Putting ICU triage guidelines into practice: A simulation study using observations and interviews.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic has prompted many countries to formulate guidelines on how to deal with a worst-case scenario in which the number of patients needing intensive care unit (ICU) care exceeds the number of available beds. This study aims to explore the experiences of triage teams when triaging fictitious patients with the Dutch triage guidelines. It provides an overview of the factors that influence decision-making when performing ICU triage with triage guidelines. METHODS: Eight triage teams from four hospitals were given files of fictitious patients needing intensive care and instructed to triage these patients. Sessions were observed and audio-recorded. Four focus group interviews with triage team members were held to reflect on the sessions and the Dutch guidelines. The results were analyzed by inductive content analysis. RESULTS: The Dutch triage guidelines were the main basis for making triage decisions. However, some teams also allowed their own considerations (outside of the guidelines) to play a role when making triage decisions, for example to help avoid using non-medical criteria such as prioritization based on age group. Group processes also played a role in decision-making: triage choices can be influenced by the triagists' opinion on the guidelines and the carefulness with which they are applied. Intensivists, being most experienced in prognostication of critical illness, often had the most decisive role during triage sessions. CONCLUSIONS: Using the Dutch triage guidelines is feasible, but there were some inconsistencies in prioritization between teams that may be undesirable. ICU triage guideline writers should consider which aspects of their criteria might, when applied in practice, lead to inconsistencies or ethically questionable prioritization of patients. Practical training of triage team members in applying the guidelines, including explanation of the rationale underlying the triage criteria, might improve the willingness and ability of triage teams to follow the guidelines closely.

Facilitators and barriers in using comics to support family caregivers of patients receiving palliative care at home: A qualitative study.

BACKGROUND: Family caregiving at home is highly important for people receiving palliative treatment, but also a complex experience, subject to implicit social expectations. This study empirically explored the claim that comics benefit palliative care practice, through evaluating a graphic novel's value as an aid in supportive conversations with family caregivers. AIM: To identify facilitators and barriers in using Naasten (Loved ones), a Dutch research-based graphic novel about family caregivers providing care at the end-of-life. DESIGN: Qualitative study, following thematic content analysis. PARTICIPANTS: Three focus groups with family caregiver consultants, palliative care volunteers, and healthcare professionals (total N = 23) who supported family caregivers; and individual telephone interviews with family caregivers to whom the book was presented (N = 4). RESULTS: Barriers and facilitators related to: (1) the family caregiver, (2) impact on the family caregiver, (3) impact on the conversation between the person who provides support and the family caregiver, (4) their relationship, and (5) the person who provides support. Naasten was reported as recognizable and supportive, and powerful in raising emotions, awareness and conversation. Barriers concerned the book's impact due to its style and guidance of a conversation, and doubts about its surplus-value. CONCLUSIONS: Emotionally impactful comics may support bereaved family caregivers, but should be introduced with care among current family caregivers, for example, ensuring a right fit, introduction, and follow-up-while taking into account a caregiver's individual situation, needs, abilities, and affinity with the medium. Comics are preferably used in educational settings, contributing to professional awareness and tailored support of family caregivers.

Perspectives of people living with Parkinson's disease on personalized prediction models.

BACKGROUND: There is a great need for the development of personalized prediction models (PPMs) that can predict the rate of disease progression for persons with Parkinson's disease (PD), based on their individual characteristics. In this study, we aimed to clarify the perspective of persons diagnosed with PD on the value of such hypothetical PPMs. METHODS: We organized four focus group discussions, each including five persons with PD who were diagnosed within the last 5 years. The sessions focused on what they think of receiving a personalized prediction; what outcomes are important to them; if and how the possibility of influencing the prognosis would change the way they think of personalized predictions; how they deal with the uncertainty from a PPM; and what barriers and facilitators they expect for using a PPM. RESULTS: The wish of persons with PD for receiving personalized prognostic information was highly heterogenous, for various reasons. Most persons with PD would like to receive more personalized prognostic information, mainly to better prepare themselves and their loved ones for the future. The prediction provided should be as personalized as possible, and there should be adequate supervision and coaching by a professional when providing the information. They were particularly interested in receiving prognostic information when their interventions would be available that could subsequently influence the identified prognostic factor and thereby affect the disease course beneficially. CONCLUSION: Most persons with PD in this study want more insight into their own future by means of prediction models, provided that this is explained and supervized properly by professionals. PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: Two patient-researchers were involved in the study design, conduct of the study, interpretation of the data and in preparation of the manuscript.

Learning shared decision-making in clinical practice.

OBJECTIVE: To explore how shared decision-making (SDM) is learned in clinical practice according to professionals and patients. METHODS: Focus group and individual interviews with interns (n = 9), residents (n = 12), senior physicians (n = 13), and (former) patients and relatives (n = 13) in fertility care and intensive care. RESULTS: Patients and professionals identified barriers and drivers for SDM related to patient, caregiver, and context. Participants agreed: the nuances of SDM are learned in practice, not during undergraduate medical education. Through observing and copying from other professionals, interns and residents describe building their personal "repertoire" of SDM skills, knowledge, and attitude. Professionals indicated it was helpful to see many different examples - both good and bad - of physicians in action. CONCLUSION: Learning SDM is a complicated task for both students and professionals in healthcare. Relevant factors are the involvement of patients, the role of informal learning processes and role models, and the importance of reflective practice. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: Learning SDM in practice requires 1) measures to lessen pressures on a meso and macro level that hinder SDM in practice, 2) inventive and precise training and education and paying explicit attention to informal learning processes in clinical practice and learning through role models.

Improvement of primary care for patients with chronic heart failure: a study protocol for a cluster randomised trial comparing two strategies.

BACKGROUND: Many patients with chronic heart failure (CHF), a common condition with high morbidity and mortality rates, receive treatment in primary care. To improve the management of CHF in primary care, we developed an implementation programme comprised of educational and organisational components, with support by a practice visitor and focus both on drug treatment and lifestyle advice, and on organisation of care within the practice and collaboration with other healthcare providers. Tailoring has been shown to improve the success of implementation programmes, but little is known about what would be best methods for tailoring, specifically with respect to CHF in primary care. METHODS/DESIGN: We describe the study protocol of a cluster randomised controlled trial to examine the effectiveness of tailoring a CHF implementation programme to general practices compared to a standardised way of delivering a programme. The study population will consist of 60 general practitioners (GPs) and the CHF patients they include. GPs are randomised in blocks of four, stratified according to practice size. With a tailored implementation programme GPs prioritise the issues that will form the bases of the support for the practice visits. These may comprise several issues, both educational and organizational.The primary outcome measures are patient's experience of receiving structured primary care for CHF (PACIC, a questionnaire related to the Chronic Care Model), patients' health-related utilities (EQ-5D), and drugs prescriptions using the guideline adherence index. Patients being clustered in practices, multilevel regression analyses will be used to explore the effect of practice size and type of intervention programme. In addition we will examine both changes within groups and differences at follow-up between groups with respect to drug dosages and advice on lifestyle issues. Furthermore, in interviews the feasibility of the programme and goal attainment, organisational changes in CHF care, and formalised cooperation with other disciplines will be assessed. DISCUSSION: In the tailoring of the programme we will present the GPs a list with barriers; GPs will assess relevance and possibility to solve these barriers. The list is rigorously developed and tested in various projects. The factors for ordering the barriers are related to the innovation, the healthcare professional, the patient, and the context.CHF patients do not form a homogeneous group. Subgroup analyses will be performed based on the distinction between systolic CHF and CHF with preserved left ventricular function (diastolic CHF). TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN: ISRCTN18812755.