Some Unresolved Ethical Challenges in Healthcare Decision-Making: Navigating Family Involvement

The development of a family-led novel intervention for delirium prevention and management in the adult intensive care unit: A co-design qualitative study

AIM

The aim of this study was to codesign a Family Members' Voice Reorientation Intervention (FAMVR) for delirium prevention and management in critically ill adult patients through collaborative process with previous patients, families, and clinical staff.

BACKGROUND

Delirium is a common consequence of intensive care admission, and there is limited evidence to support family-led interventions to prevent or minimise delirium in intensive care. People with lived experience of intensive care are seldom involved in codesigning delirium prevention and management interventions despite the identified benefits of their involvement in delirium care.

DESIGN

Codesign qualitative study.

METHODS

The process of co-designing was undertaken using the four stages of the Double Diamond model. Participants included people with lived experience of the intensive care unit, family members, and intensive care clinicians. The codesign approach was utilised, and data were gathered from a series of focus groups and individual interviews. Data were digitally recorded, transcribed verbatim, and analysed using thematic analysis.

FINDINGS

Of the 26 people who indicated their interest in participating, 12 (46%) completed the first and second stages, and nine (35%) completed the third and fourth stages of the Family Members' Voice Reorientation Intervention development. All participant groups were represented in the fourth stage: patients (n = 4), family members (n = 1), nurses (n = 2), and medical staff (n = 2). Four themes were identified: message content, wording, reactions, and tone, all of which informed the prototype of the intervention and its associated domains.

CONCLUSION

A codesign approach was important for developing a delirium management intervention. This process enabled participants to provide their feedback in the context of their unique experiences, which in turn enhanced the authenticity and appropriateness of this unique intervention.

Sharing Unpleasant Health Information with Patients: A baseline study exploring physician attitudes, practices and adherence to the SPIKES protocol at a tertiary hospital in Muscat, Oman

Objectives

This study aimed to investigate the knowledge, attitude and experiences in sharing unpleasant health information and adherence to the SPIKES protocol among physicians at a tertiary hospital in Muscat, Oman.

Methods

This cross-sectional study was conducted at the Sultan Qaboos University Hospital from August to October 2022. An electronic, self-administered questionnaire was used to gather data from physicians across various departments.

Results

A total of 89 physicians completed the questionnaire (response rate = 22.3%). Most participants (n = 86, 96.6%) recognised the need for additional training in the delivery of unpleasant health information ('bad news'), with 78.7% (n = 70) expressing their willingness to undertake such training. Additionally, 32.6% (n = 29) reported negative experiences due to improper delivery of bad news, with an equal proportion admitting to disclosing bad news to patients' family without their consent. The majority (n = 77, 86.5%) demonstrated a high level of overall adherence to the SPIKES protocol, with 59.6-85.4%, 12.4-34.8% and 1.1-11.2% reported usually, sometimes and never following specific steps of the protocol, respectively. Marital status (P = 0.015) and qualifications (P = 0.032) were the only variables that were associated with adherence level, with married physicians and those with board and/or fellowship certificates reporting significantly better adherence compared to their counterparts.

Conclusion

Physicians in Oman encounter challenges in delivering unpleasant health information, underscoring the interplay of cultural influences, training and adherence to protocols. To address these challenges, targeted and frequent training programmes are recommended, starting from undergraduate medical education and extending to continuous opportunities for physicians at various career levels.

Development and Validation of the Companion's Satisfaction Questionnaire of Patient's Hospitalized in Intensive Care Units

Objective

The current study aimed to develop and validate of companions' satisfaction questionnaire of patients hospitalized in ICUs.

Methods

This is a methodological study that was performed in three phases: In the first phase, the concept of companion's satisfaction of patients hospitalized in ICUs was defined through qualitative content analysis method. In the second phase, early items of questionnaire were generated based on findings of the first phase. In the third and final phase, validation of the questionnaire was evaluated using face, content and construct validity as well as reliability.

Results

In exploratory factor analysis, three subscales including: satisfaction with nursing staff communication (5 items), satisfaction with nursing care (12 items), and satisfaction with decision making (5 items) were extracted by Eigen value above one and factor load above 0.5. Internal consistency and stability of the developed questionnaire confirmed with 0.94 and 0.95 respectively that indicated acceptable reliability.

