Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 20 de 54
Filter
1.
JAMA Neurol ; 79(3): 223-224, 2022 03 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1664318
2.
Health Mark Q ; 38(2-3): 205-221, 2021.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1470045

ABSTRACT

The study aims to assess patients' preferences regarding physicians communicating bad news of COVID-19. Based on the data collected from 74 patients with COVID-19 in India, this study assesses "how" patients want bad news to be delivered. Key aspects of the physician-patient interaction were identified from the literature. Regression tests proved that three main constructs contribute significantly toward patient outcomes. Content of the message and facilitation were most crucial, however too much emotional support was not desirable by patients. Also, the patient's gender and educational background should be considered before breaking bad news . Thus, to increase patient compliance full disclosure and patient-centered methods of communication can be used.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Neoplasms , Communication , Humans , India , Patient Preference , Physician-Patient Relations , SARS-CoV-2 , Truth Disclosure
4.
Sci Prog ; 104(3): 368504211042980, 2021.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1430320

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to evaluate the truthfulness of patients about their pre-appointment COVID-19 screening tests at a dental clinic. METHODS: A total of 613 patients were recruited for the study from the dental clinic at the Faculty of Dentistry, Najran University, Saudi Arabia. The data collection was done in three parts from the patients who visited the hospital to receive dental treatment. The first part included the socio-demographic characteristics of the patients and the COVID-19 swab tests performed within the past 14 days. The second part was the clinical examination, and the third part was a confirmation of the swab test taken by the patient by checking the Hesen website using the patient ID. After data collection, statistical analysis was carried out using SPSS 26.0. Descriptive analysis was done and expressed as mean, standard deviation, frequency, and percentage (%). A cross-tabulation, also described as a contingency table, was used to identify trends and patterns across data and explain the correlation between different variables. RESULTS: It was seen from the status of the swab test within 14 days of the patient's arrival at the hospital for the dental treatment that 18 (2.9%) patients lied about the pre-treatment swab test within 14 days, and 595 (97.1%) were truthful. The observed and expected counts showed across genders and diagnosis a statistically significant difference (p < 0.001), and there was no significant difference seen across different age groups (p = 0.064) of the patients. CONCLUSIONS: Dental healthcare workers are worried and assume a high risk of COVID-19 infection as the patients are not truthful about the pre-treatment COVID-19 swab test. Routine rapid tests on patients and the healthcare staff are a feasible option for lowering overall risks.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/prevention & control , Patient Compliance/statistics & numerical data , Truth Disclosure/ethics , Adolescent , Adult , Aged , COVID-19/diagnosis , COVID-19/transmission , COVID-19 Testing , Dental Offices/ethics , Dental Offices/organization & administration , Female , Health Personnel/psychology , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Nasopharynx/virology , Office Visits/statistics & numerical data , Patient Compliance/psychology , Risk , SARS-CoV-2/pathogenicity , Saudi Arabia/epidemiology
6.
Health Info Libr J ; 38(2): 143-149, 2021 Jun.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1343866

ABSTRACT

Recent statistics show that almost 1/4 of a million people have died and four million people are affected either with mild or serious health problems caused by coronavirus (COVID-19). These numbers are rapidly increasing (World Health Organization, May 3, 2020c). There is much concern during this pandemic about the spread of misleading or inaccurate information. This article reports on a small study which attempted to identify the types and sources of COVID-19 misinformation. The authors identified and analysed 1225 pieces of COVID-19 fake news stories taken from fact-checkers, myth-busters and COVID-19 dashboards. The study is significant given the concern raised by the WHO Director-General that 'we are not just fighting the pandemic, we are also fighting infodemic'. The study concludes that the COVID-19 infodemic is full of false claims, half backed conspiracy theories and pseudoscientific therapies, regarding the diagnosis, treatment, prevention, origin and spread of the virus. Fake news is pervasive in social media, putting public health at risk. The scale of the crisis and ubiquity of the misleading information require that scientists, health information professionals and journalists exercise their professional responsibility to help the general public identify fake news stories. They should ensure that accurate information is published and disseminated.J.M.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Communication , Public Health , Social Media/statistics & numerical data , Truth Disclosure/ethics , Fraud/prevention & control , Global Health , Humans
7.
Eur Heart J ; 41(39): 3782-3783, 2020 10 14.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1319164
8.
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A ; 118(29)2021 07 20.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1307381

ABSTRACT

During the rapid development and rolling out of vaccines against COVID-19, researchers have called for an approach of "radical transparency," in which vaccine information is transparently disclosed to the public, even if negative information can decrease vaccine uptake. Consistent with theories about the psychology of conspiracy beliefs, these calls predict that a lack of transparency may reduce trust in health authorities and may facilitate the spread of conspiracy theories, which may limit the long-term capabilities of health authorities during and after the pandemic. On the basis of preregistered experiments conducted on large, representative samples of Americans and Danes (N > 13,000), the current study contrasts the effects of vague vaccine communication with transparent communication, which discloses either positive or negative vaccine features. The evidence demonstrates that transparent negative communication may indeed harm vaccine acceptance here and now but that it increases trust in health authorities. Furthermore, the alternative of vague, reassuring communication does not increase vaccine acceptance either and leads to both lower trust and higher endorsement of conspiracy theories.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 Vaccines , Health Communication , Patient Acceptance of Health Care/psychology , Trust/psychology , COVID-19/prevention & control , Humans , SARS-CoV-2/immunology , Truth Disclosure , Vaccination/psychology
9.
Psychol Sci ; 32(7): 1169-1178, 2021 07.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1266454

