Consent, Refusal, and Waivers in Patient-Centered Dysphagia Care: Using Law, Ethics, and Evidence to Guide Clinical Practice

2016 ◽  
Vol 25 (4) ◽  
pp. 453-469 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jennifer Horner ◽  
Maria Modayil ◽  
Laura Roche Chapman ◽  
An Dinh
Keyword(s):  
Health Care ◽  
Public Policy ◽  
Clinical Practice ◽  
Health Care Providers ◽  
Clinical Decision Making ◽  
Clinical Decision ◽  
Care Providers ◽  
Patient Centered ◽  
Legal Advice ◽  
Medical Context

PurposeWhen patients refuse medical or rehabilitation procedures, waivers of liability have been used to bar future lawsuits. The purpose of this tutorial is to review the myriad issues surrounding consent, refusal, and waivers. The larger goal is to invigorate clinical practice by providing clinicians with knowledge of ethics and law. This tutorial is for educational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice.MethodThe authors use a hypothetical case of a “noncompliant” individual under the care of an interdisciplinary neurorehabilitation team to illuminate the ethical and legal features of the patient–practitioner relationship; the elements of clinical decision-making capacity; the duty of disclosure and the right of informed consent or informed refusal; and the relationship among noncompliance, defensive practices, and iatrogenic harm. We explore the legal question of whether waivers of liability in the medical context are enforceable or unenforceable as a matter of public policy.ConclusionsSpeech-language pathologists, among other health care providers, have fiduciary and other ethical and legal obligations to patients. Because waivers try to shift liability for substandard care from health care providers to patients, courts usually find waivers of liability in the medical context unenforceable as a matter of public policy.

mHealth in clinical decision-making: A systematic literature review (Preprint)

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Amandeep Dhir
Keyword(s):  
Health Care ◽  
Decision Making ◽  
Health Care Providers ◽  
Clinical Decision Making ◽  
Clinical Decision ◽  
Future Research ◽  
Care Providers ◽  
Rigorous Approach ◽  
Almost All ◽  
Mhealth Apps

UNSTRUCTURED A large number of mHealth apps are available nowadays for patients and health care providers. Many of those apps are designed specifically for clinical decision making (CDM). Despite their proliferation, limited studies have examined the utilization and effectiveness of these apps. The current study undertakes a systematic review to organize and synthesize the extant literature on mHealth for CDM in all resource settings. A thorough search of databases resulted in a preliminary list of 1,313 titles and abstracts, of which 1,107 were excluded as they were either duplicates or irrelevant to the scope of the study. Thereafter, full-text screening of the remaining 206 articles was performed, and 175 were excluded on the basis of pre-specified inclusion/exclusion criteria. This rigorous approach resulted in the identification of 31 studies for inclusion in the review. The utilization of mHealth for CDM appears to have pervaded almost all health care settings, as demonstrated by the insights gleaned from the review of the prior studies in the domain. However, the evidence of effectiveness is still limited and unreliable, which underscores the existence of a paucity of accumulated knowledge that, in turn, invites interesting opportunities for future research.

Alternative Medicine and Multiple Sclerosis: An Objective Review from an American Perspective

2000 ◽  
Vol 2 (3) ◽  
pp. 15-28 ◽  
Author(s):  
Allen C. Bowling ◽  
Ragaa Ibrahim ◽  
Thomas M. Stewart
Keyword(s):  
Multiple Sclerosis ◽  
Health Care ◽  
Alternative Medicine ◽  
Health Care Providers ◽  
Clinical Decision Making ◽  
Clinical Decision ◽  
The United States ◽  
Care Providers ◽  
American Perspective ◽  
Conventional Medical Therapy

Abstract The use of complementary and alternative medicine (CAM), or unconventional medicine, may be challenging for health care providers in the United States. There are several definitions of CAM, and therapies that are considered alternative in one country may be conventional in other countries. Unconventional medical practices may be used instead of, or in addition to, conventional medical therapy. It may be difficult for people with multiple sclerosis (MS) to obtain reliable MS-relevant CAM information, and there may be conflicts between the values of patients and those of health care providers. These issues may create problems in the clinical decision-making process. The relevance to MS of some commonly used CAM therapies is discussed: herbal medicine, vitamins and minerals, marijuana, and a histamine and caffeine transdermal gel patch. Current information about the efficacy and safety of CAM therapies is extremely variable. Some therapies appear promising, others are unsafe or ineffective, and nearly all need to be studied further.

scholarly journals Mobile Clinical Decision Support System for the Management of Diabetic Patients With Kidney Complications in UK Primary Care Settings: Mixed Methods Feasibility Study (Preprint)

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hala Ibrahim Alhodaib ◽  
Christina Antza ◽  
Joht Singh Chandan ◽  
Wasim Hanif ◽  
Sailesh Sankaranarayanan ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Health Care ◽  
Clinical Practice ◽  
Decision Support ◽  
Health Care Providers ◽  
Clinical Decision Support System ◽  
Intervention Group ◽  
Clinical Decision ◽  
Control Group ◽  
Care Providers ◽  
Specialist Nurses