Conclusion

The 22-item developed questionnaire is valid and reliable for measurement of levels of companion's satisfaction of Iranian patients hospitalized in ICUs.

Barriers of and strategies for shared decision-making implementation in the care of metastatic breast cancer: A qualitative study among patients and healthcare professionals in an Asian country

BACKGROUND

Shared decision-making has been shown to improve the quality of life in metastatic breast cancer patients in high-literacy and high-resource settings. However, limited studies have examined the cultural preferences of metastatic breast cancer patients with shared decision-making implementation and the barriers encountered in an Asian setting where societal norms predominate and physician decision-making is at the forefront. This paper aims to identify (1) barriers to practising shared decision-making faced by healthcare professionals and patients and (2) strategies for implementing shared decision-making in the context of metastatic breast cancer management in Malaysia.

METHODS

We conducted a qualitative study involving 12 patients diagnosed with metastatic breast cancer, 16 healthcare professionals and 5 policymakers from surgical and oncology departments at public healthcare centres in Malaysia. Semi-structured in-depth interviews and focus group discussions were conducted. The interviews were recorded, transcribed verbatim and analysed using the thematic approach. Nvivo software was used to manage and analyse the data.

RESULTS

Five main themes emerged from the study: healthcare provider-patient communication, workforce availability, cultural and belief systems, goals of care and paternalism versus autonomy. Other strategies proposed to overcome barriers to implementing shared decision-making were training of healthcare professionals and empowering nurses to manage patients' psychosocial issues.

CONCLUSION

This study found that practising shared decision-making in the public health sector remains challenging when managing patients with metastatic breast cancer. The utilization of decision-making tools, patient empowerment and healthcare provider training may help address the system and healthcare provider-patient barriers identified in this study.

PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION

Patients were involved in the study design, recruitment and analysis.

Dialysis Decision-Making, Dialysis Experiences, and Illness Perceptions: A Qualitative Study of Pakistani Patients Receiving Maintenance Hemodialysis

Rationale & Objective

The incidence and prevalence of patients with kidney failure requiring dialysis are increasing in Pakistan. However, in-depth perspectives on kidney care from Pakistani people requiring maintenance dialysis are lacking.

Study Design

Qualitative interview study.

Setting & Participants

Between September 2020 and January 2021, we interviewed 20 adults receiving maintenance hemodialysis in 2 outpatient dialysis units in Pakistan. We asked open-ended questions to explore their experiences with various aspects of kidney care.

Analytical Approach

We recorded, transcribed, and then, using a phenomenological approach, thematically analyzed interviews.

Results

We observed the following 6 main themes: (1) Patients perceived various supernatural phenomena as causes of their illness and chose traditional medicine for chronic kidney disease (CKD) treatment. (2) Patients expressed dissatisfaction with their physicians' communication. They felt poorly informed and resented their decision to initiate dialysis. (3) Family members tried to dissuade patients away from dialysis but also provided support once dialysis was initiated. (4) Patients and families found it challenging to afford dialysis and transplantation and also to arrange for transportation. (5) Women found it challenging to fulfill their obligations as wives and mothers while receiving maintenance dialysis. (6) Patients seemed reluctant to discuss end-of-life care.

Limitations

We collected data from only 2 hospitals in neighboring cities. Additionally, patients on peritoneal dialysis were not included.

Conclusions

Our findings shed light on patients' perspectives on kidney care in Pakistan and call for financially feasible solutions to raise kidney disease awareness and improve patients' experiences with dialysis. Physician training in communication and shared dialysis decision making along with the development of culturally adapted decision aids are needed to improve CKD knowledge and shared decision making. Although financial challenges preclude many from receiving long-term dialysis, cost-effective strategies to improve the availability of other options (eg, supportive kidney care, peritoneal dialysis, and transplantation) are still warranted.

Breaking Bad News in Cancer Care: Ethiopian Patients Want More Information Than What Family and the Public Want Them to Have

PURPOSE

This study explores the preferences of patients with cancer, family caregivers, and the general public regarding breaking bad news in an Ethiopian oncology setting.

METHODS

The study was conducted at Tikur Anbessa (Black Lion) Specialized Hospital. The sample consists of patients with a confirmed cancer diagnosis, their family caregivers, and representatives from the general public with 150 subjects per cohort. The study used a comparative cross-sectional design and multivariable data analysis.

