%) of White race (25, 83.3%). Clinicians contextualize their use of SDOH within three frames of reference: 1) their own identity and experiences; 2) their relationships and communication with patients and caregivers; and 3) immediate structures of care around ICU patients including clinician advocacy, care transitions, and readmission. Clinicians identified that discussing SDOH could allow them to recognize bias faced by their patients, elucidate drivers of critical illness, and navigate communication with patients caregivers. Clinicians worried about ICU-specific factors impeding the discussion of SDOH including time contraints and acuity, high stakes and emotions, and negative anticipatory emotions. DISCUSSION: Clinicians gather SDOH during critical illness both to understand their patients' stories and provide individualized care, which may lead to better clinician satisfaction and patient- and family-centered care outcomes. Educational and operational efforts to increase SDOH assessment and use in critical care should also gather and integrate the perspectives of patients and caregivers regarding the collection and use of SDOH in the ICU.
RESUMO
BACKGROUND: Care management programs for chronic lung disease attempt to reduce hospitalizations, yet have not reliably achieved this goal. A key limitation of many programs is that they target patients with characteristics associated with hospitalization risk, but do not specifically modify the mechanisms that lead to hospitalization. RESEARCH QUESTION: What are the common mechanisms underlying known patient-level risk characteristics leading to hospitalizations for acute exacerbations of chronic lung disease? STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: We conducted a qualitative study of patients admitted to the University of Pennsylvania Health System with acute exacerbations of chronic lung disease between January and September 2019. We interviewed patients, their family caregivers, and their inpatient and outpatient clinicians about experiences leading up to the hospitalization. We analyzed the interview transcripts using triangulation and abductive analytic methods. RESULTS: We conducted 69 interviews focused on the admission of 22 patients with a median age of 66 years (interquartile range, 60-70 years), of whom 16 patients (73%) were female and 14 patients (64%) were Black. We interviewed 22 patients, 14 caregivers, 19 inpatient clinicians, and 14 outpatient clinicians. We triangulated the available interview data for each patient admission and identified the underlying mechanisms of how several known patient characteristics associated with risk actually led to hospitalization. These mechanisms included limited capacity for home management of acute symptom changes, barriers to accessing care, chronic functional limitations, and comorbid behavioral health disorders. Importantly, many of the clinical, social, and behavioral mechanisms underlying hospitalizations were present for months or years before the symptoms that prompted inpatient care. INTERPRETATION: Care management programs should be built to target specific clinical, social, and behavioral mechanisms that directly lead to hospitalization. Upstream interventions that reduce hospitalization risk are possible given that many contributory mechanisms are present for months or years before the onset of acute exacerbations.
RESUMO
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.
RESUMO
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.
Assuntos
Doença Pulmonar Obstrutiva Crônica , Qualidade de Vida , Humanos , Feminino , Adulto , Idoso , Estudos de Coortes , Dispneia , EmoçõesRESUMO
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.
RESUMO
OBJECTIVE: We sought to identify factors related to critical care physicians' and nurses' willingness to help manage potential donors after circulatory determination of death, and to elicit opinions on the presence of role conflict in donors after circulatory determination of death and its impact on end-of-life care. DESIGN AND SETTING: Randomized trial administered by Web or post of four donors after circulatory determination of death vignettes. Response rates were 31.0% and 44.3%, respectively. SUBJECTS: Two thousand two hundred and six academic inten-sive care unit physicians and 988 intensive care unit nurses in the United States. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Majorities of intensive care unit physicians (72.5%; 95% confidence interval 69.2-75.9) and nurses (74.3%; 95% confidence interval 70.2-78.5) believed they should help manage potential donors after circulatory determination of death. 14.7% (95% confidence interval 12.0-17.4) of physicians and 14.3% (95% confidence interval 11.0-17.6) of nurses believed that management of donors after circulatory determination of death would create professional role conflicts. 33.8% (95% confidence interval 30.0-37.4) of physicians and 55.1% (95% confidence interval 50.3-59.7) of nurses believed that preserving opportunities for donors after circulatory determination of death could improve end-of-life care. More favorable views of donors after circulatory determination of death were provided by clinicians randomly assigned to vignettes depicting donors with previously denoted preferences for organ donation; similar effects were not introduced by vignettes in which surrogates actively initiated donation discussions. CONCLUSIONS: These findings suggest that critical care physicians and nurses are generally supportive of managing donors after circulatory determination of death, particularly when patients were registered organ donors. However, minorities of clinicians harbor concerns regarding conflicts of interest, and many are uncertain of the practice's impact on end-of-life care.
Assuntos
Atitude do Pessoal de Saúde , Cuidados Críticos/organização & administração , Morte , Corpo Clínico Hospitalar , Recursos Humanos de Enfermagem Hospitalar , Obtenção de Tecidos e Órgãos/organização & administração , Adulto , Intervalos de Confiança , Conflito de Interesses , Feminino , Pesquisas sobre Atenção à Saúde , Humanos , Unidades de Terapia Intensiva , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Padrões de Prática Médica , Qualidade da Assistência à Saúde , Percepção Social , Inquéritos e Questionários , Obtenção de Tecidos e Órgãos/ética , Estados UnidosAssuntos
Reanimação Cardiopulmonar , Obtenção de Tecidos e Órgãos , Morte , Parada Cardíaca , HumanosRESUMO
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.
Assuntos
Enganação , Profissionalismo , Humanos , ConfiançaRESUMO
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.
Assuntos
Enfermagem de Cuidados Paliativos na Terminalidade da Vida , Angústia Psicológica , Doença Pulmonar Obstrutiva Crônica , Humanos , Cuidados Paliativos , Pesquisa QualitativaRESUMO
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.
Assuntos
Neoplasias Pulmonares , Abandono do Hábito de Fumar , Adulto , Detecção Precoce de Câncer/métodos , Humanos , Neoplasias Pulmonares/diagnóstico , Neoplasias Pulmonares/prevenção & controle , Ensaios Clínicos Controlados Aleatórios como Assunto , Fumar , Abandono do Hábito de Fumar/métodos , Populações VulneráveisRESUMO
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.
Assuntos
COVID-19 , Família , Visitas a Pacientes , Guias como Assunto , HumanosRESUMO
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.