BACKGROUND Attempts to utilize eHealth in diabetes mellitus (DM) management have shown promising outcomes, mostly targeted at patients; however, few solutions have been designed for health care providers. OBJECTIVE The purpose of this study was to conduct a feasibility project developing and evaluating a mobile clinical decision support system (CDSS) tool exclusively for health care providers to manage chronic kidney disease (CKD) in patients with DM. METHODS The design process was based on the 3 key stages of the user-centered design framework. First, an exploratory qualitative study collected the experiences and views of DM specialist nurses regarding the use of mobile apps in clinical practice. Second, a CDSS tool was developed for the management of patients with DM and CKD. Finally, a randomized controlled trial examined the acceptability and impact of the tool. RESULTS We interviewed 15 DM specialist nurses. DM specialist nurses were not currently using eHealth solutions in their clinical practice, while most nurses were not even aware of existing medical apps. However, they appreciated the potential benefits that apps may bring to their clinical practice. Taking into consideration the needs and preferences of end users, a new mobile CDSS app, “Diabetes &amp; CKD,” was developed based on guidelines. We recruited 39 junior foundation year 1 doctors (44% male) to evaluate the app. Of them, 44% (17/39) were allocated to the intervention group, and 56% (22/39) were allocated to the control group. There was no significant difference in scores (maximum score=13) assessing the management decisions between the app and paper-based version of the app’s algorithm (intervention group: mean 7.24 points, SD 2.46 points; control group: mean 7.39, SD 2.56; t<sub>37</sub>=–0.19, <i>P</i>=.85). However, 82% (14/17) of the participants were satisfied with using the app. CONCLUSIONS The findings will guide the design of future CDSS apps for the management of DM, aiming to help health care providers with a personalized approach depending on patients’ comorbidities, specifically CKD, in accordance with guidelines.

scholarly journals Mobile Clinical Decision Support System for the Management of Diabetic Patients With Kidney Complications in UK Primary Care Settings: Mixed Methods Feasibility Study

JMIR Diabetes ◽  
10.2196/19650 ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 5 (4) ◽  
pp. e19650
Author(s):  
Hala Ibrahim Alhodaib ◽  
Christina Antza ◽  
Joht Singh Chandan ◽  
Wasim Hanif ◽  
Sailesh Sankaranarayanan ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Health Care ◽  
Clinical Practice ◽  
Decision Support ◽  
Health Care Providers ◽  
Clinical Decision Support System ◽  
Intervention Group ◽  
Clinical Decision ◽  
Control Group ◽  
Care Providers ◽  
Specialist Nurses

Background Attempts to utilize eHealth in diabetes mellitus (DM) management have shown promising outcomes, mostly targeted at patients; however, few solutions have been designed for health care providers. Objective The purpose of this study was to conduct a feasibility project developing and evaluating a mobile clinical decision support system (CDSS) tool exclusively for health care providers to manage chronic kidney disease (CKD) in patients with DM. Methods The design process was based on the 3 key stages of the user-centered design framework. First, an exploratory qualitative study collected the experiences and views of DM specialist nurses regarding the use of mobile apps in clinical practice. Second, a CDSS tool was developed for the management of patients with DM and CKD. Finally, a randomized controlled trial examined the acceptability and impact of the tool. Results We interviewed 15 DM specialist nurses. DM specialist nurses were not currently using eHealth solutions in their clinical practice, while most nurses were not even aware of existing medical apps. However, they appreciated the potential benefits that apps may bring to their clinical practice. Taking into consideration the needs and preferences of end users, a new mobile CDSS app, “Diabetes & CKD,” was developed based on guidelines. We recruited 39 junior foundation year 1 doctors (44% male) to evaluate the app. Of them, 44% (17/39) were allocated to the intervention group, and 56% (22/39) were allocated to the control group. There was no significant difference in scores (maximum score=13) assessing the management decisions between the app and paper-based version of the app’s algorithm (intervention group: mean 7.24 points, SD 2.46 points; control group: mean 7.39, SD 2.56; t37=–0.19, P=.85). However, 82% (14/17) of the participants were satisfied with using the app. Conclusions The findings will guide the design of future CDSS apps for the management of DM, aiming to help health care providers with a personalized approach depending on patients’ comorbidities, specifically CKD, in accordance with guidelines.

Interdisciplinary Therapy Assessments for the Older Adult

2012 ◽  
Vol 17 (1) ◽  
pp. 11-16
Author(s):  
Lynn Chatfield ◽  
Sandra Christos ◽  
Michael McGregor
Keyword(s):  
Older Adults ◽  
Health Care ◽  
Standardized Testing ◽  
Health Care Providers ◽  
Outcome Measurement ◽  
Care Providers ◽  
Patient Centered ◽  
Screening Process ◽  
Evidenced Based ◽  
Changing Economy

In a changing economy and a changing industry, health care providers need to complete thorough, comprehensive, and efficient assessments that provide both an accurate depiction of the patient's deficits and a blueprint to the path of treatment for older adults. Through standardized testing and observations as well as the goals and evidenced-based treatment plans we have devised, health care providers can maximize outcomes and the functional levels of patients. In this article, we review an interdisciplinary assessment that involves speech-language pathology, occupational therapy, physical therapy, and respiratory therapy to work with older adults in health care settings. Using the approach, we will examine the benefits of collaboration between disciplines, an interdisciplinary screening process, and the importance of sharing information from comprehensive discipline-specific evaluations. We also will discuss the importance of having an understanding of the varied scopes of practice, the utilization of outcome measurement tools, and a patient-centered assessment approach to care.

