Investigator/IRB-led community communication in genetic research: A descriptive feasibility pilot study

This pilot study, conducted in the Houston, TX, area, established a structured dialogue among a university Institutional Review Board, its researchers, and its local community members (i.e. pool of potential research participants) for the purpose of further educating all three parties about genetic research and community concerns related to such research. An IRB-designed educational presentation aimed at assisting potential subjects in making an informed decision to participate in genetic research was provided to four community groups (n=54); this presentation also included a current example of genetic research being conducted in the community as explained by the researcher, and a question-and-answer session designed to assist the IRB and the researcher in understanding the community's concerns about genetic research. Comparisons of pre- and post- presentation community questionnaires indicate that the joint presentation was effective in increasing community knowledge about genetic research, most notably related to the risks and benefits of this research to the individual, as well as the understanding that protections are in place for research participants. While researchers are optimistic about the idea of a collaborative effort with the IRB and the community, the feasibility of such a program and the benefit to the participating researchers remain unclear; additional research is necessary to establish the most effective method of communication for all groups involved, as well as to obtain statistically significant results with regard to race/ethnicity, gender, and education levels of community participants. ^

Doctor-patient communication in the medical interaction: Context, implications, and practice

Effective communication; whether from an interpersonal, mass media, or global perspective, is a critical component in public health. It is an essential conduit in increasing public awareness of available health resources, potential health hazards and related disease prevention strategies, and in delivering better health care. Within this context, available literature asserts doctor-patient communication as central to healthcare delivery. It has been shown to affect patient health outcomes, satisfaction with care, adherence to treatment recommendations, and even understanding of medical information. While research supports the essential imperative of interventions aimed at teaching doctors and patients the communication skills necessary for a successful and meaningful medical interaction, most interventions to date, focus on teaching these communication skills to doctors and seem to rely, largely, on mass media for providing patients with the information needed to increase communication efficacy. This study sought to fill a significant gap in the doctor-patient communication literature by reviewing the context of the doctor-patient exchange in the medical interaction, the implications of this exchange in resulting care of the patient, and the potential improvements to practice through interventions aimed at improving the communication exchange. Closing with an evaluation of a patient-centered communication intervention, the “How to Talk to Your Doctor” (HTTTYD) program that combines previously identified optimal strategies for improving communication between doctors and patients, this study examined the patients’ perspective of their potential as better communicators in the medical interaction. ^ Specific Aims, Hypotheses or Questions (Aim I) To examine the context of health communication within a public health framework and its relation to health care delivery. (Aim II) To review doctor-patient communication as a central focus within health care delivery and the resulting implications to patient care. (Aim III) To assess the utility of interventions to improve doctor-patient communication. Specifically, to evaluate the effectiveness of a patient-centered community education intervention, the “How to Talk to Your Doctor” (HTTTYD) program, aimed at improving patient communication efficacy.^

Improving follow-up of abnormal cancer screens using electronic health records: trust but verify test result communication.

BACKGROUND: Early detection of colorectal cancer through timely follow-up of positive Fecal Occult Blood Tests (FOBTs) remains a challenge. In our previous work, we found 40% of positive FOBT results eligible for colonoscopy had no documented response by a treating clinician at two weeks despite procedures for electronic result notification. We determined if technical and/or workflow-related aspects of automated communication in the electronic health record could lead to the lack of response. METHODS: Using both qualitative and quantitative methods, we evaluated positive FOBT communication in the electronic health record of a large, urban facility between May 2008 and March 2009. We identified the source of test result communication breakdown, and developed an intervention to fix the problem. Explicit medical record reviews measured timely follow-up (defined as response within 30 days of positive FOBT) pre- and post-intervention. RESULTS: Data from 11 interviews and tracking information from 490 FOBT alerts revealed that the software intended to alert primary care practitioners (PCPs) of positive FOBT results was not configured correctly and over a third of positive FOBTs were not transmitted to PCPs. Upon correction of the technical problem, lack of timely follow-up decreased immediately from 29.9% to 5.4% (p<0.01) and was sustained at month 4 following the intervention. CONCLUSION: Electronic communication of positive FOBT results should be monitored to avoid limiting colorectal cancer screening benefits. Robust quality assurance and oversight systems are needed to achieve this. Our methods may be useful for others seeking to improve follow-up of FOBTs in their systems.

Baylor History of Medicine Society Schedule 2007-2008

"Medicine: Perspectives in History and Art" (Robert E. Greenspan) Eight Practical Lessons from Osler That Will Better Your Life (Bryan Boutwell) History of the American Mental Hospital: From networking to not working & Back (Ed Fann) Ambiguities and Amputations: Methods, mishaps, and the surgical quest to cure breast cancer (Student Essay Contest Winner) (Matt Luedke) An Automated, Algorithmic, Retrospective Analysis of the Growing Influence of Statistics in Medicine (Student Essay Contest Winner) (Ryan Rochat) What’s Special about William Osler? (Charles S. Bryan) The Virtuous Physician: Lessons from Medical Biography (Charles S. Bryan) Legacy: 50 Years of Loving Care – The History of Texas Children’s Hospital, 1954-2004 (Betsy Parish) The Education of a University President: Edgar Odell Lovett of Rice University (John B. Boles) Artists and Illness: The Effect of Illness on an Artist’s Work (David Bybee)

