Physicians' Acceptance of Triage Guidelines in the Context of the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Qualitative Study

Core stories of physicians on a Swiss internal medicine ward during the first COVID-19 wave: a qualitative exploration

INTRODUCTION

The first COVID-19 wave (2020), W1, will remain extraordinary due to its novelty and the uncertainty on how to handle the pandemic. To understand what physicians went through, we collected narratives of frontline physicians working in a Swiss university hospital during W1.

METHODS

Physicians in the Division of Internal Medicine of Lausanne University Hospital (CHUV) were invited to send anonymous narratives to an online platform, between 28 April and 30 June 2020. The analysed material consisted of 13 written texts and one audio record. They were examined by means of a narrative analysis based on a holistic content approach, attempting to identify narrative highlights, referred to as foci, in the texts.

RESULTS

Five main foci were identified: danger and threats, acquisition of knowledge and practices, adaptation to a changing context, commitment to the profession, and sense of belonging to the medical staff. In physicians' narratives, danger designated a variety of rather negative feelings and emotions, whereas threats were experienced as being dangerous for others, but also for oneself. The acquisition of knowledge and practices focus referred to the different types of acquisition that took place during W1. The narratives that focused on adaptation reflected how physicians coped with W1 and private or professional upheavals. COVID-19 W1 contributed to revealing a natural commitment (or not) of physicians towards the profession and patients, accompanied by the concern of offering the best possible care to all. Lastly, sense of belonging referred to the team and its reconfiguration during W1.

CONCLUSIONS

Our study deepens the understanding of how physicians experienced the pandemic both in their professional and personal settings. It offers insights into how they prepared and reacted to a pandemic. The foci reflect topics that are inherent to a physician's profession, whatever the context. During a pandemic, these foundational elements are particularly challenged. Strikingly, these topics are not studied in medical school, thus raising the general question of how students are prepared for the medical profession.

Patient Admission and Mechanical Ventilator Allocation Decision-Making Processes by Frontline Medical Professionals in a Japanese ICU During the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Qualitative Study

During the COVID-19 pandemic, the need to triage COVID-19 patients in ICUs emerged globally. Triage guidelines were established in many countries; however, the actual triage decision-making processes and decisions themselves made by frontline medical providers may not have exactly reflected those guidelines. Despite the need to understand decisions and processes in practice regarding patient ICU admission and mechanical ventilator usage to identify areas of improvement for medical care provision, such research is limited. This qualitative study was conducted to identify the decision-making processes regarding COVID-19 patient ICU admissions and mechanical ventilator allocation by frontline medical providers and issues associated with those processes in an ICU during the COVID-19 pandemic. Semi-structured, in-depth interviews were conducted with ICU physicians and nurses working at an urban tertiary referral hospital in Japan between February and April 2022. Patient characteristics that influenced triage decisions made by physicians and the interaction between physicians, nurses, and senior management staff upon making such decisions are discussed in this article. An implicated issue was the lack of legal support for Japanese physicians to practice withdrawal of life-sustaining treatments even during emergencies. Another issue was the impact of non-clinical forces-likely specific to health emergencies-on physicians' decisions regarding mechanical ventilator allocation, where such forces imposed a significant mental burden on the medical providers. We consider public policy and legal implications for future pandemics.

Physician and administrator experience of preparing to implement Ontario's intensive care unit Triage Emergency Standard of Care during the COVID-19 pandemic: a qualitative study

BACKGROUND

As the COVID-19 pandemic created a surge in demand for critical care resources, the province of Ontario, Canada, released the Adult Critical Care Clinical Emergency Standard of Care for Major Surge (Emergency Standard of Care [ESoC]), a triage framework to guide the allocation of critical care resources in the expectation that intensive care units would be overwhelmed. Our aim was to understand physicians' and administrators' experiences and perceptions of planning to implement the ESoC, and to identify ways to improve critical care triage processes for future pandemics.

METHODS

We conducted semistructured qualitative interviews with critical care, emergency and internal medicine physicians, and hospital administrators from various Ontario health regions who were involved in their hospital's or region's ESoC implementation planning. Interviews were conducted virtually between April and October 2021. We analyzed the data using thematic analysis.

RESULTS

We conducted interviews with 11 physicians and 10 hospital administrators representing 9 health regions. We identified 4 themes regarding participants' preparation to implement the ESoC: infrastructure to enable effective triage implementation; social, medical and political supports to enable effective triage implementation; moral dimensions of triage implementation; and communication of triage results. Participants outlined administrative and implementation-related improvements that could be provided at the provincial level, such as billing codes for ESoC. They also suggested improving ethical supports for the usability and quality of the ESoC (e.g., designating an ethicist in each region), and ways to improve the efficiency and usability of the tools for assessing short-term mortality risk (e.g., create information technology solutions such as a dashboard).

INTERPRETATION

The implementation of a jurisdiction-level triage framework poses moral challenges for a health care system, but it also requires dedicated infrastructure, as well as institutional supports. Lessons learned from Ontario's process to prepare for ESoC implementation, as well as participants' suggestions, can be used for planning for current and future pandemics.

