OBJECTIVE: Patients diagnosed with advanced larynx cancer face a decisional process in which they can choose between radiotherapy, chemoradiotherapy, or a total laryngectomy with adjuvant radiotherapy. Clinicians do not always agree on the best clinical treatment, making the decisional process for patients a complex problem.METHODS: Guided by the International Patient Decision Aid (PDA) Standards, we followed three developmental phases for which we held semi-structured in-depth interviews with patients and physicians, thinking-out-loud sessions, and a study-specific questionnaire. Audio-recorded interviews were verbatim transcribed, thematically coded, and analyzed. Phase 1 consisted of an evaluation of the decisional needs and the regular counseling process; phase 2 tested the comprehensibility and usability of the PDA; and phase 3 beta tested the feasibility of the PDA.RESULTS: Patients and doctors agreed on the need for development of a PDA. Major revisions were conducted after phase 1 to improve the readability and replace the majority of text with video animations. Patients and physicians considered the PDA to be a major improvement to the current counseling process.CONCLUSION: This study describes the development of a comprehensible and easy-to-use online patient decision aid for advanced larynx cancer, which was found satisfactory by patients and physicians (available on www.treatmentchoice.info). The outcome of the interviews underscores the need for better patient counseling. The feasibility and satisfaction among newly diagnosed patients as well as doctors will need to be proven. To this end, we started a multicenter trial evaluating the PDA in clinical practice (ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03292341).LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: NA Laryngoscope, 129:2733-2739, 2019.
MULTIFILE
Aim To provide insight into the basic characteristics of decision making in the treatment of symptomatic severe aortic stenosis (SSAS) in Dutch heart centres with specific emphasis on the evaluation of frailty, cognition, nutritional status and physical functioning/functionality in (instrumental) activities of daily living [(I)ADL]. Methods A questionnaire was used that is based on the European and American guidelines for SSAS treatment. The survey was administered to physicians and non-physicians in Dutch heart centres involved in the decision-making pathway for SSAS treatment. Results All 16 Dutch heart centres participated. Before a patient case is discussed by the heart team, heart centres rarely request data from the referring hospital regarding patients’ functionality (n = 5), frailty scores (n = 0) and geriatric consultation (n = 1) as a standard procedure. Most heart centres ‘often to always’ do their own screening for frailty (n = 10), cognition/mood (n = 9), nutritional status (n = 10) and physical functioning/functionality in (I)ADL (n = 10). During heart team meetings data are ‘sometimes to regularly’ available regarding frailty (n = 5), cognition/mood (n = 11), nutritional status (n = 8) and physical functioning/functionality in (I)ADL (n = 10). After assessment in the outpatient clinic patient cases are re-discussed ‘sometimes to regularly’ in heart team meetings (n = 10). Conclusions Dutch heart centres make an effort to evaluate frailty, cognition, nutritional status and physical functioning/functionality in (I)ADL for decision making regarding SSAS treatment. However, these patient data are not routinely requested from the referring hospital and are not always available for heart team meetings. Incorporation of these important data in a structured manner early in the decision-making process may provide additional useful information for decision making in the heart team meeting.
LINK
Purpose Worry is an intuitive sense that goes beyond logical reasoning and is valuable in situations where patients’ conditions are rapidly changing or when objective data may not fully capture the complexity of a patient’s situation. Nurse anesthetists’ subjective reasons for worry are quite vague as they are valued inconsistently and not accurately expressed. This study aimed to identify factors playing a role in the emergence of worry during anesthesia practice to clarify its concept. Design Mixed-methods design consisting of quantitative online surveys followed by qualitative focus group interviews including Dutch nurse anesthetists. Methods Both quantitative and qualitative thematic analyses were performed, followed by data and methodological triangulation to enhance the validity and credibility of findings and mitigate the presence of bias. Findings Surveys (N = 102) were analyzed, and 14 nurse anesthetists participated in the focus group interviews. A total of 89% of the survey respondents reported that at least once have had the feeling of worry, of which 92% use worry during clinical anesthesia practice. Worry was mentioned to be a vital element during anesthesia practice that makes it possible to take precautionary actions to change the anesthetic care plan in a changing situation or patient deterioration. Conclusions While a clear definition of worry could not be given, it is a valuable element of anesthesia practice as it serves as a catalyst for critical thinking, problem-solving, clinical reasoning, and decision-making. Use of the feeling of worry alongside technological systems to make an informed decision is crucial. Technology has significantly improved the ability of health care providers to detect and respond to patient deterioration promptly, but it is crucial for nurse anesthetists to use their feeling of worry or intuition alongside technological systems and evidence-based practice to ensure quick assessments or judgments based on experience, knowledge, and observations in clinical practice.