ABSTRACT

As part of the Systematizing Confidence in Open Research and Evidence (SCORE) program, the present study consisted of a two-stage replication test of a central finding by Pennycook et al. (2020), namely that asking people to think about the accuracy of a single headline improves "truth discernment" of intentions to share news headlines about COVID-19. The first stage of the replication test (n = 701) was unsuccessful (p = .67). After collecting a second round of data (additional n = 882, pooled N = 1,583), we found a small but significant interaction between treatment condition and truth discernment (uncorrected p = .017; treatment: d = 0.14, control: d = 0.10). As in the target study, perceived headline accuracy correlated with treatment impact, so that treatment-group participants were less willing to share headlines that were perceived as less accurate. We discuss potential explanations for these findings and an unreported change in the hypothesis (but not the analysis plan) from the preregistration in the original study.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Mass Media , Thinking , Humans , Information Dissemination , Intention , Mass Media/standards , Reproducibility of Results , Truth Disclosure
10.
Clin Teach ; 18(4): 424-430, 2021 Aug.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1261166

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Communication between clinicians, patients, and families is a core component of medical care that requires deliberate practice and feedback to improve. In March 2020, the COVID-19 pandemic caused a sudden transformation in communication practices because of new physical distancing requirements, necessitating physicians to communicate bad news via telephone and video-mediated communication (VMC). This study investigated students' experience with a simulation-based communications training for having difficult conversations using VMC. METHODS: Thirty-eight fourth-year medical students preparing for their surgical residency participated in a simulated scenario where students discussed a new COVID-19 diagnosis with a standardised family member (SFM) of a sick patient via VMC. Learners were introduced to an established communications model (SPIKES) by an educational video. After the simulation, SFM and course facilitators guided a debrief and provided feedback. Learners completed surveys evaluating reactions to the training, preparedness to deliver bad news, and attitudes about telehealth. RESULTS: Twenty-three students completed evaluation surveys (response rate=61%). Few students had prior formal training (17%) or experience communicating bad news using telehealth (13%). Most respondents rated the session beneficial (96%) and felt they could express empathy using the VMC format (83%). However, only 57% felt ready to deliver bad news independently after the training and 52% reported it was more difficult to communicate without physical presence. Comments highlighted the need for additional practice. CONCLUSION: This pilot study demonstrated the value and feasibility of teaching medical students to break bad news using VMC as well as demonstrating the need for additional training.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Pandemics , COVID-19 Testing , Communication , Humans , Physician-Patient Relations , Pilot Projects , SARS-CoV-2 , Truth Disclosure
11.
S Afr Fam Pract (2004) ; 63(1): e1-e5, 2021 05 13.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1259671

ABSTRACT

Clinicians notify positive results of the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 polymerase chain reaction to patients and/or relatives, whilst short message service (SMS) has been adopted as a means of disseminating negative results. Therefore, clinicians should be adequately equipped to provide telephonic consultation whilst delivering a positive test result to patients. The news of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) test result often invokes fear of impending death in patients, especially the elderlies and those with comorbidities. In addition, several survivors have reported persistent symptoms and COVID-19-related stigma, which precludes them from immediate re-integration into their workplaces. Consequently, COVID-19 results are perceived as bad news by the members of the public. This article justifies why COVID-19 test results are bad news and also discusses the notification steps to follow when delivering COVID-19 results, whilst also addressing patients' immediate concerns. The article concludes by highlighting an important safety net for COVID-19 patients and the attending clinician.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/diagnosis , Communication , Physician's Role , Truth Disclosure , Age Factors , COVID-19/psychology , Clinical Competence , Comorbidity , Fear , Humans , Social Stigma
12.
JCI Insight ; 5(6)2020 03 17.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1228932

ABSTRACT

Lessons from history underline the importance of having direct lines of communication to and from public health officials, who must remain free from policital bias in times of crisis.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Influenza Pandemic, 1918-1919/history , Public Health/history , Truth Disclosure , History, 20th Century , Humans , SARS-CoV-2
15.
Support Care Cancer ; 29(8): 4195-4198, 2021 Aug.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1156946