Patients' rights in physicians' practice during Covid-19 pandemic: a cross-sectional study in Romania

BACKGROUND

Although the Covid-19 epidemic challenged existing medical care norms and practices, it was no excuse for unlawful conduct. On the contrary, legal compliance proved essential in fighting the pandemic. Within the European legal framework for the pandemic, patients were still entitled to be treated equally, by a specialized physician, with the possibility of seeking a second medical opinion, in a confidential setting, following prior and informed consent. This study examines physicians' practices regarding patients' rights during the Covid-19 pandemic and the effects of age, experience, and specialty on physicians' behavior and preferences. Additionally, it explores the nexus of malpractice complaints, malpractice fear, and legal compliance.

METHODS

A cross-sectional study was conducted on a convenience sample of attending physicians and general practitioners to assess compliance with patients' rights regulations. Respondents were physicians practicing in private and public settings in Southwestern Romania from July 2021 to May 2022.

RESULTS

396 attending physicians and 109 general practitioners participated in the research. Attending physicians acknowledged patients' rights in 55.7% of statements, while general practitioners showed a slightly higher level of compliance at 59.9%. Emergency and Anesthesia and Intensive Care physicians showed the lowest compliance. There were no significant behavioral differences based on physicians' age, years in practice, work sector, or location. However, when faced with the question of prioritizing treatment for patients with similar medical conditions, 46.2% of attending physicians reported favoring the younger patients. This preference was common among physicians under 39. Additionally, over half of the attending physicians reported working outside their area of expertise due to staff shortages. Malpractice fear was high among physicians, although unrelated to patients' claims, legal compliance, or working outside the scope of practice. It resulted in pressure and behavioral changes.

CONCLUSION

Adherence to patients' rights was low during the Covid-19 pandemic. Physicians could benefit from educational and administrative support to ensure better legal compliance. Further research is needed to determine if this behavior persists beyond the pandemic context.

Obstacles to patient inclusion in CPR/DNAR decisions and challenging conversations: A qualitative study with internal medicine physicians in Southern Switzerland

Despite cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) and do-not-attempt-resuscitation (DNAR) decisions are increasingly considered an essential component of hospital practice and patient inclusion in these conversations an ethical imperative in most cases, there is evidence that such discussions between physicians and patients/surrogate decision-makers (the person or people providing direction in decision making if a person is unable to make decisions about personal health care, e.g., family members or friends) are often inadequate, excessively delayed, or absent. We conducted a study to qualitatively explore physician-reported CPR/DNAR decision-making approaches and CPR/DNAR conversations with patients hospitalized in the internal medicine wards of the four main hospitals in Ticino, Southern Switzerland. We conducted four focus groups with 19 resident and staff physicians employed in the internal medicine unit of the four public hospitals in Ticino. Questions aimed to elicit participants' specific experiences in deciding on and discussing CPR/DNAR with patients and their families, the stakeholders (ideally) involved in the discussion, and their responsibilities. We found that participants experienced two main tensions. On the one side, CPR/DNAR decisions were dominated by the belief that patient involvement is often pointless, even though participants favored a shared decision-making approach. On the other, despite aiming at a non-manipulative conversation, participants were aware that most CPR/DNAR conversations are characterized by a nudging communicative approach where the physician gently pushes patients towards his/her recommendation. Participants identified structural cause to the previous two tensions that go beyond the patient-physician relationship. CPR/DNAR decisions are examples of best interests assessments at the end of life. Such assessments represent value judgments that cannot be validly ascertained without patient input. CPR/DNAR conversations should be regarded as complex interventions that need to be thoroughly and regularly taught, in a manner similar to technical interventions.

The risk profile of patients with COVID-19 as predictors of lung lesions severity and mortality—Development and validation of a prediction model

Objective

We developed and validated a prediction model based on individuals' risk profiles to predict the severity of lung involvement and death in patients hospitalized with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) infection.

Methods

In this retrospective study, we studied hospitalized COVID-19 patients with data on chest CT scans performed during hospital stay (February 2020-April 2021) in a training dataset (TD) (n = 2,251) and an external validation dataset (eVD) (n = 993). We used the most relevant demographical, clinical, and laboratory variables (n = 25) as potential predictors of COVID-19-related outcomes. The primary and secondary endpoints were the severity of lung involvement quantified as mild (≤25%), moderate (26–50%), severe (>50%), and in-hospital death, respectively. We applied random forest (RF) classifier, a machine learning technique, and multivariable logistic regression analysis to study our objectives.

Results

In the TD and the eVD, respectively, the mean [standard deviation (SD)] age was 57.9 (18.0) and 52.4 (17.6) years; patients with severe lung involvement [n (%):185 (8.2) and 116 (11.7)] were significantly older [mean (SD) age: 64.2 (16.9), and 56.2 (18.9)] than the other two groups (mild and moderate). The mortality rate was higher in patients with severe (64.9 and 38.8%) compared to moderate (5.5 and 12.4%) and mild (2.3 and 7.1%) lung involvement. The RF analysis showed age, C reactive protein (CRP) levels, and duration of hospitalizations as the three most important predictors of lung involvement severity at the time of the first CT examination. Multivariable logistic regression analysis showed a significant strong association between the extent of the severity of lung involvement (continuous variable) and death; adjusted odds ratio (OR): 9.3; 95% CI: 7.1–12.1 in the TD and 2.6 (1.8–3.5) in the eVD.

Conclusion

In hospitalized patients with COVID-19, the severity of lung involvement is a strong predictor of death. Age, CRP levels, and duration of hospitalizations are the most important predictors of severe lung involvement. A simple prediction model based on available clinical and imaging data provides a validated tool that predicts the severity of lung involvement and death probability among hospitalized patients with COVID-19.