Patient Flow or the Patient’s Journey? Exploring Health Care Providers’ Experiences and Understandings of Implementing a Care Pathway to Improve the Quality of Transitional Care for Older People

2021 ◽  
pp. 104973232110038
Author(s):  
Cecilie Fromholt Olsen ◽  
Astrid Bergland ◽  
Jonas Debesay ◽  
Asta Bye ◽  
Anne Gudrun Langaas
Keyword(s):  
Health Care ◽  
Older People ◽  
Health Care Providers ◽  
Transitional Care ◽  
Care Pathway ◽  
Patient Flow ◽  
Care Pathways ◽  
Care Providers ◽  
Patient Centered ◽  
Care For Older People

Internationally, the implementation of care pathways is a common strategy for making transitional care for older people more effective and patient-centered. Previous research highlights inherent tensions in care pathways, particularly in relation to their patient-centered aspects, which may cause dilemmas for health care providers. Health care providers’ understandings and experiences of this, however, remain unclear. Our aim was to explore health care providers’ experiences and understandings of implementing a care pathway to improve transitional care for older people. We conducted semistructured interviews with 20 health care providers and three key persons, along with participant observations of 22 meetings, in a Norwegian quality improvement collaborative. Through a thematic analysis, we identified an understanding of the care pathway as both patient flow and the patient’s journey and a dilemma between the two, and we discuss how the negotiation of conflicting institutional logics is a central part of care pathway implementation.

scholarly journals Plain Language Summary: Opioid Prescribing for Analgesia After Common Otolaryngology Operations

2021 ◽  
Vol 164 (4) ◽  
pp. 704-711
Author(s):  
Samantha Anne ◽  
Sandra A. Finestone ◽  
Allison Paisley ◽  
Taskin M. Monjur
Keyword(s):  
Health Care ◽  
Decision Making ◽  
Clinical Practice ◽  
Pain Management ◽  
Health Care Providers ◽  
Clinical Practice Guideline ◽  
Shared Decision ◽  
Care Providers ◽  
Plain Language ◽  
Opioid Prescribing

This plain language summary explains pain management and careful use of opioids after common otolaryngology operations. The summary applies to patients of any age who need treatment for pain within 30 days after having a common otolaryngologic operation (having to do with the ear, nose, or throat). It is based on the 2021 “Clinical Practice Guideline: Opioid Prescribing for Analgesia After Common Otolaryngology Operations.” This guideline uses available research to best advise health care providers, and it includes recommendations that are explained in this summary. Recommendations may not apply to every patient but can be used to facilitate shared decision making between patients and their health care providers.

Risks of Cardiovascular Disease and Beyond in Prescription of Nonsteroidal Anti-Inflammatory Drugs

2019 ◽  
Vol 25 (1) ◽  
pp. 3-6 ◽  
Author(s):  
Manas A. Rane ◽  
Alexander Gitin ◽  
Benjamin Fiedler ◽  
Lawrence Fiedler ◽  
Charles H. Hennekens
Keyword(s):  
Cardiovascular Disease ◽  
Side Effects ◽  
Health Care Providers ◽  
Clinical Decision Making ◽  
Clinical Decision ◽  
Care Providers ◽  
Relieve Pain ◽  
Gastrointestinal Side Effects ◽  
Inflammatory Drugs ◽  
Anti Inflammatory

Introduction: Nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) include aspirin, naproxen, diclofenac, and ibuprofen, as well as selective cyclooxygenase 2 inhibitors such as celecoxib. Their use is common, as well as their side effects which cause 100 000 hospitalizations and 17 000 deaths annually. Recently, the US Food and Drug Administration strengthened its warning about the risks of cardiovascular disease (CVD) attributed to nonaspirin NSAIDs. Methods: When the sample size is large, randomization provides control of confounding not possible to achieve with any observational study. Further, observational studies and, especially, claims data have inherent confounding by indication larger than the small to moderate effects being sought. Results: While trials are necessary, they must be of sufficient size and duration and achieve high compliance and follow-up. Until then, clinicians should remain uncertain about benefits and risks of these drugs. Conclusions: Since the totality of evidence remains incomplete, health-care providers should consider all these aforementioned benefits and risks, both CVD and beyond, in deciding whether and, if so, which, NSAID to prescribe. The factors in the decision of whether and, if so, which NSAID to prescribe for relief of pain from inflammatory arthritis should not be limited to risks of CVD or gastrointestinal side effects but should also include potential benefits including improvements in overall quality of life resulting from decreases in pain or impairment from musculoskeletal pain syndromes. The judicious individual clinical decision-making about the prescription of NSAIDs to relieve pain based on all these considerations has the potential to do much more good than harm.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document