LINK
Background Objective gait analysis that fully captures the multi-segmental foot movement of a clubfoot may help in early identification of a relapse clubfoot. Unfortunately, this type of objective measure is still lacking in a clinical setting and it is unknown how it relates to clinical assessment. Research question The aim of this study was to identify differences in total gait and foot deviations between clubfoot patients with and without a relapse clubfoot and to evaluate their relationship with clinical status. Methods In this study, Ponseti-treated idiopathic clubfoot patients were included and divided into clubfoot patients with and without a relapse. Objective gait analysis was done resulting in total gait and foot scores and clinical assessment was performed using the Clubfoot Assessment Protocol (CAP). Additionally, a new clubfoot specific foot score, the clubFoot Deviation Index (cFDI*), was calculated to better capture foot kinematics of clubfoot patients. Results Clubfoot patients with a relapse show lower total gait quality (GDI*) and lower clinical status defined by the CAP than clubfoot patients without a relapse. Abnormal cFDI* was found in relapse patients, reflected by differences in corresponding variable scores. Moderate relationships were found for the subdomains of the CAP and total gait and foot quality in all clubfoot patients. Significance A new total foot score was introduced in this study, which was more relevant for the clubfoot population. The use of this new foot score (cFDI*) besides the GDI*, is recommended to identify gait and foot motion deviations. Along with clinical assessment, this will give an overview of the overall status of the complex, multi-segmental aspects of a (relapsed) clubfoot. The relationships found in this study suggest that clinical assessment might be indicative of a deviation in total gait and foot pattern, therefore hinting towards personalised screening for better treatment decision making.
MULTIFILE
Introduction: Given the complexity of teaching clinical reasoning to (future) healthcare professionals, the utilization of serious games has become popular for supporting clinical reasoning education. This scoping review outlines games designed to support teaching clinical reasoning in health professions education, with a specific emphasis on their alignment with the 8-step clinical reasoning cycle and the reflective practice framework, fundamental for effective learning. Methods: A scoping review using systematic searches across seven databases (PubMed, CINAHL, ERIC, PsycINFO, Scopus, Web of Science, and Embase) was conducted. Game characteristics, technical requirements, and incorporation of clinical reasoning cycle steps were analyzed. Additional game information was obtained from the authors. Results: Nineteen unique games emerged, primarily simulation and escape room genres. Most games incorporated the following clinical reasoning steps: patient consideration (step 1), cue collection (step 2), intervention (step 6), and outcome evaluation (step 7). Processing information (step 3) and understanding the patient’s problem (step 4) were less prevalent, while goal setting (step 5) and reflection (step 8) were least integrated. Conclusion: All serious games reviewed show potential for improving clinical reasoning skills, but thoughtful alignment with learning objectives and contextual factors is vital. While this study aids health professions educators in understanding how games may support teaching of clinical reasoning, further research is needed to optimize their effective use in education. Notably, most games lack explicit incorporation of all clinical reasoning cycle steps, especially reflection, limiting its role in reflective practice. Hence, we recommend prioritizing a systematic clinical reasoning model with explicit reflective steps when using serious games for teaching clinical reasoning.
DOCUMENT
The relationship between race and biology is complex. In contemporary medical science, race is a social construct that is measured via self-identification of study participants. But even though race has no biological essence, it is often used as variable in medical guidelines (e.g., treatment recommendations specific for Black people with hypertension). Such recommendations are based on clinical trials in which there was a significant correlation between self-identified race and actual, but often unmeasured, health-related factors such as (pharmaco) genetics, diet, sun exposure, etc. Many teachers are insufficiently aware of this complexity. In their classes, they (unintentionally) portray self-reported race as having a biological essence. This may cause students to see people of shared race as biologically or genetically homogeneous, and believe that race-based recommendations are true for all individuals (rather than reflecting the average of a heterogeneous group). This medicalizes race and reinforces already existing healthcare disparities. Moreover, students may fail to learn that the relation between race and health is easily biased by factors such as socioeconomic status, racism, ancestry, and environment and that this limits the generalizability of race-based recommendations. We observed that the clinical case vignettes that we use in our teaching contain many stereotypes and biases, and do not generally reflect the diversity of actual patients. This guide, written by clinical pharmacology and therapeutics teachers, aims to help our colleagues and teachers in other health professions to reflect on and improve our teaching on race-based medical guidelines and to make our clinical case vignettes more inclusive and diverse.
MULTIFILE
Studies about clinical pain in schizophrenia are rare. Conclusions on pain sensitivity in people with schizophrenia are primarily based on experimental pain studies. This review attempts to assess clinical pain, that is, everyday pain without experimental manipulation, in people with schizophrenia. PubMed, PsycINFO, Embase.com, and Cochrane were searched with terms related to schizophrenia and pain. Methodological quality was assessed with the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool. Fourteen studies were included. Persons with schizophrenia appear to have a diminished prevalence of pain, as well as a lower intensity of pain when compared to persons with other psychiatric diseases. When compared to healthy controls, both prevalence and intensity of pain appear to be diminished for persons with schizophrenia. However, it was found that this effect only applies to pain with an apparent medical cause, such as headache after lumbar puncture. For less severe situations, prevalence and intensity of pain appears to be comparable between people with schizophrenia and controls. Possible underlying mechanisms are discussed. Knowledge about pain in schizophrenia is important for adequate pain treatment in clinical practice. Perspective This review presents a valuable insight into clinical pain in people with schizophrenia
DOCUMENT
Clinical decision support systems (CDSSs) have gained prominence in health care, aiding professionals in decision-making and improving patient outcomes. While physicians often use CDSSs for diagnosis and treatment optimization, nurses rely on these systems for tasks such as patient monitoring, prioritization, and care planning. In nursing practice, CDSSs can assist with timely detection of clinical deterioration, support infection control, and streamline care documentation. Despite their potential, the adoption and use of CDSSs by nurses face diverse challenges. Barriers such as alarm fatigue, limited usability, lack of integration with workflows, and insufficient training continue to undermine effective implementation. In contrast to the relatively extensive body of research on CDSS use by physicians, studies focusing on nurses remain limited, leaving a gap in understanding the unique facilitators and barriers they encounter. This study aimed to explore the facilitators and barriers influencing the adoption and use of CDSSs by nurses in hospitals, using an extended Fit Between Individuals, Tasks, and Technology (FITT) framework.
MULTIFILE
Background: Patient decision aids (PDAs) can support the treatment decision making process and empower patients to take a proactive role in their treatment pathway while using a shared decision-making (SDM) approach making participatory medicine possible. The aim of this study was to develop a PDA for prostate cancer that is accurate and user-friendly. Methods: We followed a user-centered design process consisting of five rounds of semi-structured interviews and usability surveys with topics such as informational/decisional needs of users and requirements for PDAs. Our userbase consisted of 8 urologists, 4 radiation oncologists, 2 oncology nurses, 8 general practitioners, 19 former prostate cancer patients, 4 usability experts and 11 healthy volunteers. Results: Informational needs for patients centered on three key factors: treatment experience, post-treatment quality of life, and the impact of side effects. Patients and clinicians valued a PDA that presents balanced information on these factors through simple understandable language and visual aids. Usability questionnaires revealed that patients were more satisfied overall with the PDA than clinicians; however, both groups had concerns that the PDA might lengthen consultation times (42 and 41%, respectively). The PDA is accessible on http://beslissamen.nl/. Conclusions: User-centered design provided valuable insights into PDA requirements but challenges in integrating diverse perspectives as clinicians focus on clinical outcomes while patients also consider quality of life. Nevertheless, it is crucial to involve a broad base of clinical users in order to better understand the decision-making process and to develop a PDA that is accurate, usable, and acceptable.
DOCUMENT
