Shared decision-making and the duration of medical consultations: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVE: 1) determine whether increased levels of Shared Decision-Making (SDM) affect consultation duration, 2) investigate the intervention characteristics involved. METHODS: MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL and Cochrane library were systematically searched for experimental and cross-sectional studies up to December 2021. A best-evidence synthesis was performed, and interventions characteristics that increased at least one SDM-outcome, were pooled and descriptively analyzed. RESULTS: Sixty-three studies were selected: 28 randomized clinical trials, 8 quasi-experimental studies, and 27 cross-sectional studies. Overall, pooling of data was not possible due to substantial heterogeneity. No differences in consultation duration were found more often than increased or decreased durations. . Consultation times (minutes:seconds) were significantly increased only among interventions that: 1) targeted clinicians only (Mean Difference [MD] 1:30, 95% Confidence Interval [CI] 0:24-2:37); 2) were performed in primary care (MD 2:05, 95%CI 0:11-3:59; 3) used a group format (MD 2:25, 95%CI 0:45-4:05); 4) were not theory-based (MD 4:01, 95%CI 0:38-7:23). CONCLUSION: Applying SDM does not necessarily require longer consultation durations. Theory-based, multilevel implementation approaches possibly lower the risk of increasing consultation durations. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: The commonly heard concern that time hinders SDM implementation can be contradicted, but implementation demands multifaceted approaches and space for training and adapting work processes.

Impact of family visit restrictions due to COVID-19 policy on patient outcomes: A cohort study.

AIM: To investigate the impact of family visit restrictions during the COVID-19 pandemic on deliriums, falls, pneumonia, pressure ulcers and readmissions among surgical inpatients with gastrointestinal (oncologic) diseases. DESIGN: Cohort study. METHODS: This study was conducted among adult inpatients undergoing gastrointestinal surgery in two academic hospitals. During the COVID-19 outbreak in 2020, over a 10-week period, one cohort was subjected to family visit restrictions. Per patient, one person per day was allowed to visit for a maximum of 30 min. This cohort was compared with another cohort in which patients were not subjected to such restrictions during a 10-week period in 2019. Logistic regression analyses were used to investigate the impact of the restrictions on deliriums, falls, pneumonia, pressure ulcers and readmissions. RESULTS: In total, 287 patients were included in the 2020 cohort and 243 in the 2019 cohort. No differences were observed in the cohorts with respect to baseline characteristics. Logistic regression analyses showed no significant differences in deliriums, falls, pneumonia, pressure ulcers and readmissions between the cohorts. CONCLUSION: We cautiously conclude that the family visit restrictions during the COVID-19 pandemic did not contribute to deliriums, falls, pneumonia, pressure ulcers or readmissions in surgical patients with gastrointestinal (oncologic) diseases. IMPACT: COVID-19 influenced family-centred care due to family visit restrictions. Nurses need to continue monitoring outcomes known to be sensitive to family-centred care to gain insight into the effects of visit restrictions and share the results in order to include nurses' perspectives in COVID-19-decision-making. Re-implementing of family visit restrictions should be carefully considered in policy-making.

Gastrectomy Versus Esophagectomy for Gastroesophageal Junction Tumors: Short- and Long-Term Outcomes From the Dutch Upper Gastrointestinal Cancer Audit.

OBJECTIVE: Investigate long-term survival, morbidity, mortality, and pathology results in patients following esophagectomy or total gastrectomy for gastroesophageal junction (GEJ) cancer. BACKGROUND: Both a total gastrectomy and an esophagectomy may be valid treatment options in patients with GEJ cancer. Which procedure results in the most optimal patient outcome is not well studied. The aim of this study was to investigate the long-term survival, morbidity, mortality, and pathology results in patients following esophagectomy or total gastrectomy for GEJ cancer. METHODS: A retrospective comparative cohort study of prospectively collected data from the Dutch Upper GI Cancer Audit combined with survival data of the Dutch medical insurance database was performed. Patients with GEJ cancer in whom a total gastrectomy or an esophagectomy was performed between 2011 and 2016 were compared. The primary outcome was 3-year overall survival. Postoperative morbidity, mortality, 3-year conditional survival, radicality of resection, and lymph node yield were secondary endpoints. RESULTS: A total of 871 patients were included: 790 following esophagectomy and 81 following gastrectomy. The 3-year overall survival was 35.8% after esophagectomy and 28.4% after gastrectomy (hazard ratio 1.2, 95% confidence interval 0.721-1.836, P = 0.557). Postoperative morbidity, mortality, radicality of resection, lymph node yield, and 3-year conditional survival did not differ significantly between groups. CONCLUSION: A total gastrectomy and an esophagectomy for GEJ cancer show largely comparable results with regard to long-term survival, postoperative morbidity, mortality, and pathology results. If both procedures are feasible, other parameters such as surgeon's experience and quality of life should be considered when planning for surgery.