The study aimed to investigate the acute medical chain consisting of SOS operator, ambulance nurse, emergency nurse and emergency physician with regard to the assessment and prioritization of the victim. The design of this journal study is retrospective with descriptive approach. Data were collected from all ambulance missions carried out in Uppsala county 2009-01-01 between the hours 00:00 to 12:00. Sample period was chosen because the prerequisite for high frequency on the ambulance mission was supposed to be good. In order to be able to systematize the compilation of data a protocol were prepared and used. Applicable data were collected from three databases SOS Alarms, ambulance operations, and the University Hospital in Uppsala. The study was divided into three stages and record documents usefulness was assessed individually based on inclusion criteria's. During the measurement period the SOS operator assessed need of an ambulance at 62 occasions in Uppsala County. Of these 62 ambulance missions there were 18 that could be followed during the whole acute medical chain. The results showed that the participants of the acute medical chain most of the time did the same assessment of the victim main problem/symptom and thus the criterion. Without considering the priority it appeared that the criteria were the same in 83% of all 18 included ambulance missions. SOS operator assessed ambulance mission as a priority one in 39% (7/18), and the ambulance nurse judged that priority one on the way to the hospital was justified in 17% (3/18). Of the 18 victims who were transported by ambulance to the emergency department at the University Hospital in Uppsala 72% (13/18) went home the same day. / Studiens syfte var att undersöka den akutmedicinska vårdkedjan bestående av SOS operatör, ambulanssjuksköterska, akutsjuksköterska och akutläkare med avseende på bedömning och prioritering av drabbad. Designen på denna journalstudie är retrospektiv med deskriptiv ansats. Data insamlades från samtliga ambulansuppdrag som genomfördes i Uppsala län 2009-01-01 mellan klockan 00:00 - 12:00. Urvalsperioden valdes därför att förutsättningen för hög frekvens på ambulansuppdrag förmodades vara goda. För att systematisera sammanställningen av data utarbetades och användes ett protokoll. Tillämpbara uppgifter inhämtades från tre databaser SOS Alarms, ambulansverksamhetens och Akademiska sjukhusets. Studien delades upp i tre steg och journalhandlingarnas användbarhet bedömdes var för sig utifrån inklusionskriterier. Under mätperioden bedömde SOS operatören behov av ambulans vid 62 tillfällen i Uppsala län. Av dessa 62 ambulansuppdrag gick 18 att följa under hela vårdkedjan. Resultatet visade att aktörerna i akutmedicinska vårdkedjan för det mesta gjorde samma bedömning av den drabbades huvudproblem/symtom och därmed kriteriet. Utan hänsyn taget till prioritet så visade det sig att kriterierna övrrensstämde vid 83% av alla 18 inkluderade ambulansuppdrag. SOS operatören bedömde ambulansuppdraget som prioritet ett i 39% (7/18) och ambulanssjuksköterskan bedömde att prioritet ett på väg till sjukhus var motiverat i 17% (3/18). Av de18 drabbade som transporterats med ambulans till akutmottagningen på Akademiska sjukhuset fick 72% (13/18) åka hem samma dag.

