The Community Perspective on Potentially Inappropriate Treatment

What do people know and think about medical overuse? an online questionnaire study in Germany

BACKGROUND

Medical overuse is defined as health care services that exceed the individual needs of patients and when the potential harms of medical interventions exceed their benefits. It has impacts on patients as well as on health care resources. To address medical overuse, it is important to understand the knowledge and experiences of overuse on the side of patients.

RESEARCH QUESTIONS

What is the citizens' understanding of overuse? How do they assess its relevance, causes, consequences and potential solutions?

METHODS

A quantitative online survey was conducted. The participants were asked to state what they understand by medical overuse. Statements on causes, consequences and possible solutions were evaluated. Recruitment was carried out via a panel of a market research institute (Schlesinger Group).

RESULTS

The survey was completed by 406 participants. In terms of age and gender, the sample corresponded to the distribution in the German population. The majority had never heard of medical overuse (58%). About 60% assumed that medical overuse means "too much medicine including overtreatment and overtesting". Medical overuse was mainly suspected for services not covered by the public health insurance system (56%), surgical interventions (45%) and medication prescriptions (37%). Reasons for medical overuse were seen in uncoordinated care and financial incentives, but also in the expectations of patients. The main problem with medical overuse was seen in rising health care costs, while harmful physical and mental consequences for patients were mentioned less often. In order to reduce medical overuse, little importance was attributed to a primary care based system or higher financial contribution of patients. Instead, stricter cost control on the side of physicians and better coordination between care providers were suggested as solutions. Differences in socio-demographic characteristics hardly showed any differences in response behavior.

CONCLUSION

More than half of the respondents had never heard of medical overuse. Overuse was mainly associated with financial causes and consequences. It was not seen that overuse can be harmful for patients directly. The limited awareness of the problem of overuse probably is a barrier to tackling it effectively. Communicating the topic to the public might therefore be an effective start to mitigate medical overuse.

TAKE HOME MESSAGE

Many citizens seem not to be familiar with the concept of medical overuse, especially not with the fact that it may directly cause harm to patients. Informing citizens about the harms of medical overuse might be helpful in mitigating it.

Enteral nutrition practice in the prone position in patients with coronavirus disease 2019: An international one-day point prevalence analysis

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Enteral nutrition (EN) in the prone position for severe respiratory failure is considered possible with care. However, the extent to which it is feasible, especially its association with the length of intensive care unit (ICU) stay, is unclear. Therefore, we investigated the relationship between the duration of prone position therapy and adequacy of EN delivery and explored factors associated with this relationship in an observational study of critically ill patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) who were actively treated in the prone position.

METHODS

This study was a secondary analysis of a worldwide one-day prevalence study in the COVID-19 era. We investigated the care and nutritional therapy provided to critically ill patients with COVID-19 admitted to ICU, along with ICU-related information. We targeted patients who received only tube feeding and analyzed the relationship between the duration of prone position, length of ICU stays, and nutrition delivery via EN. In addition, a multivariate analysis was performed to examine factors affecting the achievement of EN delivery of 20 kcal/kg/day or more in patients who were placed in the prone position for at least 6 h.

RESULTS

A total of 399 patients who received only EN, excluding parenteral nutrition and oral intake, were included, of whom 58 % received EN energy delivery of ≥20 kcal/kg/day; this rate increased with the length of ICU stay, regardless of the duration of prone position. In a multivariate analysis of 121 patients who were in the prone position for at least 6 h, the presence of dedicated dietitians in the ICU (OR = 6.91, 95 % CI = 1.98 to 24.1, p < 0.01) was associated with a higher energy delivery. Conversely, the use of muscle relaxants (OR = 0.32, 95 % CI = 0.11 to 0.98, p = 0.04) and presence of nutrition protocols (OR = 0.24, 95 % CI = 0.07 to 0.77, p = 0.02) was associated with a lower energy delivery.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with COVID-19 received adequate nutrition by EN even during prone position. Target EN delivery would be achieved with the introduction of prone position.

Indicators of Clinical Trajectory in Patients With Cancer Who Receive Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation

BACKGROUND

Patients with cancer who require cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) historically have had low survival to hospital discharge; however, overall CPR outcomes and cancer survival have improved. Identifying patients with cancer who are unlikely to survive CPR could guide and improve end-of-life discussions prior to cardiac arrest.

METHODS

Demographics, clinical variables, and outcomes including immediate and hospital survival for patients with cancer aged ≥18 years who required in-hospital CPR from 2012 to 2015 were collected. Indicators capturing the overall declining clinical and oncologic trajectory (ie, no further therapeutic options for cancer, recommendation for hospice, or recommendation for do not resuscitate) prior to CPR were determined a priori and manually identified.

RESULTS

Of 854 patients with cancer who underwent CPR, the median age was 63 years and 43.6% were female; solid cancers accounted for 60.6% of diagnoses. A recursive partitioning model selected having any indicator of declining trajectory as the most predictive factor in hospital outcome. Of our study group, 249 (29%) patients were found to have at least one indicator identified prior to CPR and only 5 survived to discharge. Patients with an indicator were more likely to die in the hospital and none were alive at 6 months after discharge. These patients were younger (median age, 59 vs 64 years; P≤.001), had a higher incidence of metastatic disease (83.0% vs 62.9%; P<.001), and were more likely to undergo CPR in the ICU (55.8% vs 36.5%; P<.001) compared with those without an indicator. Of patients without an indicator, 145 (25%) were discharged alive and half received some form of cancer intervention after CPR.

CONCLUSIONS

Providers can use easily identifiable indicators to ascertain which patients with cancer are at risk for death despite CPR and are unlikely to survive to discharge. These findings can guide discussions regarding utility of resuscitation and the lack of further cancer interventions even if CPR is successful.