Background: Few data are available about physicians' decisions in regard to withholding or withdrawing lifesustaining measures. We therefore studied internists' views on this subject. Methods:We surveyed 1000 generalist and subspecialist internists about their views on withholding or withdrawing life-sustaining treatment. Thirty-two hypothetical cases were included. The effect of the demographic data on withholding or withdrawing treatment was analyzed via analysis of covariance and multiple logistic regression.Results: Of 1000 internists, 407 (41%) completed and returned surveys. A majority of respondents (51%) were willing to withhold or withdraw treatment in all 32 scenarios; 49% were unwilling to withhold or withdraw in at least 1 scenario. Respondents were likely to withhold treatment in 14 of 16 scenarios compared with 13.7 of 16 scenarios for withdrawing treatments (PϽ.001). Respondents withheld or withdrew feeding tubes in 6.6 of 8 scenarios (PϽ.001) and antibiotics in 6.7 of 8 scenarios (P=.001) compared with ventilators (7.1 of 8 scenarios) and dialysis (7.3 of 8 scenarios). Respondents were less likely to withhold or withdraw treatments in nonterminally ill (12.9 of 16 scenarios) (P=.02) and alert patients (13.2 of 16 scenarios) (PϽ.001) compared with terminally ill patients (14.9 of 16 scenarios) and patients with dementia (14.5 of 16 scenarios).Conclusions: A large percentage of internists would be unwilling to adhere to some of patients' wishes to withhold or withdraw life-sustaining treatment. The clinical scenario and type of treatment affect internists' decisions about whether they would withhold or withdraw such treatment.

An interprofessional group of educators from multiple institutions piloted a simulation-based learning experience focusing on acute pain management. The participants in the program were resident physicians-novice nurse dyads, and medical student-nursing student dyads from large universities and a magnet health care system. Each dyad was challenged to assess and manage acute pain in a simulated hospitalized patient using effective collaboration skills. The simulations included pre-debriefing, simulation, and a debriefing session. Participants completed pre- and post-surveys measuring confidence in pain management and attitudes toward physician-nurse collaboration. There was a significant positive shift in the confidence of the learners' ability to assess and manage acute pain in a hospitalized patient after the simulation and debriefing (23.2% strongly agreed versus 7% at baseline). Participants' attitudes regarding education to enhance interprofessional collaboration improved after the simulation experience (83.9% strongly agreed versus 73.7% at baseline). Based on these encouraging findings, we are extending this interprofessional experience to a larger group of learners with the same targeted dyads.

Background Physicians are in an ideal position to describe the impact of medication non-medical switching (switching commonly due to formulary changes by insurer for reasons unrelated to patient health) on their practice dynamics and patient care. We sought to examine physicians' openness to requests for non-medical switching and their experiences and opinions regarding the impact of non-medical switching on their practice, staff and patients. Methods An online survey of randomly-sampled physicians spending �10% of time providing patient care and having received �1 non-medical switch request during the prior 12-months. The impact of non-medical switching on clinical decision-making process; professional experience with clinical practice, patient-physician relationship, insurance process; and perceived impact on practice, staff and patients were assessed. Weighted percent responses were calculated. Results We sampled 1,010 physicians (response rate = 55.5%). Many responded being frequently not amenable (26.0%) or had reservations (41.8%) to non-medical switch requests; with >50% indicating patient stability on current therapy and suboptimal alternatives as factors frequently influencing amenability. Physicians agreed non-medical switching can create ethical concerns (clinical judgement, autonomy, ability to treat per guidelines; 74.8%, 82.3%, 53.5%, respectively), while forcing them to take responsibility for insurers' decisions (81.1%) and diverting their clinical time (84.3%). Most indicated non-medical switching increased practice burden (administrative, non-billable interactions, additional staffing, nonoffice patient contact, calls to/from the pharmacy; 85.

Background: Non-medical switching refers to a change in a stable patient’s prescribed medication to a clinically distinct, non-generic, alternative for reasons other than poor clinical response, side-effects or non-adherence. Objective: To assess the perceptions of high-volume Medicare and/or Medicaid physician providers regarding the impact non-medical switching has on their patients’ medication-related outcomes and health-care utilization. Methods: We performed an e-survey of high-volume Medicare and/or Medicaid physicians (spending >50% of their time caring for Medicare and/or Medicaid patients), practicing for >2 years but <30 years post-residency and/or fellowship; working in a general, internal, family medicine or specialist setting; spending ≥40% of their time providing direct care and having received ≥1 request for a non-medical switch in the past 12 months. Physicians were queried on 15-items to assess perceptions regarding the impact non-medical switching on medication-related outcomes and health-care utilization. Results: Three-hundred and fifty physicians were included. Respondents reported they felt non-medical switching, to some degree, increased side-effects (54.0%), medication errors (56.0%) and medication abandonment (60.3%), and ~50% believed it increased patients’ out-of-pocket costs. Few physicians (≤13.4% for each) felt non-medical switching had a positive impact on effectiveness, adherence or patients’ or physicians’ confidence in the quality-of-care provided. Non-office visit and prescriber-pharmacy contact were most frequently thought to increase due to non-medical switching. One-third of physicians felt office visits were very frequently/frequently increased, and ~ 1-in-5 respondents believed laboratory testing and additional medication use very frequently/frequently increased following a non-medical switch. About 1-in-10 physicians felt non-medical switching very frequently/frequently increased the utilization of emergency department or in-hospital care. Conclusion: This study suggests high-volume Medicare and/or Medicaid physician providers perceive multiple negative influences of non-medical switching on medication-related outcomes and health-care utilization.

Introduction: A non-medical switch is a change to a patient's medication regimen for reasons other than lack of clinical response, side-effects or poor adherence. Specialist physicians treat complex patients who may be vulnerable to non-medical switching. Objectives: To evaluate specialist physicians' perceptions regarding the frequency of nonmedical switch requests, and the impact on their patients' outcomes and healthcare utilization. Methods: An online survey of randomly sampled physicians spending ≥10% of time providing patient care and having received ≥1 non-medical switch request during the prior 12-months. Results: Among 404 specialist physicians surveyed, non-medical switch requests were reported as very frequent or frequent by 35.0% of oncologists (for injectable cancer agents) and up to 80.3% of endocrinologists (for injectable anti-hyperglycemics). Respondents reported decreased medication effectiveness (25.0% of oncologists to 75.0% of dermatologists) and increased sideeffects (32.5% of oncologists to 66.7% of psychiatrists). Most specialists reported very frequent or frequent increases in non-office visits (52.5% of oncologists to 75.3% of endocrinologists) and calls with pharmacies (57.5% of oncologists to 80.5% of rheumatologists) due to non-medical switching. Conclusions: Receipt of non-medical switching requests were common among specialist physicians. Non-medical switching may lead to negative effects on patient care and require increased healthcare utilization. ARTICLE HISTORY