RESULTS

The patients would like to be informed, which contradicts the preferences of family caregivers. This creates an ethical dilemma for staff in terms of how much they involve their patients in clinical decision making. The patients also indicate that information should not be withheld from them. By contrast, the general public prefers information about poor life expectancy to be communicated to family only, which may reflect a widespread public perception of cancer as a deadly disease.

CONCLUSION

The findings indicate the complexity of communication-related preferences concerning breaking bad news in oncology care in Ethiopia. It requires oncologists to probe patient attitudes before information disclosure to find a balance between involving patients in communication at the same time as keeping a constructive alliance with family caregivers.

Understanding the positive outcomes of discharge planning interventions for older adults hospitalized following a fall: a realist synthesis

BACKGROUND

Older adults hospitalized following a fall often encounter preventable adverse events when transitioning from hospital to home. Discharge planning interventions developed to prevent these events do not all produce the expected effects to the same extent. This realist synthesis aimed to better understand when, where, for whom, why and how the components of these interventions produce positive outcomes.

METHODS

Nine indexed databases were searched to identify scientific papers and grey literature on discharge planning interventions for older adults (65+) hospitalized following a fall. Manual searches were also conducted. Documents were selected based on relevance and rigor. Two reviewers extracted and compiled data regarding intervention components, contextual factors, underlying mechanisms and positive outcomes. Preliminary theories were then formulated based on an iterative synthesis process.

RESULTS

Twenty-one documents were included in the synthesis. Four Intervention-Context-Mechanism-Outcome configurations were developed as preliminary theories, based on the following intervention components: 1) Increase two-way communication between healthcare providers and patients/caregivers using a family-centered approach; 2) Foster interprofessional communication within and across healthcare settings through both standardized and unofficial information exchange; 3) Provide patients/caregivers with individually tailored fall prevention education; and 4) Designate a coordinator to manage discharge planning. These components should be implemented from patient admission to return home and be supported at the organizational level (contexts) to trigger knowledge, understanding and trust of patients/caregivers, adjusted expectations, reduced family stress, and sustained engagement of families and professionals (mechanisms). These optimal conditions improve patient satisfaction, recovery, functional status and continuity of care, and reduce hospital readmissions and fall risk (outcomes).

CONCLUSIONS

Since transitions are critical points with potential communication gaps, coordinated interventions are vital to support a safe return home for older adults hospitalized following a fall. Considering the organizational challenges, simple tools such as pictograms and drawings, combined with computer-based communication channels, may optimize discharge interventions based on frail patients' needs, habits and values. Empirically testing our preliminary theories will help to develop effective interventions throughout the continuum of transitional care to enhance patients' health and reduce the economic burden of avoidable care.

Bioethics and the use of social media for medical crowdfunding

BACKGROUND

Social media has globalised compassion enabling requests for donations to spread beyond geographical boundaries. The use of social media for medical crowdfunding links people with unmet healthcare needs to charitable donors. There is no doubt that fundraising campaigns using such platforms facilitates access to financial resources to the benefit of patients and their caregivers.

MAIN TEXT

This paper reports on a critical review of the published literature and information from other online resources discussing medical crowdfunding and the related ethical questions. The review highlighted the benefits of crowdfunding as well as the under-exploration of the risk of having patients' desires and human rights undermined during online fundraising campaigns. Majority of these campaigns get initiated on behalf of the patients, especially the very sick and dependant. The ethical questions raised relate to the voluntariness of informed consent and the possibility of patients being used as a means to an end. Vulnerability of patients may expose them to coercion, undue influence, manipulation, and violation of their human rights. The success of these campaigns is influenced by the digital skills, pre-existing social networks and, the emotional potency. Healthcare is a public good, and online market forces should not determine access to essential health services. The benefits of crowdfunding cannot be subverted, but it can perpetuate unintended injustices, especially those arising from socio-economic factors.

CONCLUSIONS

Policymakers ought to monitor the utilisation of crowdfunding sites to identify policy failures and unmet essential health care needs responsible for driving individuals to use these platforms. The upholding of human rights and the fundamental respect of the individual's wishes is a moral imperative. The need for an ethics framework to guide different stakeholders during medical crowdfunding needs further examination.