Dataset Information

Clinician Perspectives on Caring for Dying Patients During the Pandemic : A Mixed-Methods Study.

ABSTRACT:

Background

The severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) pandemic has affected the hospital experience for patients, visitors, and staff.

Objective

To understand clinician perspectives on adaptations to end-of-life care for dying patients and their families during the pandemic.

Design

Mixed-methods embedded study. (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT04602520).

Setting

3 acute care medical units in a tertiary care hospital from 16 March to 1 July 2020.

Participants

45 dying patients, 45 family members, and 45 clinicians.

Intervention

During the pandemic, clinicians continued an existing practice of collating personal information about dying patients and "what matters most," eliciting wishes, and implementing acts of compassion.

Measurements

Themes from semistructured clinician interviews that were summarized with representative quotations.

Results

Many barriers to end-of-life care arose because of infection control practices that mandated visiting restrictions and personal protective equipment, with attendant practical and psychological consequences. During hospitalization, family visits inside or outside the patient's room were possible for 36 patients (80.0%); 13 patients (28.9%) had virtual visits with a relative or friend. At the time of death, 20 patients (44.4%) had a family member at the bedside. Clinicians endeavored to prevent unmarked deaths by adopting advocacy roles to "fill the gap" of absent family and by initiating new and established ways to connect patients and relatives.

Limitation

Absence of clinician symptom or wellness metrics; a single-center design.

Conclusion

Clinicians expressed their humanity through several intentional practices to preserve personalized, compassionate end-of-life care for dying hospitalized patients during the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic.

Primary funding source

Canadian Institutes of Health Research and Canadian Critical Care Trials Group Research Coordinator Fund.

SUBMITTER: Cook DJ

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7747669 | biostudies-literature | 2020 Dec

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Clinician Perspectives on Caring for Dying Patients During the Pandemic : A Mixed-Methods Study.

Cook Deborah J DJ Takaoka Alyson A Hoad Neala N Swinton Marilyn M Clarke France J FJ Rudkowski Jill C JC Heels-Ansdell Diane D Boyle Anne A Toledo Felida F Dennis Brittany B BB Fiest Kirsten K Vanstone Meredith M

Annals of internal medicine 20201208 4

<h4>Background</h4>The severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) pandemic has affected the hospital experience for patients, visitors, and staff.<h4>Objective</h4>To understand clinician perspectives on adaptations to end-of-life care for dying patients and their families during the pandemic.<h4>Design</h4>Mixed-methods embedded study. (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT04602520).<h4>Setting</h4>3 acute care medical units in a tertiary care hospital from 16 March to 1 July 2020.<h4>Parti ...[more]

PMID: 33284683

Similar Datasets

Project description:ObjectiveTo describe the drivers of distress and motivations faced by interdisciplinary clinicians who were on the frontline caring for patients with COVID-19.Design50 semistructured interviews. Transcripts were analysed using qualitative thematic analysis.SettingA safety-net hospital in Denver, Colorado.ParticipantsInterdisciplinary frontline clinicians including physicians, advance practice providers, nurses, respiratory therapists and paramedics providing inpatient hospital care to patients hospitalised for COVID-19.ResultsFifty clinicians (32 women and 18 men) participated. Five themes with respective subthemes (in parentheses) were identified: depersonalisation and barriers to care (impeding rapport and compassion, focusing on infection risk at the expense of high-quality care, grief from witnessing patients suffer in isolation), powerless in uncertainty (inescapable awareness of personal risk, therapeutic doubt in a void of evidence, confronting ethical dilemmas, struggling with dynamic and unfamiliar challenges), overwhelmed and exhausted (burden of personal protective equipment (PPE), information overload and confusion, overstretched by additional responsibilities at work, compounded by personal life stressors, feeling vulnerable and dispensable, compassion fatigue, distress from the disproportionate impact on socially oppressed communities), bolstering morale and confidence (motivated by community and family support, equipped with data), and driven by moral duty (responsibility to patient care and community, collegial solidarity and collaboration, contributing to the greater good).ConclusionFrontline clinicians reported distress due to the challenges of PPE, uncertainty and powerlessness, new responsibilities at work and home, losing control of their schedules, grief from witnessing patients suffer in isolation and witnessing healthcare disparities exacerbated by this pandemic. Clinicians feel supported by their colleagues, families, and community and were driven by a sense of moral duty. Healthcare system should adopt strategies to minimise distress faced by interdisciplinary clinicians on the frontline of COVID-19.