Recent changes in legislation and access to information, through sources such as the media, may have influenced peoples' expectations for information about their prescribed medication. As a result, health care professionals may perceive an increased pressure to provide information. A case study approach was employed to examine the sources and scope of information patients draw upon when they are prescribed oral steroids for asthma. The aim was to examine the extent to which patients can be said to exercise an `informed choice' when they take prescribed medication. The role and importance of GPs (general practitioners) in informing the choices patients make was also examined. Both qualitative and quantitative methods were employed. Interviews conducted with both patients and GPs indicated `gaps' in understanding. Although the GP was the preferred source of information, patients reported that the choices they made were based on information from a range of sources. General practitioners justified not providing information to patients so as to `protect' patients from knowledge of side effects. However, there was some awareness of the range of sources of information used by patients. A vignette technique was employed to further investigate GPs' recognition and understanding of the range of sources of information patients' use to inform the choices they make. Approximately half of the GPs who responded to the vignette recognised the influences presented. General practitioners who had been practising for a shorter period of time were significantly more likely to recognise these influences. The conclusions draw on the literature of the sociology of the professions. In spite of the way in which the Government has sought to encourage patients to act as consumers, the state has also continued to endorse GPs right to make decisions concerning the level of information to provide. If GPs do not believe it is in the interests of patients to be provided with information to make choices about their medications then the information available to patients may be limited. This will have an impact on the ease with which patients may make `medically' informed choices about their prescribed medication. Only when the communication between patients and GPs improves, will it be possible for a relationship to develop where patients may be assured of gaining information from their GP at the level they feel is appropriate to enable them to make informed choices about their medication.

This study explores the phenomenon of the informal medical consultation, a communication event in which an individual asks for medical information, advice, or care from an off-duty health professional with whom the individual has no formal patient-provider relationship. Using surveys and interviews, the study describes these consultations from the perspective of the health care professional and the informal patient. The study explores foundational theories that offer explanations for the phenomenon. The theories considered include social support, decision-making, social exchange, perceived partner responsiveness to needs, and uncertainty management. This study suggests health care providers perceive informal medical consultations to be more problematic than do the informal patients who consult them. The problematic nature of informal consultations increases as the type of request moves from purely informational to a request for treatment. Informal patients do not perceive this distinction. The informal patient’s motivation to pursue an informal consultation instead of a formal consult is affected by the relationship with, trust in, and access to the informal consultant. The willingness of the informal consultant to engage in an informal consultation is affected by the relationship with the informal patient, the type of request made, and perception of risk/benefit for both the provider and the patient. The study supports the idea that informal medical consultations are potentially problematic within the current medico-legal-ethical environment. Alternately, these consultations may be viewed as offering positive contributions to the health and well-being of informal patients. The study suggests translational research is needed to guide health professionals in considering requests for informal medical consultations.

Over the past few years, the rate of elective interventions in pregnancy in the United States, including elective inductions of labor and elective cesarean deliveries, has increased dramatically. While scholars attribute some of the increase in elective interventions to the female patients who request elective procedures from obstetricians, some literature contradicts that notion and suggests physicians are actually the primary perpetuators of the growth in elective procedures. Although pregnant women may seek elective interventions because of desired convenience, physicians can also claim the benefit of convenience in scheduling deliveries. In addition, elective procedures provide physicians greater monetary compensation than labor and deliveries which evolve without intervention. The current dissertation investigates the communicative role of obstetricians in women’s delivery decisions through in-depth interviews with obstetricians practicing in the state of Kentucky (N=28). Guided by the framework of Message Convergence, the study assesses how obstetricians manage uncertainty surrounding patient care and make clinical decisions in the midst of either unclear evidence or competing messages. The study also reveals the ways that physicians utilize their medical expertise to engage in decision-making with patients. In addition, specific scenarios of decision-making regarding delivery are discussed, including patients’ requests and physicians’ provisions of requests; patients’ requests and physicians’ refusals of requests; and physicians’ recommendations for treatment and patients’ refusals of recommendations for treatment. Finally, the internal tensions and conflicts experienced by physicians in the decision-making process with patients are also examined.

