Decision making in childhood asthma exacerbation – a clinical judgement analysis

Background: Clinical decisions which impact directly on patient safety and quality of care are made during acute asthma attacks by individual doctors on the basis of their knowledge and experience. These include administration of systemic corticosteroids (CS), oral antibiotics, and admission to hospital. Clinical judgement analysis provides a methodology for comparing decisions between practitioners with different training and experience, and improving decision making. Methods: Stepwise linear regression was used to select clinical cues based on visual analogue scale assessments of the propensity of 62 clinicians to prescribe a short course of oral CS (decision 1), a course of antibiotics (decision 2), and/or admit to hospital (decision 3) for 60 â??paperâ?? patients. Results:When compared by specialty, paediatriciansâ?? models for decision 1 were more likely to include as a cue level of alertness (54% v. 16%); for decision 2 presence of crepitations (49% v. 16%), and less likely to include inhaled CS (8% v. 40%), respiratory rate (0% v. 24%), and air entry (70% v. 100%). When compared to other grades, the models derived for decision 3 by consultants/general practitioners were more likely to include wheeze severity as a cue (39% v. 6%). Conclusions: Clinicians differed in their use of individual cues and the number included in their models. Patient safety and quality of care will benefit from clarification of decision making strategies as general learning points during medical training, in the development of guidelines and care pathways, and by clinicians developing self-awareness of their own preferences.

Fast and frugal models of clinical judgement in novice and expert physicians

Our objective was to study whether “compensatory” models provide better descriptions of clinical judgment than fast and frugal models, according to expertise and experience. Fifty practitioners appraised 60 vignettes describing a child with an exacerbation of asthma and rated their propensities to admit the child. Linear logistic (LL) models of their judgments were compared with a matching heuristic (MH) model that searched available cues in order of importance for a critical value indicating an admission decision. There was a small difference between the 2 models in the proportion of patients allocated correctly (admit or not-admit decisions), 91.2% and 87.8%, respectively. The proportion allocated correctly by the LL model was lower for consultants than juniors, whereas the MH model performed equally well for both. In this vignette study, neither model provided any better description of judgments made by consultants or by pediatricians compared to other grades and specialties.

'Murder or Mercy?' an innovative module helping UK medical students to articulate their own ethical standpoints regarding end-of-life decisions

Objectives This student selected component (SSC) was designed to equip United Kingdom (UK) medical students to respond ethically and with sensitivity to requests they might receive as qualified doctors in regard to euthanasia and assisted dying. The aim was to expose students to relevant opinions and experiences and to provide opportunities to explore and justify their own views and rehearse ethical decision making in a safe learning environment. Method The module is delivered by specialists from a number of disciplines including law, theology, medicine and nursing, each providing students with a working knowledge allowing them to actively discuss cases, articulate their own views and practise ethical reasoning through group and individual study. Visits to local intensive care units, palliative care wards and hospices are integrated effectively with theory. Student assessment comprises a dissertation, student-led debate and reflective commentary. Module impact was evaluated by analysis of student coursework and a questionnaire. Results Students found the content stimulating and relevant to their future career and agreed that the module was well-structured and that learning outcomes were achieved. They greatly appreciated the clinical context provided by the visits and opportunities to apply ethical reasoning to real cases and to debate ethical issues with peers. Students reported an increased discernment of the ethical and legal position and practical considerations and a greater awareness of the range of professional and lay viewpoints held. Student perceptions were confirmed on analysis of their submitted coursework. Many participants were less strongly in favour of euthanasia and assisted dying on module completion than at the outset but all felt better equipped to justify their own viewpoint and to respond appropriately to patient requests. Conclusions The multi-disciplinary nature of this course is helpful in preparing students to deal effectively and sensitively with ethical dilemmas they will encounter in their medical career. Use of an integrated, learner-centred approach equips students to actively engage with their peers in discussion of such issues and to formulate and defend their own position.

Children’s views on unlicensed/off-label paediatric prescribing and paediatric clinical trials.

Objectives: To explore the views and perspectives of children on the unlicensed/off-label use of medicines in children and on the participation of children in clinical trials. Methods: Focus-group discussions, involving school children, were carried out in a range of primary and secondary schools in Northern Ireland. A purposeful sample was chosen to facilitate representation of various socioeconomic groupings. Results: A total of 123 pupils, aged from 10 to 16 years, from six schools, participated in 16 focus groups. In general, pupils viewed the unlicensed/off-label use of medicines in children as unsafe and unethical and felt it is necessary to test medicines in children to improve the availability of licensed products. The majority felt that older children should be told, and that parents should be told, about the unlicensed/off-label use of medicines in children, yet they recognised some implications of this, such as potential medication non-adherence. Conclusions: This is the first study to explore the views of healthy children on unlicensed medicine use in children. Children were able to recognise potential risks associated with the unlicensed use of medicines and felt it is necessary to test and license more medicines in children. Practice implications Health care professionals should consider the views of children in decisions that affect their health.

Towards optimal clinical and epidemiological registration of haematological malignancies: Guidelines for recording progressions, transformations and multiple diagnoses

Haematological malignancies (HM) represent over 6% of the total cancer incidence in Europe and affect all ages, ranging between 45% of all cancers in children and 7% in the elderly. Thirty per cent of childhood cancer deaths are due to HM, 8% in the elderly. Their registration presents specific challenges, mainly because HM may transform or progress in the course of the disease into other types of HM. In the context of cancer registration decisions have to be made about classifying subsequent notifications on the same patient as the same tumour (progression), a transformation or a new tumour registration. Allocation of incidence date and method of diagnosis must also be standardised. We developed European Network of Cancer Registries (ENCR) recommendations providing specific advice for cancer registries to use haematology and molecular laboratories as data sources, conserve the original date of incidence in case of change of diagnosis, make provision for recording both the original as well as transformed tumour and to apply precise rules for recording and counting multiple diagnoses. A reference table advising on codes which reflect a potential transformation or a new tumour is included. This work will help to improve comparability of data produced by population-based cancer registries, which are indispensable for aetiological research, health care planning and clinical research, an increasing important area with the application of targeted therapies.

Clinical trial designs for rare diseases: Studies developed and discussed by the International Rare Cancers Initiative

BACKGROUND: The past three decades have seen rapid improvements in the diagnosis and treatment of most cancers and the most important contributor has been research. Progress in rare cancers has been slower, not least because of the challenges of undertaking research.

SETTINGS: The International Rare Cancers Initiative (IRCI) is a partnership which aims to stimulate and facilitate the development of international clinical trials for patients with rare cancers. It is focused on interventional--usually randomized--clinical trials with the clear goal of improving outcomes for patients. The key challenges are organisational and methodological. A multi-disciplinary workshop to review the methods used in ICRI portfolio trials was held in Amsterdam in September 2013. Other as-yet unrealised methods were also discussed.

RESULTS: The IRCI trials are each presented to exemplify possible approaches to designing credible trials in rare cancers. Researchers may consider these for use in future trials and understand the choices made for each design.

INTERPRETATION: Trials can be designed using a wide array of possibilities. There is no 'one size fits all' solution. In order to make progress in the rare diseases, decisions to change practice will have to be based on less direct evidence from clinical trials than in more common diseases.

IMPLEMENTING BACK PAIN TREATMENT PATHWAYS IN CLINICAL PRACTICE: QUALITATATIVE ANALYSIS OF STAKEHOLDER PERCEPTIONS

Background
Evidence-based practice advocates utilising best current research evidence, while reflecting patient preference and clinical expertise in decision making. Successfully incorporating this evidence into practice is a complex process. Based on recommendations of existing guidelines and systematic evidence reviews conducted using the GRADE approach, treatment pathways for common spinal pain disorders were developed.

Aims
The aim of this study was to identify important potential facilitators to the integration of these pathways into routine clinical practice.

Methods
A 22 person stakeholder group consisting of patient representatives, clinicians, researchers and members of relevant clinical interest groups took part in a series of moderated focus groups, followed up with individual, semi-structured interviews. Data were analysed using content analysis.

Results
Participants identified a number of issues which were categorized into broad themes. Common facilitators to implementation included continual education and synthesis of research evidence which is reflective of everyday practice; as well as the use of clear, unambiguous messages in recommendations. Meeting additional training needs in new or extended areas of practice was also recognized as an important factor. Different stakeholders identified specific areas which could be associated with successful uptake. Patients frequently defined early involvement in a shared decision making process as important. Clinicians identified case based examples and information on important prognostic indicators as useful tools to aiding decisions.

Conclusion
A number of potential implementation strategies were identified. Further work will examine the impact of these and other important factors on the integration of evidence-based treatment recommendations into clinical practice.

The thinking doctor: clinical decision making in contemporary medicine

Diagnostic errors are responsible for a significant number of adverse events. Logical reasoning and good decision-making skills are key factors in reducing such errors, but little emphasis has traditionally been placed on how these thought processes occur, and how errors could be minimised. In this article, we explore key cognitive ideas that underpin clinical decision making and suggest that by employing some simple strategies, physicians might be better able to understand how they make decisions and how the process might be optimised.

The clinical significance of cathepsin S expression in human astrocytomas

Early local invasion by astrocytoma. cells results in tumor recurrence even after apparent total surgical resection, leading to the poor prognosis associated with malignant astrocytomas. Proteolytic enzymes have been implicated in facilitating tumor cell invasion and the current study was designed to characterize the expression of the cysteine proteinase cathepsin S (CatS) in astrocytomas and examine its potential role in invasion. Immunohistochemical analysis of biopsies demonstrated that CatS was expressed in astrocytoma cells but absent from normal astrocytes, oligodendrocytes, neurones and endothelial cells. Microglial cells and macrophages were also positive. Assays of specific activity in 59 astrocytoma biopsies confirmed CatS expression and in addition demonstrated that the highest levels of activity were expressed in grade IV tumors. CatS activity was also present in astrocytoma cells in vitro and the extracellular levels of activity were highest in cultures derived from grade IV tumors. In vitro invasion assays were carried out using the U251MG cell line and the invasion rate was reduced by up to 61% in the presence of the selective CatS inhibitor 4-Morpholineurea-LeuHomoPhe-vinylsulphone. We conclude that CatS expression is up-regulated in astrocytoma. cells and provide evidence for a potential role for CatS in invasion.