Project description:BackgroundWhen children suffer acute pain, the ambulance service is often involved to provide initial assessment, treatment, and transport. Several predictors of effective pain management have been identified, including children who are younger (0-5 years), administered analgesics, and living in homes from more affluent areas.ObjectiveTo explain previously identified predictors of effective prehospital pain management in children.DesignMixed methods sequential explanatory study.Setting and participantsEast Midlands Ambulance Service National Health Service Trust paramedics and emergency medical technicians (EMTs) participated in face-to-face semi-structured interviews. These were audio recorded, transcribed verbatim, and coded using thematic analysis. Meta-inferences were generated and illustrated within a joint display.ResultsTwelve clinicians (9 paramedics and 3 EMTs) were interviewed. Median (interquartile range) age was 43.5 years (41.5, 45.75), 58% were male (n = 7) and 58% were parents (n = 7). Possible explanations were provided for all predictors. Younger children were perceived to express more emotion, were easier to distract, and lived more in the moment than their older counterparts, which explained why younger children were more likely to achieve effective pain management. Analgesics were perceived to have a psychosocial benefit in addition to the pharmacological action. Ambulance clinicians felt that children living in more affluent areas were more likely to achieve effective pain management because the kempt environment facilitated assessment and management and clinicians spent more time on scene; this allowed more time for analgesics to take effect. Participants perceived paramedics to be more confident, and it was found that paramedics were older, more experienced, had a greater scope of practice, and spent more time on scene than EMTs.ConclusionPrehospital pain management in children could be improved by facilitating and prioritizing analgesic administration and by ambulance services ensuring a paramedic, or highly trained clinician, is present on each vehicle, necessitating long-term commitment to staff development.

Project description:ObjectivesThe outcome of well-performed clinical research is essential for evidence-based patient management during pandemics. However, conducting clinical research amidst a pandemic requires researchers to balance clinical and research demands. We seek to understand the values, experiences, and beliefs of physicians working at the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic in order to inform clinical research planning. We aim to understand whether pandemic settings affect physician comfort with research practices, and how physician experiences shape their understanding of research in a pandemic setting.MethodsA survey tool was adapted to evaluate familiarity and comfort with research during a pandemic. A cross-sectional, online questionnaire was distributed across Canadian research networks early in the COVID-19 outbreak. The survey was administered between March 11th and 17th, 2020, during a time of local transmission but prior to the surge of cases. We aimed to recruit into the survey physicians in infectious disease and critical care research networks across Canada.ResultsOf the 133 physician respondents, 131 (98%) considered it important to conduct clinical research during the COVID-19 pandemic. Respondents were more accepting of adaptations to the research process in during a pandemic compared to in a non-pandemic setting, including conducting research with deferred consent (χ2 = 8.941, 95% CI: -0.264, -0.085, p = 0.003), using non-identifiable observational data with a waiver of consent with a median score of 97 out of 100 (IQR: 79.25-100) vs median 87 out of 100 (IQR: 63-79) (95% CI: -12.43, 0.054, p = 0.052). The majority felt that research quality is not compromised during pandemics.ConclusionsPhysicians consider it important to conduct research during a pandemic, highlighting the need to expedite research activities in pandemic settings. Respondents were more accepting of adaptations to the research process for research conducted during a pandemic, compared to that conducted in its absence of a pandemic.