Sedan oktober 2011 sköter Sjukvårdens Larmcentral, SvLC, utalarmeringen av akuta sjukdomsfall som inkommer vid 112-samtal. Samtidigt infördes ett nytt medicinskt beslutsstöd för de sjuksköterskor som tar emot de akuta samtalen. Då orsaken till buksmärta är komplext och svårt att identifiera hos patienterna valdes just detta tillstånd för granskning. Syfte: Att undersöka om det medicinska beslutsstödet för sjuksköterskorna på SvLC i Uppsala län är en tillförlitlig hjälp i identifieringen av patienter med akuta buksmärtor, samt att undersöka om det fanns ålder-eller könsskillnader. Metod: En empirisk kvantitativ studie med en retrospektiv journalgranskning. Sammanlagt 151 patienter som ringt ambulans på grund av buksmärta och som av larmcentralen prioriterats som livshotande (prioritet 1) eller brådskande (prioritet 2) har granskats. Resultat: SvLC´s initiala bedömningar stämde väl överens med de prehospitala bedömningar sjuksköterskan i ambulans gjorde. Hos prio1-gruppen hade 48 % diagnostiserats buksmärta UNS, det vill säga buksmärta utan närmare specifikation, och hos prio 2-gruppen var det 40 % som fått samma diagnos. I denna undersökning kunde inga allvarliga brister identifieras i det nya medicinska beslutssystemet gällande akuta buksmärtor i Uppsala län, och inga signifikanta ålder-eller könsskillnader kunde hittas. Mer studier skulle behövas för att öka träffsäkerheten gällande resultatet i detta ämne och fler patienter skulle behöva involveras för att ”fånga upp” eventuella brister i detta medicinska beslutssystem. / Since October 2011 Sjukvårdens Larmcentral (SvLC) take care of emergency calls. At the same time new decision support tool for nurses that receive the emergency calls was introduced, andit was of interest to find out if there are flaws in the emergency call- system. Since the cause of abdominal pain in patients is a complex and difficult to identify this specific condition was chosen for this study. Aim: To examine whether the new medical decision support for patients with acute abdominal pain after the introduction of the new medical decision- making aid is a reliable working aid. Method: An empirical quantitative study with retrospective review of patients records. Totally 151 patients who called ambulance due to abdominal pain and that the emergency call- center prioritized as life-threatening (priority 1) or urgent (priority 2) has been reviewed. Result: SvLC´s initial evaluation tallied well with the prehospital assessment the nurse in ambulance did. In the prio 1-group 48% diagnosed abdominal pain NOS, that is to say “Not Otherwise Specified”, and in prio 2 group 40% received the same diagnosis. In this investigation, no serious flaws identified in the new medical decision support regarding acute abdominal pain in Uppsala county, and no significant..... More studies would be needed to increase accuracy on the results in this topic and more patients would need to be involved in order to “capture” any deficiencies in this medical decision systems.

Στην παρούσα διπλωματική εργασία παρουσιάζονται τα ιατρικά συστήματα λήψης απόφασης (MDSS) και αρχιτεκτονικές ανάπτυξή τους. Πραγματεύεται τις έννοιες του ευφυούς ελέγχου και της ασάφειας για να καταλήξει στον όρο Ασαφή Γνωστικά Δίκτυα(FCΜ). Αφού περιγράφεται αναλυτικά η ανάπτυξή, ο καθορισμός των παραμέτρων και οι μεθοδολογίες εκμάθησης ενός Ασαφούς Γνωστικού Δικτύου, καταλήγει τελικά στην εφαρμογή τους στον χώρο της ιατρικής. Τέλος, ακολουθεί το μοντέλο ενός Ασαφούς Ελεγκτή για ιατρικές εφαρμογές και η ανάπτυξη ενός MDSS για την εύρεση Κάκωσης Γόνατος με αρχιτεκτονικές Ανταγωνιστικού Ασαφούς Γνωστικού Δικτύου (CFCΜ). / The thesis represents the medical decision support systems (MDSS) and their architecture. Starting with the concepts of intelligent control and Fuzzy Cognitive Maps (FCM), it describes in detail the development, the setting parameters, and the learning methods of FCMs, with the purpose of their application into the field of medicine. Finally, it illustrates the model of a Fuzzy Controller for medical applications and the development of an MDSS for finding knee injury with the architecture of Competitive FCMs (CFCM).

