IMPORTANCE Earlier clinician-patient conversations about patients' values, goals, and preferences in serious illness (ie, serious illness conversations) are associated with better outcomes but occur inconsistently in cancer care. OBJECTIVE To evaluate the efficacy of a communication quality-improvement intervention in improving the occurrence, timing, quality, and accessibility of documented serious illness conversations between oncology clinicians and patients with advanced cancer. DESIGN, SETTING, PARTICIPANTS This cluster randomized clinical trial in outpatient oncology was conducted at the Dana-Farber Cancer Institute and included physicians, advanced-practice clinicians, and patients with cancer who were at high risk of death. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES The primary outcomes (goal-concordant care and peacefulness at the end of life) are published elsewhere. Secondary outcomes are reported herein, including (1) documentation of at least 1 serious illness conversation before death, (2) timing of the initial conversation before death, (3) quality of conversations, and (4) their accessibility in the electronic medical record (EMR). RESULTS We enrolled 91 clinicians (48 intervention, 43 control) and 278 patients (134 intervention, 144 control). Of enrolled patients, 58% died during the study (n=161); mean age was 62.3 years (95% CI, 58.9-65.6 years); 55% were women (n=88). These patients were cared for by 76 of the 91 enrolled clinicians (37 intervention, 39 control); years in practice, 11.5 (95% CI, 9.2-13.8); 57% female (n=43). Medical record review after patients' death demonstrated that a significantly higher proportion of intervention patients had a documented discussion compared with controls (96% vs 79%, P = .005) and intervention conversations occurred a median of 2.4 months earlier (median, 143 days vs 71 days, P < .001). Conversation documentation for intervention patients was significantly more comprehensive and patient centered, with a greater focus on values or goals (89% vs 44%, P < .001), prognosis or illness understanding (91% vs 48%, P < .001), and life-sustaining treatment preferences (63% vs 32%, P = .004). Documentation about end-of-life care planning did not differ between arms (80% intervention vs 68% control, P = .08). Significantly more intervention patients had documentation that was accessible in the EMR (61% vs 11%, P < .001). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE This communication quality-improvement intervention resulted in more, earlier, better, and more accessible serious illness conversations documented in the EMR. To our knowledge, this is the first such study to demonstrate improvement in all 4 of these outcomes.
BackgroundAlthough there are many evidence-based practices that reduce the risk of maternal and neonatal mortality around the time of birth, there remains a gap between what is known and the care received. This know-do gap is a source of preventable maternal and perinatal deaths and is the focus of improvement efforts in many countries. Following an increase in perinatal and maternal deaths, Gobabis District Hospital initiated a quality improvement (QI) initiative to increase adherence to these WHO Safe Childbirth Checklist (SCC)-targeted essential birth practices (EBPs).MethodsWe implemented the SCC with support from leadership, coaching and organisational redesign. Implementation was led by a facility champion supported by a QI team and adapted through a series of three 8-week Plan–Do–Study–Act (PDSA) cycles.ResultsDuring the 6-month period, we observed an improvement of average EBPs delivered from 68% to 95%. We also found reductions in perinatal mortality rates from 22 deaths/1000 deliveries to 13.8/1000 deliveries largely due to a drop in fresh stillbirths.ConclusionWe conclude that replicating the programme is feasible, acceptable and effective in areas where gaps exist, but it requires local leadership, ongoing coaching and adaptation through PDSA cycles.
The diversity of influenza A viruses (IAV) is primarily hosted by two highly divergent avian orders: Anseriformes (ducks, swans and geese) and Charadriiformes (gulls, terns and shorebirds). Studies of IAV have historically focused on Anseriformes, specifically dabbling ducks, overlooking the diversity of hosts in nature, including gull and goose species that have successfully adapted to human habitats. This study sought to address this imbalance by characterizing spillover dynamics and global transmission patterns of IAV over 10 years at greater taxonomic resolution than previously considered. Furthermore, the circulation of viral subtypes in birds that are either host-adapted (low pathogenic H13, H16) or host-generalist (highly pathogenic avian influenza—HPAI H5) provided a unique opportunity to test and extend models of viral evolution. Using Bayesian phylodynamic modelling we uncovered a complex transmission network that relied on ecologically divergent bird hosts. The generalist subtype, HPAI H5 was driven largely by wild geese and swans that acted as a source for wild ducks, gulls, land birds, and domestic geese. Gulls were responsible for moving HPAI H5 more rapidly than any other host, a finding that may reflect their long-distance, pelagic movements and their immuno-naïve status against this subtype. Wild ducks, long viewed as primary hosts for spillover, occupied an optimal space for viral transmission, contributing to geographic expansion and rapid dispersal of HPAI H5. Evidence of inter-hemispheric dispersal via both the Pacific and Atlantic Rims was detected, supporting surveillance at high latitudes along continental margins to achieve early detection. Both neutral (geographic expansion) and non-neutral (antigenic selection) evolutionary processes were found to shape subtype evolution which manifested as unique geographic hotspots for each subtype at the global scale. This study reveals how a diversity of avian hosts contribute to viral spread and spillover with the potential to improve surveillance in an era of rapid global change.
Findings suggest that patients report bup/nx to be a viable treatment and many prefer it to other opioid replacement therapies.
Background: Clinical decisions for seriously ill older patients with surgical emergencies are highly complex. Measuring the benefits of burdensome treatments in this context is fraught with uncertainty. Little is known about how surgeons formulate treatment decisions to avoid nonbeneficial surgery, or engage in preoperative conversations about end-of-life (EOL) care. Objective: We sought to describe how surgeons approach such discussions, and to identify modifiable factors to reduce nonbeneficial surgery near the EOL. Design: Purposive and snowball sampling were used to recruit a national sample of emergency general surgeons. Semistructured interviews were conducted between February and May 2014. Measurements: Three independent coders performed qualitative coding using NVivo software (NVivo version 10.0, QSR International). Content analysis was used to identify factors important to surgical decision making and EOL communication.Results: Twenty-four surgeons were interviewed. Participants felt responsible for conducting EOL conversations with seriously ill older patients and their families before surgery to prevent nonbeneficial treatments. However, wide differences in prognostic estimates among surgeons, inadequate data about postoperative quality of life (QOL), patients and surrogates who were unprepared for EOL conversations, variation in perceptions about the role of palliative care, and time constraints are contributors to surgeons providing nonbeneficial operations. Surgeons reported performing operations they knew would not benefit the patient to give the family time to come to terms with the patient's demise. Conclusions: Emergency general surgeons feel responsible for having preoperative discussions about EOL care with seriously ill older patients to avoid nonbenefical surgery. However, surgeons identified multiple factors that undermine adequate communication and lead to nonbeneficial surgery.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
customersupport@researchsolutions.com
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.