The 2016 Academic Emergency Medicine Consensus Conference, "Shared Decision Making in the Emergency Department: Development of a Policy-relevant Patient-centered Research Agenda" Diagnostic Testing Breakout Session Report

Patient values and preferences in pulmonary embolism testing in the emergency department

INTRODUCTION

Patient-centered care is concordant with patient values and preferences. There is a lack of research on patient values and preferences for pulmonary embolism (PE) testing in the emergency department (ED), and a poor physician understanding of patient-specific goals. Our aim was to map patient-specific values, preferences, and expectations regarding PE testing in the ED.

METHOD

This qualitative study used constructivist grounded theory to identify patient values and expectations around PE testing in the ED. We conducted semi-structured interviews with ED patients who were being tested for PE in two EDs. Patients who were waiting for PE imaging or D-dimer results were approached and consented to take part in a 30-minute audio-recorded interview. Each interview was transcribed verbatim and analyzed using constant comparative coding. The interview script was modified to maximize information on emerging themes. Major themes and subthemes were derived, each representing an opportunity, barrier, or value to address with patient-centered PE testing.

RESULTS

From 30 patient interviews, we mapped four major themes: patient satisfaction comes from addressing the patient's primary concern (for example, their pain); patients expect individualized care; patients prefer imaging over clinical examination for PE testing; and patients expect 100% confidence from their emergency physician when given a diagnosis. Subthemes included symptomatic relief, finding a diagnosis, receiving tests, rapid progression through their care, perception of highly accurate CT scans, willingness to seek a second opinion, direct physician communication, and expectation of case-specific testing with cognitive reassurance.

CONCLUSION

Addressing each of these four themes by realigning ED processes could provide patient-centered PE testing.

Barriers and facilitators to shared decision-making in hospitals from policy to practice: a systematic review

Background

Involving patients in their healthcare using shared decision-making (SDM) is promoted through policy and research, yet its implementation in routine practice remains slow. Research into SDM has stemmed from primary and secondary care contexts, and research into the implementation of SDM in tertiary care settings has not been systematically reviewed. Furthermore, perspectives on SDM beyond those of patients and their treating clinicians may add insights into the implementation of SDM. This systematic review aimed to review literature exploring barriers and facilitators to implementing SDM in hospital settings from multiple stakeholder perspectives.

Methods

The search strategy focused on peer-reviewed qualitative studies with the primary aim of identifying barriers and facilitators to implementing SDM in hospital (tertiary care) settings. Studies from the perspective of patients, clinicians, health service administrators, and decision makers, government policy makers, and other stakeholders (for example researchers) were eligible for inclusion. Reported qualitative results were mapped to the Theoretical Domains Framework (TDF) to identify behavioural barriers and facilitators to SDM.

Results

Titles and abstracts of 8724 articles were screened and 520 were reviewed in full text. Fourteen articles met inclusion criteria. Most studies (n = 12) were conducted in the last four years; only four reported perspectives in addition to the patient-clinician dyad. In mapping results to the TDF, the dominant themes were Environmental Context and Resources, Social/Professional Role and Identity, Knowledge and Skills, and Beliefs about Capabilities. A wide range of barriers and facilitators across individual, organisational, and system levels were reported. Barriers specific to the hospital setting included noisy and busy ward environments and a lack of private spaces in which to conduct SDM conversations.

Conclusions

SDM implementation research in hospital settings appears to be a young field. Future research should build on studies examining perspectives beyond the clinician-patient dyad and further consider the role of organisational- and system-level factors. Organisations wishing to implement SDM in hospital settings should also consider factors specific to tertiary care settings in addition to addressing their organisational and individual SDM needs.

Trial Registration

The protocol for the review is registered on the Open Science Framework and can be found at https://osf.io/da645/, DOI 10.17605/OSF.IO/DA645.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s13012-021-01142-y.

The Yield of Computed Tomography of the Head Among Patients Presenting With Syncope: A Systematic Review

BACKGROUND

Overuse of head computed tomography (CT) for syncope has been reported. However, there is no literature synthesis on this overuse. We undertook a systematic review to determine the use and yield of head CT and risk factors for serious intracranial conditions among syncope patients.

METHODS

We searched Embase, Medline, and Cochrane databases from inception until June 2017. Studies including adult syncope patients with part or all of patients undergoing CT head were included. We excluded case reports, reviews, letters, and pediatric studies. Two independent reviewers screened the articles and collected data on CT head use, diagnostic yield (proportion with acute hemorrhage, tumors or infarct), and risk of bias. We report pooled percentages, I² , and Cochran's Q-test.

RESULTS

Seventeen articles with 3,361 syncope patients were included. In eight ED studies (n = 1,669), 54.4% (95% confidence interval [CI] = 34.9%-73.2%) received head CT with a 3.8% (95% CI = 2.6%-5.1%) diagnostic yield and considerable heterogeneity. In six in-hospital studies (n = 1,289), 44.8% (95% CI = 26.4%-64.1%) received head CT with a 1.2% (95% CI = 0.5%-2.2%) yield and no heterogeneity. In two articles, all patients had CT (yield 2.3%) and the third enrolled patients ≥ 65 years old (yield 7.7%). Abnormal neurologic findings, age ≥ 65 years, trauma, warfarin use, and seizure/stroke history were identified as risk factors. The quality of all articles referenced was strong.

CONCLUSION

More than half of patients with syncope underwent CT head with a diagnostic yield of 1.1% to 3.8%. A future large prospective study is needed to develop a robust risk tool.

Awareness and Knowledge of Ionizing Radiation Risks Between Prescribed and Self-Presenting Patients for Common Diagnostic Radiological Procedures in Bahrain

OBJECTIVES

Between 20 to 50% of medical imaging examinations are considered inappropriate, and unnecessary ionizing radiation exposures may lead to cancer. We hypothesized that Bahraini patients who self-present for ionizing radiation procedures are not aware of, and lack the requisite knowledge of, the inherent risks associated with their use than patients prescribed for diagnostic purposes. We attempted to examine and compare the awareness and knowledge of the associated risks of ionizing radiation in common diagnostic radiological procedures between prescribed and self-presenting patients in Bahrain.

METHODS

A cross-sectional survey was carried out among 416 Bahraini patients attending the radiology department of the Salmaniya Medical Complex (SMC), a secondary health care center, who had been referred by primary care physicians or self-presented to the center. Data was collected via face-to-face interviews.

RESULTS

Prescribed patients (n = 358) had a better awareness than self-presenting (n = 58) patients on all ionizing radiation awareness statements (i.e., risks, permissible levels, willingness to undergo the procedure, and preference for a clinical examination over a radiological procedure) (p < 0.050). Of the 10 knowledge statements, the prescribed patients agreed on four statements than the self-presenting patients: preventing or minimizing exposure improves health, people can prevent or minimize exposure, a lifelong health concern, and radiological procedures offer best diagnoses compared to medical tests or procedures (p <  0.050).

CONCLUSIONS

Bahraini patients who reported to SMC lack awareness and knowledge on ionizing radiation. The proportion of appropriate responses to awareness and knowledge questions were paltry for self-presenting patients and deficient for the prescribed patients in the knowledge segment alone.