Patient’s experience with the Arabin cervical pessary during pregnancy: A questionnaire survey

Introduction The cervical pessary is used in women with precocious cervical ripening to prevent preterm birth. Up to now however, there have been no systematic studies on compliance and tolerance, which vary among different study cohorts. Material and methods A questionnaire was administered to 166 women treated with the Arabin cervical pessary in one center. Data were analysed about the patient’s experience before insertion (adequacy of information received), during treatment (follow-up, impact on daily life, perceived discomfort, side effects) and at the time of removal (pain, if the patient’s expectations had been met regarding the treatment). Results Information received before the insertion of the Arabin cervical pessary was considered adequate in 163/166 (98.2%) women. An increase in vaginal discharge was experienced by 70/166 (42.2%) women. Discomfort or other side effects were reported in 13.8% and 16.3% of cases, respectively. Overall, 77% of women reported an improved quality of life and 94% considered the follow-up during pregnancy adequate. Removal was moderately painful for 58/166 (35%) of women. Patient’s expectations regarding the treatment were exceeded in the majority of cases (75.3%). In a final step, we compared our results to previous studies regarding the use of the pessary in singleton and twin pregnancies. Conclusion Although some trials report high rates of non-compliant patients, this could not be confirmed by our study. In contrast, most women reported having a positive experience and that they were motivated to continue the treatment when they were continuously followed by experienced clinicians.

From a View of the Hospital as a System to a View of the Suffering Patient

Purpose: Hospitals aspire to provide patient-centered care but are far from achieving it. This qualitative mixed methods study explored the capacity of hospital directors to shift from a hospital systemic-view to a suffering patient-view applying the Salutogenic theory.Methods: Following IRB, we conducted in-depth narrative interviews with six directors of the six Israeli academic tertiary public hospitals, focusing on their managerial role. In a second meeting we conducted vignette interviews in which we presented each director with a narrative of a suffering young patient who died at 33 due to medical misconduct, allowing self-introspection. Provisional coding was performed for data analysis to identify categories and themes by the three dimensions of the sense-of-coherence, an anchor of Salutogenics: comprehensibility, manageability, and meaningfulness.Results: While at the system level, directors reported high comprehensibility and manageability in coping with complexity, at the patient level, when confronted with the vignette, directors acknowledged their poor comprehensibility of patients' needs and patient's experience during hospitalizations. They acknowledged their poor capacity to provide patient-centered care. Meaningfulness in the narrative interview focused on the system while meaningfulness in the vignette interview focused on providing patient care.Conclusions: The evident gaps between the system level and the patient level create lack of coherence, hindering the ability to cope with complexity, and are barriers to providing patient-centered care. To improve the delivery of patient-centered care, we suggest ways to consolidate the views, enabling the shift from a systemic-view to a patient-view.

A re-consideration of interpretation. A relational approach

This paper is a discussion paper and it seeks to re-consider the Freudian psychoanalytic concept of interpretation within the relational approach to psychoanalysis. As such, it aims to argue the Freudian approach to interpretation is rejected because it is not relational but involves only the analyst as interpreter of the patient’s experience. Instead, within the relational approach, it is suggested that if interpretation, as a process of making meaning of experiences, is re-considered as the outcome of the intersubjective relationship in which the process of making-meaning is essentially a co-creational process of the patient’s experience of the analyst in the here-and-now, interpretation can potentially be an agent of change. The clinical implication is that interpretation must be the construction of the patient’s meaning of his experience but within the relational context. A clinical verbatim transcript is documented as it illustrates this relational process in interpretation.

Exploring the Patient’s Experience of Receiving Clinical Care Which Incorporates the Use of Mobile Technology at the Bedside

Objective: Research-based insight into patient’s experiences of mobile technology at the bedside in the hospital setting remains limited. This research project aims to explore patient’s experience. Methods: This mixed method pre and post study aimed to explore the patient experience in relation to this and also test whether introducing further bedside technology (beyond the workstation on wheels) had an effect on the patient experience. Questionnaires and interviews were conducted among inpatient samples prior to and one year post introduction of a suite of new bedside technologies. Results: Pre and post patient survey results (pre: n=82; post: n=98) suggested that mixed views and perceptions existed and that some of these were associated with primary demographics such as age. At post-test, attitudes about bedside technology were found to be more positive, and feedback about care quality was found to be unchanged, Baseline patient interview findings (n=15) highlight the social ubiquity of technology as a driver of positive attitude in the digital health context. Conclusion: The addition of new bedside technology is very well received by patients and was not perceived to impact on care quality.

Hemophilia Patient Experience in a Physical Therapy-Guided Health Education Intervention: A Mixed-Method Design

People with hemophilia usually have negative joint consequences due to their illness. Evidence suggests that exercise and therapeutic education bring some benefits. An important factor that affects health interventions was the experience and degree of satisfaction. Thus, it is relevant to analyze qualitative and quantitative data to obtain a complete view of the patient’s experience. As a result, a concurrent nested mixed method with quantitative predominance study design was carried out. Nine people with hemophilia of Hemoaralar with a homogeneous environment participated in this study. The items evaluated were the level of satisfaction through the GCPC-UN-ESU survey and the experience with healthcare interventions through a focus group. A high level of satisfaction was obtained, but some divergences between quantitative and qualitative data were found. Further research about physical therapy and this type of intervention in people with hemophilia should be considered to better address the impact of living with the disease.

Difference in Estimation of Side Effects of Chemotherapy between Physicians and Patients with Early-Stage Breast Cancer: The Use of Patient Reported Outcomes (PROs) in the Evaluation of Toxicity in Everyday Clinical Practice

Knowledge about the patient’s experience and perception of side effects and their impact on daily life is crucial for the adequate planning of interventions to provide the highest attainable levels of quality of life during oncology treatment. We conducted a study on consecutive samples of 69 early breast cancer patients treated with four cycles of neoadjuvant or adjuvant anthracycline-based chemotherapy. Patients completed the questionnaire about side effects experienced after the previous cycle of chemotherapy. The questionnaire was a modified PRO for the evaluation of treatment toxicity consisting of 18 questions related to the very common and common side effects of doxorubicin and cyclophosphamide, valued from 0 to 3 according to the subjective assessment of the patient. During the same cycles of therapy, data were also collected by the physician who completed a questionnaire consisting of the same questions as the questionnaire for patients, on the same scale. Most of the side effects reported by patients were mild to moderate in intensity, while physicians reported side effects much less frequently. The results also indicated a disproportionate reporting, in which physicians reported statistically significantly fewer side effects than patients. This study reported a level of disagreement between patients and physicians in the experience of therapy toxicity. In conclusion, use of PRO in clinical practice can help us avoid physician subjectiveness in the estimation of side effects and determine the group of patients who can benefit from additional and individualized supportive care measures, which could lead to better adherence to therapy and ultimately best outcomes.

In a Split Second

This chapter details the story of a critical illness survivor and highlights aspects of the patient’s experience during an intensive care unit admission. The former patient’s story is provided to add context and perspective while highlighting the psychological and rehabilitative aspects of critical illness.