Project description:BackgroundPatient-generated health data (PGHD) have been largely collected through mobile health (mHealth) apps and wearable devices. PGHD can be especially helpful in mental health, as patients' illness history and symptom narratives are vital to developing diagnoses and treatment plans. However, the extent to which clinicians use mental health-related PGHD is unknown.ObjectiveA mixed methods study was conducted to understand clinicians' perspectives on PGHD and current mental health apps. This approach uses information gathered from semistructured interviews, workflow analysis, and user-written mental health app reviews to answer the following research questions: (1) What is the current workflow of mental health practice and how are PGHD integrated into this workflow, (2) what are clinicians' perspectives on PGHD and how do they choose mobile apps for their patients, (3) and what are the features of current mobile apps in terms of interpreting and sharing PGHD?MethodsThe study consists of semistructured interviews with 12 psychiatrists and clinical psychologists from a large academic hospital. These interviews were thematically and qualitatively analyzed for common themes and workflow elements. User-posted reviews of 56 sleep and mood tracking apps were analyzed to understand app features in comparison with the information gathered from interviews.ResultsThe results showed that PGHD have been part of the workflow, but its integration and use are not optimized. Mental health clinicians supported the use of PGHD but had concerns regarding data reliability and accuracy. They also identified challenges in selecting suitable apps for their patients. From the app review, it was discovered that mHealth apps had limited features to support personalization and collaborative care as well as data interpretation and sharing.ConclusionsThis study investigates clinicians' perspectives on PGHD use and explored existing app features using the app review data in the mental health setting. A total of 3 design guidelines were generated: (1) improve data interpretation and sharing mechanisms, (2) consider clinical workflow and electronic health record integration, and (3) support personalized and collaborative care. More research is needed to demonstrate the best practices of PGHD use and to evaluate their effectiveness in improving patient outcomes.

Project description:BackgroundThe COVID-19 pandemic resulted in major disruption to healthcare delivery worldwide causing medical services to adapt their standard practices. Learning how these adaptations result in unintended patient harm is essential to mitigate against future incidents. Incident reporting and learning system data can be used to identify areas to improve patient safety. A classification system is required to make sense of such data to identify learning and priorities for further in-depth investigation. The Patient Safety (PISA) classification system was created for this purpose, but it is not known if classification systems are sufficient to capture novel safety concepts arising from crises like the pandemic. We aimed to review the application of the PISA classification system during the COVID-19 pandemic to appraise whether modifications were required to maintain its meaningful use for the pandemic context.MethodsWe conducted a mixed-methods study integrating two phases in an exploratory, sequential design. This included a comparative secondary analysis of patient safety incident reports from two studies conducted during the first wave of the pandemic, where we coded patient-reported incidents from the UK and clinician-reported incidents from France. The findings were presented to a focus group of experts in classification systems and patient safety, and a thematic analysis was conducted on the resultant transcript.ResultsWe identified five key themes derived from the data analysis and expert group discussion. These included capitalising on the unique perspective of safety concerns from different groups, that existing frameworks do identify priority areas to investigate further, the objectives of a study shape the data interpretation, the pandemic spotlighted long-standing patient concerns, and the time period in which data are collected offers valuable context to aid explanation. The group consensus was that no COVID-19-specific codes were warranted, and the PISA classification system was fit for purpose.ConclusionsWe have scrutinised the meaningful use of the PISA classification system's application during a period of systemic healthcare constraint, the COVID-19 pandemic. Despite these constraints, we found the framework can be successfully applied to incident reports to enable deductive analysis, identify areas for further enquiry and thus support organisational learning. No new or amended codes were warranted. Organisations and investigators can use our findings when reviewing their own classification systems.

Dataset Information

Clinician Perspectives on Caring for Dying Patients During the Pandemic : A Mixed-Methods Study.

Background

Objective

Design

Setting

Participants

Intervention

Measurements

Results

Limitation

Conclusion

Primary funding source

Publications

Clinician Perspectives on Caring for Dying Patients During the Pandemic : A Mixed-Methods Study.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets