Assessing quality of life after pulmonary embolism: Comparing results from the PEmb-QoL with semistructured interviews.

Background: The Pulmonary Embolism Quality of Life questionnaire (PEmb-QoL) assesses quality of life (QoL) in patients with previous pulmonary embolism (PE). Objective: Our aim was to assess the agreement between the PEmb-QoL and interviews and to explore other QoL concerns in patients diagnosed with PE. Methods: This mixed-method study included interviews with 21 patients about QoL after PE, followed by the PEmb-QoL questionnaire. In interviews, patients were asked about their lived experiences and impact of PE. Our analysis identified the frequency and severity of decreased QoL in qualitative interviews and compared with the PEmb-QoL score. Excerpts that described the effect of PE on QoL in interview transcripts were transcoded to match the answers corresponding to the 1 to 6 numeric values for each question from the PEmb-QoL using a predetermined matrix (eg, "constant" and "daily" = all of the time = value 1) and directly compared with responses on the PEmb-QoL in the areas of emotional complaints and activities of daily living/social limitations. Results: Interviews showed more functional impairment than predicted by PEmb-QoL. For fear of recurrence, 86% of participants had disagreements between PEmb-QoL scores and transcoded interview scores. We found 42% disagreement between reported descriptions of the inability to do or enjoy hobbies in interviews and the PEmb-QoL score. Conclusion: Patient interviews showed discordances compared with a validated psychometric tool. To capture a more detailed and accurate picture of the effect of PE on QoL, providers and researchers should consider the addition of qualitative methods to assess outcomes.

Pediatric hematology/oncology physician and nurse practitioner attitudes towards the COVID-19 vaccines: A qualitative study.

As of 05/28/2021, SARS-CoV-2 (COVID-19) had caused 3.9 million infections in the United States (US) pediatric population since its discovery in December of 2019. The development and expansion of vaccination has markedly changed the shape of the epidemic. In this qualitative study, we report on pediatric hematology/oncology provider views on the COVID-19 vaccine prior to approval in the adolescent population <16 years of age. Results from interviews with 20 providers across the state of Indiana showed that most were supportive of the COVID-19 vaccine for healthy adults. However, the majority also expressed a need to see more data on the safety and effectiveness of COVID-19 vaccinations in pediatric hematology/oncology populations. While they recognized the public health importance of vaccination, their duty to protect their patients led to a need for more specific safety and efficacy data.

Communication at diagnosis of venous thromboembolism: Lasting impact of verbal and nonverbal provider communication on patients.

BACKGROUND: Establishing trust and effective communication can be challenging in the emergency department, where a prior relationship between patient and provider is lacking and decisions have to be made rapidly. Venous thromboembolism (VTE) represents an emergent condition that requires immediate decision making. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this paper was to document the experiences, perceptions, and the overall impact of health care provider communication on patients during the diagnosis of VTE in the emergency department. METHODS: This was a qualitative method study using semistructured interviews to increase understanding of the patient experience during the diagnosis of VTE and impact of the health care provider communication on subsequent patient perceptions. RESULTS: A total of 24 interviews were conducted. Content analysis revealed that certain aspects of health care providers' communication-namely, word choice, incomplete information, imbalance between fear over reassurance and nonverbal behavior-used to deliver and explain VTE diagnosis, treatment, and prognosis increases patients' fears. CONCLUSION: These interviews elucidate areas for improvement of communication in the emergency care setting for acute VTE.

Human Challenge Studies With Wild-Type Severe Acute Respiratory Sydrome Coronavirus 2 Violate Longstanding Codes of Human Subjects Research.

This manuscript explores the ethics of human inoculation experiments in young healthy adults with wild-type severe acute respiratory sydrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) as a tool to evaluate vaccine efficacy in the context of the Nuremberg Code, the Declaration of Helsinki, and the Belmont Report, and in the context of dose-response relationships with infectious agents. Despite societal pressure to develop a SARS-CoV-2 challenge model to evaluate vaccines, we argue that there are substantial risks that cannot be adequately defined because the dose of SARS-CoV-2 that causes severe disease in young adults is unknown. In the absence of curative therapy, even if a volunteer consents, longstanding ethical codes governing human subjects research preclude the conduct of such experiments.