Dataset Information

Perceptions of UK clinicians towards postoperative critical care.

ABSTRACT: Postoperative critical care is a finite resource that is recommended for high-risk patients. Despite national recommendations specifying that such patients should receive postoperative critical care, there is evidence that these recommendations are not universally followed. We performed a national survey aiming to better understand how patients are risk-stratified in practice; elucidate clinicians' opinions about how patients should be selected for critical care; and determine factors which affect the actual provision of postoperative critical care. As part of the second Sprint National Anaesthesia Project, epidemiology of critical care after surgery study, we distributed a paper survey to anaesthetists, surgeons and intensivists providing peri-operative care during a single week in March 2017. We collected data on respondent characteristics, and their opinions of postoperative critical care provision, potential benefits and real-world challenges. We undertook both quantitative and qualitative analyses to interpret the responses. We received 10,383 survey responses from 237 hospitals across the UK. Consultants used a lower threshold for critical care admission than other career grades, indicating potentially more risk-averse behaviour. The majority of respondents reported that critical care provision was inadequate, and cited the value of critical care as being predominantly due to higher nurse: patient ratios. Use of objective risk assessment tools was poor, and patients were commonly selected for critical care based on procedure-specific pathways rather than individualised risk assessment. Challenges were highlighted in the delivery of peri-operative critical care services, such as an overall lack of capacity, competition for beds with non-surgical cases and poor flow through the hospital leading to bed 'blockages'. Critical care is perceived to provide benefit to high-risk surgical patients, but there is variation in practice about the definition and determination of risk, how patients are referred and how to deal with the lack of critical care resources. Future work should focus on evaluating 'enhanced care' units for postoperative patients, how to better implement individualised risk assessment in practice, and how to improve patient flow through hospitals.

SUBMITTER: Hashim S

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7898787 | biostudies-literature | 2021 Mar

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Perceptions of UK clinicians towards postoperative critical care.

Hashim S S Wong D J N DJN Farmer L L Harris S K SK Moonesinghe S R SR

Anaesthesia 20201218 3

Postoperative critical care is a finite resource that is recommended for high-risk patients. Despite national recommendations specifying that such patients should receive postoperative critical care, there is evidence that these recommendations are not universally followed. We performed a national survey aiming to better understand how patients are risk-stratified in practice; elucidate clinicians' opinions about how patients should be selected for critical care; and determine factors which affe ...[more]

PMID: 33338259

Similar Datasets

Project description:ImportanceTelehealth use including secure messages has rapidly expanded since the COVID-19 pandemic, including for multidisciplinary aspects of cancer care. Recent reports described rapid uptake and various benefits for patients and clinicians, suggesting that telehealth may be in standard use after the pandemic.ObjectiveTo examine attitudes and perceptions of multidisciplinary cancer care clinicians toward telehealth and secure messages.Design, setting, and participantsCross-sectional specialty-specific survey (ie, some questions appear only for relevant specialties) among multidisciplinary cancer care clinicians, collected from April 29, 2020, to June 5, 2020. Participants were all 285 clinicians in the fields of medical oncology, radiation oncology, surgical oncology, survivorship, and oncology navigation from all 21 community cancer centers of Kaiser Permanente Northern California.Main outcomes and measuresClinician satisfaction, perceived benefits and challenges of telehealth, perceived quality of telehealth and secure messaging, preferred visit and communication types for different clinical activities, and preferences regarding postpandemic telehealth use.ResultsA total of 202 clinicians (71%) responded (104 of 128 medical oncologists, 34 of 37 radiation oncologists, 16 of 62 breast surgeons, 18 of 28 navigators, and 30 of 30 survivorship experts; 57% (116 of 202) were women; 73% [147 of 202] between ages 36-55 years). Seventy-six percent (n = 154) were satisfied with telehealth without statistically significant variations based on clinician characteristics. In-person visits were thought to promote a strong patient-clinician connection by 99% (n = 137) of respondents compared with 77% (n = 106) for video visits, 43% (n = 59) for telephone, and 14% (n = 19) for secure messages. The most commonly cited benefits of telehealth to clinicians included reduced commute (79%; n = 160), working from home (74%; n = 149), and staying on time (65%; n = 132); the most commonly cited negative factors included internet connection (84%; n = 170) or equipment problems (72%; n = 146), or physical examination needed (64%; n = 131). Most respondents (59%; n = 120) thought that video is adequate to manage the greater part of patient care in general; and most deemed various telehealth modalities suitable for any of the queried types of patient-clinician activities. For some specific activities, less than half of respondents thought that only an in-person visit is acceptable (eg, 49%; n = 66 for end-of-life discussion, 35%; n = 58 for new diagnosis). Most clinicians (82%; n = 166) preferred to maintain or increase use of telehealth after the pandemic.Conclusions and relevanceIn this survey of multidisciplinary cancer care clinicians in the COVID-19 era, telehealth was well received and often preferred by most cancer care clinicians, who deemed it appropriate to manage most aspects of cancer care. As telehealth use becomes routine in some cancer care settings, video and telephone visits and use of asynchronous secure messaging with patients in cancer care has clear potential to extend beyond the pandemic period.

Project description:ImportanceIt is unclear whether burnout, anxiety, and depression constitute the same or different constructs. Better understanding of these constructs is important for diagnosis and treatment for intensive care unit (ICU) clinicians.ObjectiveTo determine the associations and distinctiveness of burnout, depression, and anxiety in a sample of ICU clinicians.Design, setting, and participantsThis cross-sectional study used baseline data from the ICU Visits Study, a cluster-randomized crossover clinical trial conducted from April 2017 to July 2018 in 36 mixed public and private nonprofit ICUs in Brazil. ICU clinicians, including day-shift physicians, nurses, nurse technicians, and physiotherapists working in an ICU at least 20 hours per week, were enrolled. Data were analyzed from December 27, 2019, to October 10, 2020.Main outcomes and measuresThe main outcome measures were burnout, depression, and anxiety measured with the Maslach Burnout Inventory (MBI; range, 0-6, with high scores indicating more burnout) and the Hospital Depression and Anxiety Scale (HADS; range, 0-3, with higher scores indicating more depression or anxiety). Internal consistencies were satisfactory.ResultsThe total sample included 715 ICU clinicians (median [interquartile range] age, 34.8 [30.2-39.3] years; 520 [72.7%] women), including 96 physicians (13.4%), 159 nurses (22.2%), 358 nurse technicians (50.1%), and 102 physiotherapists (14.3%). Clinicians reported low levels of emotional exhaustion (mean [SD] score, 1.84 [1.18]), depersonalization (mean [SD] score, 0.98 [1.03]), and personal accomplishment (mean [SD] score, 5.05 [0.87]) on the MBI, and similarly low levels of depression (mean [SD] score, 0.54 [0.40]) and anxiety (mean [SD] score, 0.70 [0.45]) on the HADS. Confirmatory factor analyses consistently showed improved fit separating latent burnout dimensions from depression and anxiety. An exploratory graph analysis combining gaussian graphical model with clustering algorithms for weighted networks suggested 3 clusters, with distinct burnout, anxiety, and depression clusters. This structure was confirmed using a bootstrap with 1000 random samples, in which the 3-cluster solution emerged in 625 samples (62.5%). Both latent variable loadings and network statistics suggested 3 key indicators (ie, feeling burned out from work, worrying thoughts, and reverse-scored reporting feeling cheerful) that can be used for short screening instruments.Conclusions and relevanceThese findings suggest that burnout and clinical symptoms of depression and anxiety were empirically distinct in a large sample of ICU clinicians, highlighting the importance of screening for burnout and clinical symptoms to allow fast access to adequate support and treatment in health professionals at high risk of burnout.

Project description:Reducing inappropriate prescribing is key to mitigating antibiotic resistance, particularly in acute care settings. Clinicians' prescribing decisions are influenced by their judgments and actual or perceived patient expectations. Fuzzy trace theory predicts that patients and clinicians base such decisions on categorical gist representations that reflect the bottom-line understanding of information about antibiotics. However, due to clinicians' specialized training, the categorical gists driving clinicians' and patients' decisions might differ, which could result in mismatched expectations and inefficiencies in targeting interventions. We surveyed clinicians and patients from 2 large urban academic hospital emergency departments (EDs) and a sample of nonpatient subjects regarding their gist representations of antibiotic decisions, as well as relevant knowledge and expectations. Results were analyzed using exploratory factor analysis (EFA) and multifactor regression. In total, 149 clinicians (47% female; 74% white), 519 online subjects (45% female; 78% white), and 225 ED patients (61% female; 56% black) completed the survey. While clinicians demonstrated greater knowledge of antibiotics and concern about side effects than patients, the predominant categorical gist for both patients and clinicians was "why not take a risk," which compares the status quo of remaining sick to the possibility of benefit from antibiotics. This gist also predicted expectations and prior prescribing in the nonpatient sample. Other representations reflected the gist that "germs are germs" conflating bacteria and viruses, as well as perceptions of side effects and efficacy. Although individually rational, reliance on the "why not take a risk" representation can lead to socially suboptimal results, including antibiotic resistance and individual patient harm due to adverse events. Changing this representation could alter clinicians' and patients' expectations, suggesting opportunities to reduce overprescribing.

Dataset Information

Perceptions of UK clinicians towards postoperative critical care.

Publications

Perceptions of UK clinicians towards postoperative critical care.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets