scholarly journals Spirituality in a Doctor’s Practice: What Are the Issues?

2021 ◽  
Vol 10 (23) ◽  
pp. 5612
Author(s):  
Ángela del Carmen López-Tarrida ◽  
Rocío de Diego-Cordero ◽  
Joaquin Salvador Lima-Rodríguez
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Practice ◽  
Spiritual Care ◽  
Observational Studies ◽  
Methodological Quality ◽  
Clinical Decision Making ◽  
Clinical Decision ◽  
Qualitative Studies ◽  
Spiritual Needs ◽  
Cross Sectional ◽  
Spiritual Dimension

Introduction: It is becoming increasingly important to address the spiritual dimension in the integral care of the people in order to adequately assist them in the processes of their illness and healing. Considering the spiritual dimension has an ethical basis because it attends to the values and spiritual needs of the person in clinical decision-making, as well as helping them cope with their illness. Doctors, although sensitive to this fact, approach spiritual care in clinical practice with little rigour due to certain facts, factors, and boundaries that are assessed in this review. Objective: To find out how doctors approach the spiritual dimension, describing its characteristics, the factors that influence it, and the limitations they encounter. Methodology: We conducted a review of the scientific literature to date in the PubMed, Scopus, and CINAHL databases of randomised and non-randomised controlled trials, observational studies, and qualitative studies written in Spanish, English, and Portuguese on the spiritual approach adopted by doctors in clinical practice. This review consisted of several phases: (i) the exclusion of duplicate records; (ii) the reading of titles and abstracts; (iii) the assessment of full articles and their methodological quality using the guidelines of the international Equator Network. Results: A total of 1414 publications were identified in the search, 373 of which were excluded for being off-topic or repeated in databases. Of the remaining 1041, 962 were excluded because they did not meet the inclusion criteria. After initial screening, 79 articles were selected, from which 17 were collected after reading the full text. A total of 8 studies were eligible for inclusion. There were three qualitative studies and five cross-sectional observational studies with sufficient methodological quality. The results showed the perspectives and principal characteristics identified by doctors in their approach to the spiritual dimension, with lack of training, a lack of time, and fear in addressing this dimension in the clinic the main findings. Conclusions: Although more and more scientific research is demonstrating the benefits of spiritual care in clinical practice and physicians are aware of it, efforts are needed to achieve true holistic care in which specific training in spiritual care plays a key role.

Understanding critical care nurses’ autonomy in Jordan

2017 ◽  
Vol 30 (4) ◽  
pp. 432-442 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mahmoud Maharmeh
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Critical Care ◽  
Clinical Practice ◽  
Clinical Decision Making ◽  
Clinical Decision ◽  
Critical Care Nurses ◽  
Cross Sectional Survey ◽  
Eligibility Criteria ◽  
Cross Sectional ◽  
Content Type

Purpose The aim of this study was to describe Jordanian critical care nurses’ experiences of autonomy in their clinical practice. Design/methodology/approach A descriptive correlational design was applied using a self-reported cross-sectional survey. A total of 110 registered nurses who met the eligibility criteria participated in this study. The data were collected by a structured questionnaire. Findings A majority of critical care nurses were autonomous in their decision-making and participation in decisions to take action in their clinical settings. Also, they were independent to develop their own knowledge. The study identified that their autonomy in action and acquired knowledge were influenced by a number of factors such as gender and area of practice. Practical implications Nurse’s autonomy could be increased if nurses are made aware of the current level of autonomy and explore new ways to increase empowerment. This could be offered through classroom lectures that concentrate on the concept of autonomy and its implication in practice. Nurses should demonstrate autonomous nursing care at the same time in the clinical practice. This could be done through collaboration between educators and clinical practice to help merge theory to practice. Originality/value Critical care nurses were more autonomous in action and knowledge base. This may negatively affect the quality of patient care and nurses’ job satisfaction. Therefore, improving nurses’ clinical decision-making autonomy could be done by the support of both hospital administrators and nurses themselves.

scholarly journals Use of Urology-Based Clinical Practice Guidelines in International Settings

2021 ◽  
Vol 2 (1) ◽  
pp. 10-17
Author(s):  
German Patino ◽  
Medina Ndoye ◽  
Hannah S. Thomas ◽  
Andrew J. Cohen ◽  
Nnenaya A. Mmonu ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Clinical Practice ◽  
Clinical Practice Guidelines ◽  
Practice Guidelines ◽  
Online Survey ◽  
Clinical Decision Making ◽  
Clinical Decision ◽  
Medical Decision ◽  
Local Health ◽  
Cross Sectional

Objective Clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) serve as frameworks to unify diagnostic criteria and guide clinical decision-making. There is a paucity of literature surrounding the uptake of CPGs in urology practice settings with varied levels of resources worldwide. This study aims to evaluate reported use of CPGs within the context of international urology practice, identify local barriers to uptake, and evaluate the role of stakeholders in the CPG-development process. Methods This was an international, multi-center, cross-sectional study. An online survey collecting variables pertaining to the use of CPGs was distributed to attending/consultant urologists in Latin America, Africa, and China. Statistical analysis was conducted using R software. Result A total of 249 practicing urologists from 28 countries completed the survey. The majority of participants were males, aged 36 to 45, and practiced in a non-academic setting. Ninety-three percent of urologists used CPGs in their everyday clinical practice, and 43% believed CPGs were very important to medical decision-making. However, barriers such as the lack of adaptability or applicability of CPGs to local settings were mentioned by 29% and 24% of participants, respectively. Urologists believed scientific associations (81%), national urology boards (68%), and ministries of health (56%), were important stakeholders to consult to foster the development of local CPGs. Conclusions Globally, CPGs are widely used tools for clinical practice. However, there are concerns about the adaptability and applicability of CPGs to settings that may lack the resources to implement their recommendations. Efforts should be directed towards incorporating scientific and medical stakeholders into the review and adaptation of urology CPGs to suit the unique features of local health care systems.

scholarly journals The use of multiple-criteria decision-making theory to measure students’ perceptions of high-fidelity simulation

2017 ◽  
Vol 3 (3) ◽  
pp. 88-93 ◽  
Author(s):  
Maureen Anne Jersby ◽  
Paul Van-Schaik ◽  
Stephen Green ◽  
Lili Nacheva-Skopalik
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Clinical Practice ◽  
Repeated Measures ◽  
Clinical Decision Making ◽  
Learning Experience ◽  
Clinical Decision ◽  
High Fidelity ◽  
High Fidelity Simulation ◽  
Initial Exposure ◽  
Repeated Measures Design

BackgroundHigh-Fidelity Simulation (HFS) has great potential to improve decision-making in clinical practice. Previous studies have found HFS promotes self-confidence, but its effectiveness in clinical practice has not been established. The aim of this research is to establish if HFS facilitates learning that informs decision-making skills in clinical practice using MultipleCriteria DecisionMaking Theory (MCDMT).MethodsThe sample was 2nd year undergraduate pre-registration adult nursing students.MCDMT was used to measure the students’ experience of HFS and how it developed their clinical decision-making skills. MCDMT requires characteristic measurements which for the learning experience were based on five factors that underpin successful learning, and for clinical decision-making, an analytical framework was used. The study used a repeated-measures design to take two measurements: the first one after the first simulation experience and the second one after clinical placement. Baseline measurements were obtained from academics. Data were analysed using the MCDMT tool.ResultsAfter their initial exposure to simulation learning, students reported that HFS provides a high-quality learning experience (87%) and supports all aspects of clinical decision-making (85%). Following clinical practice, the level of support for clinical decision-making remained at 85%, suggesting that students believe HFS promotes transferability of knowledge to the practice setting.ConclusionOverall, students report a high level of support for learning and developing clinical decision-making skills from HFS. However, there are no comparative data available from classroom teaching of similar content so it cannot be established if these results are due to HFS alone.

scholarly journals Diagnostic accuracy of symptoms as a diagnostic tool for SARS-CoV 2 infection: a cross-sectional study in a cohort of 2,173 patients

2021 ◽  
Vol 21 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Carlos Alfonso Romero-Gameros ◽  
Tania Colin-Martínez ◽  
Salomón Waizel-Haiat ◽  
Guadalupe Vargas-Ortega ◽  
Eduardo Ferat-Osorio ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Diagnostic Accuracy ◽  
Diagnostic Tool ◽  
Clinical Decision Making ◽  
Multivariate Logistic Regression Analysis ◽  
Clinical Decision ◽  
Cross Sectional Study ◽  
World Health ◽  
Likelihood Ratios ◽  
Cross Sectional ◽  
Health Organization

Abstract Background The SARS-CoV-2 pandemic continues to be a priority health problem; According to the World Health Organization data from October 13, 2020, 37,704,153 confirmed COVID-19 cases have been reported, including 1,079,029 deaths, since the outbreak. The identification of potential symptoms has been reported to be a useful tool for clinical decision-making in emergency departments to avoid overload and improve the quality of care. The aim of this study was to evaluate the performances of symptoms as a diagnostic tool for SARS -CoV-2 infection. Methods An observational, cross-sectional, prospective and analytical study was carried out, during the period of time from April 14 to July 21, 2020. Data (demographic variables, medical history, respiratory and non-respiratory symptoms) were collected by emergency physicians. The diagnosis of COVID-19 was made using SARS-CoV-2 RT-PCR. The diagnostic accuracy of these characteristics for COVID-19 was evaluated by calculating the positive and negative likelihood ratios. A Mantel-Haenszel and multivariate logistic regression analysis was performed to assess the association of symptoms with COVID-19. Results A prevalence of 53.72% of SARS-CoV-2 infection was observed. The symptom with the highest sensitivity was cough 71%, and a specificity of 52.68%. The symptomatological scale, constructed from 6 symptoms, obtained a sensitivity of 83.45% and a specificity of 32.86%, taking ≥2 symptoms as a cut-off point. The symptoms with the greatest association with SARS-CoV-2 were: anosmia odds ratio (OR) 3.2 (95% CI; 2.52–4.17), fever OR 2.98 (95% CI; 2.47–3.58), dyspnea OR 2.9 (95% CI; 2.39–3.51]) and cough OR 2.73 (95% CI: 2.27–3.28). Conclusion The combination of ≥2 symptoms / signs (fever, cough, anosmia, dyspnea and oxygen saturation < 93%, and headache) results in a highly sensitivity model for a quick and accurate diagnosis of COVID-19, and should be used in the absence of ancillary diagnostic studies. Symptomatology, alone and in combination, may be an appropriate strategy to use in the emergency department to guide the behaviors to respond to the disease. Trial registration Institutional registration R-2020-3601-145, Federal Commission for the Protection against Sanitary Risks 17 CI-09-015-034, National Bioethics Commission: 09 CEI-023-2017082.

Clinical Conundrums When Integrating the QbTest into a Standard ADHD Assessment of Children and Young People

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Carsten Vogt
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Practice ◽  
Clinical Decision Making ◽  
Ecological Validity ◽  
Neuropsychological Test ◽  
Real Life ◽  
Clinical Decision ◽  
Hyperactivity Disorder ◽  
Standard Clinical Practice ◽  
Novel Method ◽  
The Impact

AbstractThe uptake of the QbTest in clinical practice is increasing and has recently been supported by research evidence proposing its effectiveness in relation to clinical decision-making. However, the exact underlying process leading to this clinical benefit is currently not well established and requires further clarification. For the clinician, certain challenges arise when adding the QbTest as a novel method to standard clinical practice, such as having the skills required to interpret neuropsychological test information and assess for diagnostically relevant neurocognitive domains that are related to attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), or how neurocognitive domains express themselves within the behavioral classifications of ADHD and how the quantitative measurement of activity in a laboratory setting compares with real-life (ecological validity) situations as well as the impact of comorbidity on test results. This article aims to address these clinical conundrums in aid of developing a consistent approach and future guidelines in clinical practice.

Between a logic of disruption and a logic of continuation: Negotiating the legitimacy of algorithms used in automated clinical decision-making

2021 ◽  
pp. 136345932199674
Author(s):  
Rikke Torenholt ◽  
Henriette Langstrup
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Clinical Practice ◽  
Patient Reported Outcomes ◽  
Patient Involvement ◽  
Clinical Decision Making ◽  
Diagnostic Procedures ◽  
Clinical Decision ◽  
Patient Reported ◽  
Pro Tools

In both popular and academic discussions of the use of algorithms in clinical practice, narratives often draw on the decisive potentialities of algorithms and come with the belief that algorithms will substantially transform healthcare. We suggest that this approach is associated with a logic of disruption. However, we argue that in clinical practice alongside this logic, another and less recognised logic exists, namely that of continuation: here the use of algorithms constitutes part of an established practice. Applying these logics as our analytical framing, we set out to explore how algorithms for clinical decision-making are enacted by political stakeholders, healthcare professionals, and patients, and in doing so, study how the legitimacy of delegating to an algorithm is negotiated and obtained. Empirically we draw on ethnographic fieldwork carried out in relation to attempts in Denmark to develop and implement Patient Reported Outcomes (PRO) tools – involving algorithmic sorting – in clinical practice. We follow the work within two disease areas: heart rehabilitation and breast cancer follow-up care. We show how at the political level, algorithms constitute tools for disrupting inefficient work and unsystematic patient involvement, whereas closer to the clinical practice, algorithms constitute a continuation of standardised and evidence-based diagnostic procedures and a continuation of the physicians’ expertise and authority. We argue that the co-existence of the two logics have implications as both provide a push towards the use of algorithms and how a logic of continuation may divert attention away from new issues introduced with automated digital decision-support systems.

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.

Abstract P111: Comparative Efficacy Of Bisoprolol Compared To Other Selective Beta-1 Blockers In Patients With Hypertension - A Systematic Review And Meta-analysis Of Observational Studies

Hypertension ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 78 (Suppl_1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Uday M Jadhav ◽  
Tiny Nair ◽  
SANDEEP BANSAL ◽  
Saumitra Ray
Keyword(s):  
Lipid Profile ◽  
Observational Studies ◽  
Clinical Decision Making ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Hdl Cholesterol ◽  
Clinical Decision ◽  
Cochrane Library ◽  
Favourable Effect ◽  
Pooled Data ◽  
Cholesterol Levels

Introduction: Selective beta-1 blockers (s-BBs) are used in the management of hypertension (HT) in specific subsets. Studies comparing the potency of blood pressure (BP) lowering with different s-BBs are sparse. The objective of this meta-analysis was to evaluate the efficacy of bisoprolol compared to other s-BBs (Atenolol, Betaxolol, Esmolol, Acebutolol, Metoprolol, Nebivolol) in HT patients by examining their effect on BP, heart rate (HR) and metabolic derangements, by examining the evidences reported in observational studies. Methods: Electronic databases like PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, Clinicaltrials.gov, Surveillance, Epidemiology and End Results Program and 12 PV databases were systematically searched from inception to October 2019. Observational studies that compared bisoprolol with other s-BBs in patients with HT were evaluated in accordance with the PRISMA guidelines. Pooled data were calculated using random-effects model for meta-analysis in terms of mean difference (MD) and 95% confidence interval (95% CI) for each outcome. Outcomes of interest were BP, HR and lipid profile. Results: Four observational studies which compared bisoprolol with other s-BBs (nebivolol and atenolol) were included in this meta-analysis. Significant reduction was observed in office diastolic BP [MD: -1.70; 95% CI: -2.68,-0.72; P <0.01] among arterial HT patients treated with bisoprolol for 26 weeks (w) compared to those treated with other s-BBs. HT patients treated with bisoprolol for 26 w showed significant reduction in HR [MD: -2.20; 95% CI: -3.57,-0.65; P <0.01] and office HR [MD: -2.55; 95% CI: -3.57,-1.53; P <0.01] than other s-BBs. HDL cholesterol levels increased significantly in essential HT patients treated with bisoprolol at 26 w [MD: 7.17; 95% CI: 1.90,12.45; P <0.01], 78 w [MD: 11.70; 95% CI: 4.49,18.91; P <0.01] and 104 w [MD: 10.20, 95% CI: 4.49,18.91; P <0.01] compared to other s-BBs. Conclusion: Our results suggests that bisoprolol is superior to other s-BBs in reducing BP and HR. Bisoprolol also had a favourable effect on lipid profile shown by increase in HDL cholesterol. This meta-analysis emphasizes the efficacy of bisoprolol over other s-BBs, which aids clinical decision making in treatment of patients with HT.

Standardized Synoptic Cancer Pathology Reports — So What and Who Cares?: A Population-Based Satisfaction Survey of 970 Pathologists, Surgeons, and Oncologists

2013 ◽  
Vol 137 (11) ◽  
pp. 1599-1602 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sara Lankshear ◽  
John Srigley ◽  
Thomas McGowan ◽  
Marta Yurcan ◽  
Carol Sawka
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Clinical Decision Making ◽  
Clinical Decision ◽  
Physician Satisfaction ◽  
Cross Sectional ◽  
Cancer Pathology ◽  
Report Turnaround Time ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Pathology Reporting ◽  
The Impact

Context.—Cancer Care Ontario implemented synoptic pathology reporting across Ontario, impacting the practice of pathologists, surgeons, and medical and radiation oncologists. The benefits of standardized synoptic pathology reporting include enhanced completeness and improved consistency in comparison with narrative reports, with reported challenges including increased workload and report turnaround time. Objective.—To determine the impact of synoptic pathology reporting on physician satisfaction specific to practice and process. Design.—A descriptive, cross-sectional design was utilized involving 970 clinicians across 27 hospitals. An 11-item survey was developed to obtain information regarding timeliness, completeness, clarity, and usability. Open-ended questions were also employed to obtain qualitative comments. Results.—A 51% response rate was obtained, with descriptive statistics reporting that physicians perceive synoptic reports as significantly better than narrative reports. Correlation analysis revealed a moderately strong, positive relationship between respondents' perceptions of overall satisfaction with the level of information provided and perceptions of completeness for clinical decision making (r = 0.750, P &lt; .001) and ease of finding information for clinical decision making (r = 0.663, P &lt; .001). Dependent t tests showed a statistically significant difference in the satisfaction scores of pathologists and oncologists (t169 = 3.044, P = .003). Qualitative comments revealed technology-related issues as the most frequently cited factor impacting timeliness of report completion. Conclusion.—This study provides evidence of strong physician satisfaction with synoptic cancer pathology reporting as a clinical decision support tool in the diagnosis, prognosis, and treatment of cancer patients.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document