ABSTRACT

Breaking bad news is a mandatory provision in the professional life of nearly every physician. One of its most frequent occasions is the diagnosis of malignancy. Responding to the recipients' emotions is a critical issue in the delivery of unsettling information, and has an impact on the patient's trust in the treating physician, adjustment to illness and ultimately treatment. Since the World Health Organization (WHO) declared COVID-19 a pandemic on March 11, 2020, several measures of social distancing and isolation have been introduced to our clinical setting. In the wake of these restrictions, it is important to reexamine existing communication guidelines to determine their applicability to face-to-face counseling in the context of social distancing, as well as to new communication technologies, such as telemedicine. We address these issues and discuss strategies to convey bad news the most empathetic and comprehensible way possible.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Neoplasms/psychology , Physical Distancing , Physician-Patient Relations/ethics , Telemedicine , Truth Disclosure , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/prevention & control , COVID-19/psychology , Emotional Intelligence , Humans , Neoplasms/diagnosis , Physicians/ethics , Physicians/psychology , Psycho-Oncology/methods , SARS-CoV-2 , Telemedicine/ethics , Telemedicine/methods , Telemedicine/standards
16.
PLoS One ; 16(3): e0245900, 2021.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1133679

ABSTRACT

The coronavirus pandemic has seen a marked rise in medical disinformation across social media. A variety of claims have garnered considerable traction, including the assertion that COVID is a hoax or deliberately manufactured, that 5G frequency radiation causes coronavirus, and that the pandemic is a ruse by big pharmaceutical companies to profiteer off a vaccine. An estimated 30% of some populations subscribe some form of COVID medico-scientific conspiracy narratives, with detrimental impacts for themselves and others. Consequently, exposing the lack of veracity of these claims is of considerable importance. Previous work has demonstrated that historical medical and scientific conspiracies are highly unlikely to be sustainable. In this article, an expanded model for a hypothetical en masse COVID conspiracy is derived. Analysis suggests that even under ideal circumstances for conspirators, commonly encountered conspiratorial claims are highly unlikely to endure, and would quickly be exposed. This work also explores the spectrum of medico-scientific acceptance, motivations behind propagation of falsehoods, and the urgent need for the medical and scientific community to anticipate and counter the emergence of falsehoods.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/pathology , Deception , COVID-19/virology , Electromagnetic Fields , Fraud/statistics & numerical data , Humans , SARS-CoV-2/isolation & purification , Truth Disclosure , Vaccination , Wireless Technology
17.
Bol Med Hosp Infant Mex ; 78(1): 59-65, 2020.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1119705

ABSTRACT

Communicating bad news is one of the most frequent activities in hospitals, for which some recommendations have been adapted to the needs within the coronavirus-2 disease (COVID-19) context. This document presents nine steps to deliver bad news (face to face or remotely) adapted to the COVID-19 context from two international protocols (SPIKES and GRIEV_ING). The importance of promoting physical and emotional self-care skills in health personnel is also described, as well as psychological first aid strategies to address the emotional response of the family member who receives the news. Finally, the limitations and advantages of the proposal should be considered.


La comunicación de malas noticias es una de las actividades más frecuentes en los hospitales dentro del contexto de la COVID-19. A pesar de su alta frecuencia, existen pocas recomendaciones adaptadas a las necesidades que el contexto de la COVID-19 demanda. Debido a lo anterior, en el presente escrito se presentan nueve pasos para dar malas noticias (cara a cara o por vía remota) de dos protocolos internacionales (SPIKES y GRIEV_ING) adaptados a las necesidades de transmisión de información de la COVID-19. Se describe también la importancia de promover habilidades de autocuidado físico y emocional en el personal de salud, así como estrategias de primeros auxilios psicológicos para el abordaje de la respuesta emocional del familiar que recibe la noticia. Finalmente, se deben considerar las limitaciones y ventajas de la propuesta.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Family/psychology , Self Care/psychology , Truth Disclosure , Communication , Health Personnel/organization & administration , Humans , Internationality
18.
Front Public Health ; 9: 644538, 2021.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1110370

ABSTRACT

The rapid advancement in vaccine development represents a critical milestone that will help humanity tackle the COVID-19 pandemic. However, the success of these efforts is not guaranteed, as it relies on the outcomes of national and international vaccination strategies. In this article, we highlight some of the challenges that Romania will face and propose a set of solutions to overcome them. With this in mind, we discuss issues such as the infrastructure of vaccine storage and delivery, the deployment and administration of immunisations, and the public acceptance of vaccines. The ways in which Romanian society will respond to a national COVID-19 vaccination campaign will be contingent on appropriate and timely actions. As many of the problems encountered in Romania are not unique, the proposed recommendations could be adapted and implemented in other countries that face similar issues, thereby informing better practices in the management of the COVID-19 pandemic.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 Vaccines , COVID-19/prevention & control , Immunization Programs/organization & administration , Patient Compliance , Awareness , COVID-19 Vaccines/supply & distribution , Delivery of Health Care , Humans , Pandemics , Romania , SARS-CoV-2 , Truth Disclosure
19.
J Perinat Neonatal Nurs ; 35(1): 12-15, 2021.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1109358
20.
Am J Bioeth ; 21(3): 1-3, 2021 03.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1104702
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL