Should I Stay, or Should I Go? Early Phase Instrument Development of Workforce Movement-A Pilot Study with Breast Radiologists.

OBJECTIVE: The goal of this study was to develop a psychometrically valid survey on workplace satisfaction and examine predictors of workforce movement among breast radiologists. METHODS: Actively practicing members of the Society of Breast Imaging were invited to complete a survey on workplace satisfaction. Radiologists also indicated whether they had recently left their practice or were thinking of leaving their practice. RESULTS: In total, 228 breast radiologists provided valid responses (8.7% response rate); 45% were thinking of leaving or had left their practice. Factor analysis yielded five factors, and discriminant function analysis found six main aspects associated with workforce movement in breast radiologists: (1) not enough work-life balance; (2) salary too low; (3) not feeling valued; (4) wanting a different challenge and/or more growth opportunity; (5) safety concerns; and (6) not feeling respected by physician leadership. CONCLUSIONS: Pending further validation in larger and different cohorts, the survey created here can be administered by radiology practices to predict when breast radiologists are vulnerable to quitting. Atlhough this measure was designed for breast radiologists specifically, it could be adapted for other subspecialties.

Can incorrect artificial intelligence (AI) results impact radiologists, and if so, what can we do about it? A multi-reader pilot study of lung cancer detection with chest radiography.

OBJECTIVE: To examine whether incorrect AI results impact radiologist performance, and if so, whether human factors can be optimized to reduce error. METHODS: Multi-reader design, 6 radiologists interpreted 90 identical chest radiographs (follow-up CT needed: yes/no) on four occasions (09/20-01/22). No AI result was provided for session 1. Sham AI results were provided for sessions 2-4, and AI for 12 cases were manipulated to be incorrect (8 false positives (FP), 4 false negatives (FN)) (0.87 ROC-AUC). In the Delete AI (No Box) condition, radiologists were told AI results would not be saved for the evaluation. In Keep AI (No Box) and Keep AI (Box), radiologists were told results would be saved. In Keep AI (Box), the ostensible AI program visually outlined the region of suspicion. AI results were constant between conditions. RESULTS: Relative to the No AI condition (FN = 2.7%, FP = 51.4%), FN and FPs were higher in the Keep AI (No Box) (FN = 33.0%, FP = 86.0%), Delete AI (No Box) (FN = 26.7%, FP = 80.5%), and Keep AI (Box) (FN = to 20.7%, FP = 80.5%) conditions (all ps < 0.05). FNs were higher in the Keep AI (No Box) condition (33.0%) than in the Keep AI (Box) condition (20.7%) (p = 0.04). FPs were higher in the Keep AI (No Box) (86.0%) condition than in the Delete AI (No Box) condition (80.5%) (p = 0.03). CONCLUSION: Incorrect AI causes radiologists to make incorrect follow-up decisions when they were correct without AI. This effect is mitigated when radiologists believe AI will be deleted from the patient's file or a box is provided around the region of interest. CLINICAL RELEVANCE STATEMENT: When AI is wrong, radiologists make more errors than they would have without AI. Based on human factors psychology, our manuscript provides evidence for two AI implementation strategies that reduce the deleterious effects of incorrect AI. KEY POINTS: • When AI provided incorrect results, false negative and false positive rates among the radiologists increased. • False positives decreased when AI results were deleted, versus kept, in the patient's record. • False negatives and false positives decreased when AI visually outlined the region of suspicion.

A Pilot Study of Accelerometer-Based Biometric Data Collection among Patients Undergoing Locoregional Therapies.

This study evaluated the feasibility of measuring patient recovery after locoregional therapies (LRTs) using a wearable activity tracker (WAT). Twenty adult patients with cancer were provided with a WAT device to wear for a minimum of 7 days prior to their procedure (baseline) and for up to 30 days after their procedure (recovery). Daily step counts were continuously recorded. Patient responses to the Short Form 36-Item Health Survey (SF-36) were also collected before and after LRT. Analysis of WAT data demonstrated a mean of 4,850 daily steps taken at baseline, which decreased to 2,000 immediately after LRT and then rapidly increased to approximately 4,300 daily steps over an average of 10 days (P < .001). No significant changes were observed in SF-36 responses between baseline and follow-up assessments (P > .10). These results suggest that WAT devices capture dynamic periprocedural data not reflected in survey-based assessments and may be used to monitor patient recovery after interventional oncologic procedures.

Electronic Cigarettes for Smoking Cessation: The Gap Between Behavior in Smokers and Medical Education.

INTRODUCTION: E-cigarettes have engendered a great deal of controversy within the public health and medical communities.  Methods: Two cross-sectional surveys were administered. First, patients at an annual lung cancer screening appointment who self-identified as former smokers were asked about strategies for achieving and maintaining smoking cessation with open-ended questions. Second, medical students at a single university reported their opinion and knowledge of combustible cigarettes and e-cigarettes. RESULTS: Among the n=102 in the patient survey indicating that they used e-cigarettes or over-the-counter (OTC) nicotine replacement products for smoking cessation, 34.3% (35/102) vaped e-cigarettes, making it the second most common next to patches (47.1% {48/102}). By comparison, n=48 reported using medication. Medical student participants (n=168) were mixed regarding whether a patient should switch from traditional to electronic cigarettes (56.0% yes; 44.0% no) and reported receiving education about traditional cigarettes (92.3%) at a much higher rate than for e-cigarettes (46.4%), p<.001. CONCLUSION: Many former heavy smokers undergoing a lung cancer screen used e-cigarettes to achieve smoking cessation. However, nearly half of medical students surveyed do not think patients should switch from traditional to e-cigarettes.

How do US orthopaedic surgeons view placebo-controlled surgical trials? A pilot online survey study.

Randomised placebo-controlled trials (RPCTs) are the gold standard for evaluating novel treatments. However, this design is rarely used in the context of orthopaedic interventions where participants are assigned to a real or placebo surgery. The present study examines attitudes towards RPCTs for orthopaedic surgery among 687 orthopaedic surgeons across the USA. When presented with a vignette describing an RPCT for orthopaedic surgery, 52.3% of participants viewed it as 'completely' or 'mostly' unethical. Participants were also asked to rank-order the value of five different types of evidence supporting the efficacy of a surgery, ranging from RPCT to an anecdotal report. Responses regarding RPCTs were polarised with 26.4% viewing it as the least valuable (even less valuable than an anecdote) and 35.7 .% viewing it as the most valuable. Where equipoise exists, if we want to subject orthopaedic surgeries to the highest standard of evidence (RPCTs) before they are implemented in clinical practice, it will be necessary to educate physicians on the value and ethics of placebo surgery control conditions. Otherwise, invasive procedures may be performed without any benefits beyond possible placebo effects.

How beliefs about coronavirus disease (COVID) influence COVID-like symptoms? - A longitudinal study.

OBJECTIVE: Evidence from psychosomatic and nocebo research has indicated that believing one will develop symptoms makes the experience of such symptoms more likely. We applied this idea in the context of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Specifically, we assessed whether beliefs regarding COVID-19 predict COVID-like symptoms 3-4 weeks later, and what specific belief has the greatest influence on symptom experience. METHOD: We conducted two studies with over 300 participants, approached at two successive timepoints, 3-4 weeks apart. Participants reported their experienced symptoms, COVID-19-related beliefs, demographics, and state anxiety. To target COVID-like symptoms, participants who reported having contracted COVID-19 or attributed their symptoms to another known cause were excluded. Regression analyses were conducted to test the predictive value of beliefs regarding COVID-19 on experienced symptoms. RESULTS: A particular belief regarding one's estimated symptom severity if infected with coronavirus predicted the experience of symptoms 3-4 weeks later (ß = .17, p = .011). This result persisted after controlling for potential confounds, including state anxiety (ß = .22, p = .002). Findings were preregistered and replicated in a separate cohort. A novel scale for perception of the body's ability to fight diseases contributed to mediating the effect of estimated symptom severity on later experienced symptoms. CONCLUSIONS: A particular belief about estimated symptom severity if infected with COVID predicted the experience of COVID-like physical symptoms several weeks later. These findings contribute to the understanding of the development of unexplained physical symptoms. Furthermore, identification of a particular belief that increases the likelihood of symptoms informs intervention that may mitigate its effects. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2022 APA, all rights reserved).

Heavy Smoking Patients Receiving a Lung Cancer Screen Want to Quit: A Call for Tailored Cessation Interventions.

Background: Lung cancer screening for current or former heavy smokers is now recommended among all asymptomatic adults 50-80 years old with a 20 pack-year history of smoking. However, little is known about the smoking-related attitudes of this population. Method: An assessment was conducted among 1,472 current smokers who presented for an annual lung cancer screen at one of 12 diagnostic imaging sites in Rhode Island between April 2019 and May 2020. Patients were asked about their use of smoking products, interest in quitting, and smoking-related attitudes. Results: Patients smoked a median of 16 cigarettes per day; 86.6% were daily cigarette smokers and 30.1% were daily cigar smokers. In total, 91.4% of patients were, to some degree, interested in quitting smoking and 71.4% were seriously thinking about quitting in the next 6 months or sooner. Patients planned on smoking less regardless of whether their lung screen was positive or negative for cancer, though they were more likely to plan on smoking less if negative (on 0-3 pt Likert scale: 0.31, 95% CI [0.27, 0.34] vs. 0.77, 95% CI [0.72, 0.81]). Confidence in quitting and belief in one's inherent ability to quit smoking varied substantially within the sample. Conclusion: Nearly all current smokers receiving a lung cancer screen have some interest in smoking cessation. Due to the heterogeneity in some smoking-related attitudes, tailored interventions for this population should be tested.

Digital Breast Tomosynthesis and Digital Mammography Recall and False-Positive Rates by Time of Day and Reader Experience.

Background Digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT) image interpretation might be more cognitively demanding than interpretation of digital mammography (DM) images. The time of day of interpretation might affect recall and false-positive (FP) rates, especially for DBT. Purpose To determine whether recall and FP rates vary by time of day of interpretation for screening mammography for breast cancer performed with DM and DBT. Materials and Methods This is a retrospective study examining 97 671 screening mammograms interpreted by 18 radiologists between January 2018 and December 2019 at one of 12 community radiology sites. The association between the time of day of interpretation, the type of image interpreted (DM vs DBT), and radiologist experience (≤5 posttraining years vs >5 posttraining years) and the likelihood of a patient being recalled from screening mammography and the likelihood of whether the interpretation was FP or true positive were analyzed. Analyses were conducted using generalized linear mixed modeling with a binary distribution and sandwich estimation where observations were nested by radiologist. Results Screening mammograms interpreted by 18 radiologists were reviewed (40 220 DBTs, 57 451 DMs). Nine radiologists had 5 or fewer posttraining years of experience, and nine had more than 5 posttraining years of experience. The overall recall rates for DM (10.2%) and DBT (9.0%) were different (P = .006); FP rate also differed (9.8% DM, 8.6% DBT; P = .004). For radiologists with 5 or fewer posttraining years of experience, odds of recall increased 11.5% (odds ratio [OR] = 1.12, P = .01) with every hour when using DBT, but this was not found for DM (OR = 1.09, P = .06); DBT and DM were different (OR = 1.12 vs 1.09, P = .02). For radiologists with more than 5 posttraining years of experience, no evidence of increase in recall was observed for DBT (OR = 1.02, P = .27) or DM (OR = 1.0, P = .80), and there was no evidence that these were different (OR = 1.02 vs 1.0, P = .13). Conclusion Patients were more likely to be recalled when their screening digital breast tomosynthesis images were interpreted later in the day by less-experienced radiologists. © RSNA, 2022 Online supplemental material is available for this article.

The Importance of Patient Expectations: A Mixed-Methods Study of U.S. Psychiatrists.

Objective: To examine how psychiatrists think about and modulate non-specific factors (e.g., hope, expectations) in clinical practice. Methods: U.S. psychiatrists were recruited for two studies assessing attitudes and behaviors related to non-specific factors. Study 1 entailed remote qualitative focus groups (k = 7) with n = 26 participants (36.0% female). Study 2 was a quantitative survey with n = 346 respondents (34.0% female) designed to assess the generalizability of focus group findings. Results: Four themes were identified in Study 1 that were used to inform the survey (Study 2): (1) Expectations (2) Hope, (3) Placebo Effect, and (4) Aesthetic Features. Nearly all surveyed psychiatrists (92.2%) considered patient expectations at least "most of the time" when interacting with a patient. Focus groups revealed that psychiatrists often attempt to balance optimism and realism to improve outcomes. A majority of survey respondents believed office design and physician attire could at least somewhat influence expectations (72.5 and 77.3%, respectively) and even outcomes (51.5 and 58.7%, respectively). Focus group psychiatrists described how physical features may be used as therapeutic tools. Conclusions: Psychiatrists are highly mindful of patient expectations. Although there is variability in the perceived importance of expectations, hope, the placebo effect, and aesthetic features, many utilize these factors in clinical practice.

How orthopedic surgeons view open label placebo pills: Ethical and effective, but opposed to personal use.

OBJECTIVE: To examine attitudes of Open Label Placebos (OLP) among a national sample of US orthopedic surgeons. METHODS: Orthopedic surgeons across the US were invited to participate in a brief online cross-sectional survey; n = 687 participated. The survey included a short vignette of a surgeon using adjunctive OLPs in addition to opioids for postoperative pain management. Participants indicated how ethical and effective they thought OLPs would be in this context, and whether they would personally consider using OLPs. RESULTS: Nearly three-quarters (73.9%) of the surgeons considered OLPs ethical. In total, 55.4% and 48.8% of participants said that OLPs would "probably" or "definitely" be effective for Vicodin reduction and pain relief, respectively. However, only 19.2% of participants indicated they were personally willing to consider OLPs, and 59.6% were unwilling to do so. CONCLUSIONS: Generally, orthopedic surgeons perceive OLPs as both ethical and effective, but would not consider using them in their practice. Further research is needed to identify clinician barriers to OLP use.

Treating Pain With Open-Label Placebos: A Qualitative Study With Post-Surgical Pain Patients.

Prior research has shown that Open Label Placebos (OLPs; that is, placebos described honestly as inactive pills) are effective for a variety of clinical conditions, including pain. However, little is known about patient attitudes towards OLPs. We conducted qualitative interviews with n = 11 patients (73% female) who recently had hand or wrist surgery and took ≥ 1 opioid pill. Interview topics included: pain management, the placebo effect, and in particular, attitudes towards OLPs. Interviews were analyzed inductively and content-coded. Five themes were identified: 1) Role of the mind in pain and illness, 2) Shortcomings of opioids are the strengths of OLPs, 3) Perceptions of OLP effectiveness, 4) Relational aspects of OLP administration, and 5) Practical considerations for OLP implementation. Most patients agreed that, because of their transparency, OLPs are ethical. Participants indicated some degree of reluctance about using OLPs, but the majority said they would take OLPs if prescribed by a doctor. Patients noted that the primary disadvantage of opioids is their potency, which can lead to addiction or side-effects; by contrast, the primary advantage of placebos is their inertness. Results suggest that OLPs appear to be well received as a postoperative pain treatment among the patients in this study. PERSPECTIVE: This qualitative study examines how hand surgery patients view OLPs, which are placebos described honestly as inactive pills. OLPs were generally well received by patients as a treatment for pain after surgery and could be considered as an adjunctive treatment to potentially reduce reliance on prescription opioids.

Stockpiling in the time of COVID-19.

OBJECTIVES: Consistent with behaviour observed in prior crises, individuals are stockpiling supplies during the novel coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic. The goal of this study was to describe stockpiling behaviour in response to COVID-19 and investigate individual predictors of stockpiling. METHODS: Workers (N = 363, 54.72% male, 44.65% female, 0.63% other; Mage  = 38.41, SD = 12.48, range = 18-78) were recruited from Amazon's Mechanical Turk and completed a survey about their stockpiling of 13 items, as well as behaviours and opinions surrounding the COVID-19 pandemic and their political affiliation. RESULTS: Participants stockpiled, on average, approximately 6 items, and toilet paper was the item most commonly procured. Approximately 25% of the sample acquired a gun or other weapon in response to the pandemic and approximately 20% of participants stockpiled gold or other precious metals. Stockpiling was more commonly observed among individuals who were more conservative, worried more about the pandemic, and social distanced less. CONCLUSIONS: Individual, societal, and ideological implications are discussed.

Putting the 'Art' Into the 'Art of Medicine': The Under-Explored Role of Artifacts in Placebo Studies.

Research in social psychology demonstrates that physical environmental factors - or "artifacts" such as provider clothing and office décor - can influence health outcomes. However, the role of artifacts in augmenting or diminishing health outcomes is under-explored in the burgeoning discipline of placebo studies. In this paper, we argue that a careful consideration of artifacts may carry significant potential in informing how placebo effects can be maximized, and nocebo effects minimized in clinical settings. We discuss the potential mechanisms, including classical conditioning, response expectancy, and mindsets, by which artifacts might enhance or diminish these effects. Next, we propose testable hypotheses to investigate how placebo and nocebo effects might be elicited by artifacts in care settings, and conclude by providing innovative research designs to advance this novel research agendum.