Baylor History of Medicine Society Schedule 2006-2007

After Western Medicine: From Hippocrates to Xavier Bichat (H. Tristram Engelhardt, Jr.) Who Goes First? The Story of Self-Experimentation in Medicine (David Sears, M.D.) Exercise and Health: From Pre-History to the Present (Carlos Valbonna, M.D.) Supernaturalism to Rationalism and the Man Between (Student Essay Contest Winners) (Don Lassus) The Fog of War’s Silver Lining: The Lasting Impact of Military Medicine (Student Essay Contest Winners) (Ajit Vyas) From Drummers to Detail Men: Medicine and the pharmaceutical industry in the United States, 1900-1960 (Howard Brody) Eyewash and Thunderbolts: The Medical Adventures of Lewis and Clark (Herbert M. Swick) Angry Arrows and Satin Dresses: Tales from the Annals of Plague (Herbert M. Swick) The Greatest Books in the History of Neurology (Robert Gordon) Franklin Delano Roosevelt’s Paralytic Illness: What was the cause? (Armond S. Goldman)

UNDERSTANDING INTERRUPTIONS IN HEALTHCARE: DEVELOPING A MODEL

Developing a Model Interruption is a known human factor that contributes to errors and catastrophic events in healthcare as well as other high-risk industries. The landmark Institute of Medicine (IOM) report, To Err is Human, brought attention to the significance of preventable errors in medicine and suggested that interruptions could be a contributing factor. Previous studies of interruptions in healthcare did not offer a conceptual model by which to study interruptions. As a result of the serious consequences of interruptions investigated in other high-risk industries, there is a need to develop a model to describe, understand, explain, and predict interruptions and their consequences in healthcare. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to develop a model grounded in the literature and to use the model to describe and explain interruptions in healthcare. Specifically, this model would be used to describe and explain interruptions occurring in a Level One Trauma Center. A trauma center was chosen because this environment is characterized as intense, unpredictable, and interrupt-driven. The first step in developing the model began with a review of the literature which revealed that the concept interruption did not have a consistent definition in either the healthcare or non-healthcare literature. Walker and Avant’s method of concept analysis was used to clarify and define the concept. The analysis led to the identification of five defining attributes which include (1) a human experience, (2) an intrusion of a secondary, unplanned, and unexpected task, (3) discontinuity, (4) externally or internally initiated, and (5) situated within a context. However, before an interruption could commence, five conditions known as antecedents must occur. For an interruption to take place (1) an intent to interrupt is formed by the initiator, (2) a physical signal must pass a threshold test of detection by the recipient, (3) the sensory system of the recipient is stimulated to respond to the initiator, (4) an interruption task is presented to recipient, and (5) the interruption task is either accepted or rejected by v the recipient. An interruption was determined to be quantifiable by (1) the frequency of occurrence of an interruption, (2) the number of times the primary task has been suspended to perform an interrupting task, (3) the length of time the primary task has been suspended, and (4) the frequency of returning to the primary task or not returning to the primary task. As a result of the concept analysis, a definition of an interruption was derived from the literature. An interruption is defined as a break in the performance of a human activity initiated internal or external to the recipient and occurring within the context of a setting or location. This break results in the suspension of the initial task by initiating the performance of an unplanned task with the assumption that the initial task will be resumed. The definition is inclusive of all the defining attributes of an interruption. This is a standard definition that can be used by the healthcare industry. From the definition, a visual model of an interruption was developed. The model was used to describe and explain the interruptions recorded for an instrumental case study of physicians and registered nurses (RNs) working in a Level One Trauma Center. Five physicians were observed for a total of 29 hours, 31 minutes. Eight registered nurses were observed for a total of 40 hours 9 minutes. Observations were made on either the 0700–1500 or the 1500-2300 shift using the shadowing technique. Observations were recorded in the field note format. The field notes were analyzed by a hybrid method of categorizing activities and interruptions. The method was developed by using both a deductive a priori classification framework and by the inductive process utilizing line-byline coding and constant comparison as stated in Grounded Theory. The following categories were identified as relative to this study: Intended Recipient - the person to be interrupted Unintended Recipient - not the intended recipient of an interruption; i.e., receiving a phone call that was incorrectly dialed Indirect Recipient – the incidental recipient of an interruption; i.e., talking with another, thereby suspending the original activity Recipient Blocked – the intended recipient does not accept the interruption Recipient Delayed – the intended recipient postpones an interruption Self-interruption – a person, independent of another person, suspends one activity to perform another; i.e., while walking, stops abruptly and talks to another person Distraction – briefly disengaging from a task Organizational Design – the physical layout of the workspace that causes a disruption in workflow Artifacts Not Available – supplies and equipment that are not available in the workspace causing a disruption in workflow Initiator – a person who initiates an interruption Interruption by Organizational Design and Artifacts Not Available were identified as two new categories of interruption. These categories had not previously been cited in the literature. Analysis of the observations indicated that physicians were found to perform slightly fewer activities per hour when compared to RNs. This variance may be attributed to differing roles and responsibilities. Physicians were found to have more activities interrupted when compared to RNs. However, RNs experienced more interruptions per hour. Other people were determined to be the most commonly used medium through which to deliver an interruption. Additional mediums used to deliver an interruption vii included the telephone, pager, and one’s self. Both physicians and RNs were observed to resume an original interrupted activity more often than not. In most interruptions, both physicians and RNs performed only one or two interrupting activities before returning to the original interrupted activity. In conclusion the model was found to explain all interruptions observed during the study. However, the model will require an even more comprehensive study in order to establish its predictive value.