Caregivers' preferences for the treatment of patients with Alzheimer's disease.

OBJECTIVES: To learn caregivers' preferences for the treatment of AD with a disease-slowing therapy, and to identify relationships between these preferences and the characteristics of caregivers and patients. METHODS: A structured interview with 40 caregivers of patients with AD. Preferences were measured for an AD-slowing medicine with the benefits of a gain in survival and a delay to nursing home placement (NHP), and risks of three degrees of severity of GI bleeding. RESULTS: Using a six-point scale ranging from "not at all important" to "extremely important," the median rating of the importance of survival as a treatment benefit was "very important" and of a delay to NHP was "extremely important." Fifty-five percent of the caregivers identified a benefit more important than these two benefits. Qualitative data showed that caregivers' reasons for these preferences featured the importance of patient quality of life, and the preservation of patient cognition and function. Bivariate analyses showed that increasing importance of the benefit of survival was related to higher assessments of the patient's health and quality of life, and lower ratings of the caregiver's experience of burden. In order to slow disease progression by 1 year, 25/38 (66%) of caregivers would accept some risk of death from gastrointestinal bleeding. Regression models showed that risk tolerance was higher among caregivers who were working, adult children caring for early stage patients or from families with an history of dementia. CONCLUSIONS: Caregivers generally are willing to tolerate notable amounts of risk to slow AD progression. Factors that describe the caregiver's experience and perception of the patient and the patient-caregiver relationship influence how they want to treat the disease. This information may be useful for decisions about how to study and prescribe AD treatments.

Hospital nurses' occupational exposure to blood: prospective, retrospective, and institutional reports.

OBJECTIVES: This study examined nurses risk of exposure to blood resulting from injuries with needles and sharps, the methods of estimating those risks, and the factors affecting risks. METHODS: Nurses on 40 medical units in 20 hospitals in cities with a high incidence of AIDS were studied. Percutaneous injuries were documented for every shift during a 30-day period. These prospective reports were compared with retrospective and institutional reports. Factors affecting the likelihood of injuries were explored. RESULTS: Based on the prospective reports, the rate of injuries to staff nurses was 0.8 per nurse-year. Prospective and retrospective rates were similar, while institutional rates were significantly lower. Factors associated with increased injuries included recapping needles and temporary work assignments. Working in hospitals characterized by professional nurse practice models and taking precautions to avoid blood contact were associated with fewer injuries. CONCLUSIONS: Injuries from needlesticks are more common than institutional reports suggest and do not occur at random. Diminishing the frequency with which nurses recap needles, increasing precautions they take, reducing use of temporary nursing personnel, and implementing organizational changes may lower the odds of nurses being injured.