La prise de décision médicale se définit par le choix du traitement de la maladie, dans l’attente d’un résultat probable tentant de maximiser les bénéfices sur la santé du patient. Ce choix de traitement doit donc reposer sur les preuves scientifiques de son efficacité, ce qui renvoie à une problématique d’estimation de l’effet-traitement. Dans une première partie, nous présentons, proposons et discutons des méthodes d’inférence causale, permettant d’estimer cet effet-traitement par des approches expérimentales ou observationnelles. Toutefois, les preuves obtenues par ces méthodes fournissent une information sur l’effet-traitement uniquement à l’échelle de la population globale, et non à l’échelle de l’individu. Connaître le devenir probable du patient est essentiel pour adapter une décision clinique. Nous présentons donc, dans une deuxième partie, l’approche par modélisation prédictive, qui a permis une avancée en médecine personnalisée. Les modèles prédictifs fournissent au clinicien une information pronostique pour son patient, lui permettant ensuite le choix d’adapter le traitement. Cependant, cette approche a ses limites, puisque ce choix de traitement repose encore une fois sur des preuves établies en population globale. Dans une troisième partie, nous proposons donc une méthode originale d’estimation de l’effet-traitement individuel, en combinant inférence causale et modélisation prédictive. Dans le cas où un traitement est envisagé, notre approche permettra au clinicien de connaître et de comparer d’emblée le pronostic de son patient « avant traitement » et son pronostic « après traitement ». Huit articles étayent ces approches. / Medical decision-making is defined by the choice of treatment of illness, which attempts to maximize the healthcare benefit, given a probable outcome. The choice of a treatment must be therefore based on a scientific evidence. It refers to a problem of estimating the treatment effect. In a first part, we present, discuss and propose causal inference methods for estimating the treatment effect using experimental or observational designs. However, the evidences provided by these approaches are established at the population level, not at the individual level. Foreknowing the patient’s probability of outcome is essential for adapting a clinical decision. In a second part, we present the approach of predictive modeling, which provided a leap forward in personalized medicine. Predictive models give the patient’s prognosis at baseline and then let the clinician decide on treatment. This approach is therefore limited, as the choice of treatment is still based on evidences stated at the overall population level. In a third part, we propose an original method for estimating the individual treatment effect, by combining causal inference and predictive modeling. Whether a treatment is foreseen, our approach allows the clinician to foreknow and compare both the patient’s prognosis without treatment and the patient’s prognosis with treatment. Within this thesis, we present a series of eight articles.

No description available.

La personne de confiance, créée par la loi du 4 mars 2002, permet au patient non communiquant, de transmettre sa parole au médecin, pour l'aider dans sa prise de décision. Dix ans après, la désignation de la personne de confiance reste rare, même en gériatrie, y compris pour les patients atteints de maladie d’Alzheimer. Plusieurs enquêtes par questionnaires et entretiens et une recherche-action ont été réalisés auprès des différents acteurs du soin gériatrique : patients, aidants, gériatres, médecins traitants et associations de patients, pour appréhender comment les professionnels de gériatrie se sont approprié la notion juridique de personne de confiance et ont modifié leurs pratique Les résultats montrent que les acteurs ne connaissent pas bien la loi et n’ont rien fait pour la mettre en œuvre, même s’ils en attendent beaucoup. Les équipes de soin peuvent cependant s’approprier le sujet et donner à la personne de confiance la place prévue par la loi. Des risques de dérives sont décrits : prise de pouvoir de la personne de confiance sur le patient, décharge de la responsabilité médicale, écartement des proches au profit de la seule personne de confiance, poids extrême pouvant peser sur cette dernière. Les professionnels trouvent que la procédure prend beaucoup de temps, qu’un document écrit n’est pas toujours adapté, que cela représente une charge supplémentaire, alors qu’ils sont déjà surchargés. Le manque de pratique entraine le manque d’utilisation. Les patients présentent parfois des difficultés de communication, limitant la possibilité de désigner. L’information sur la personne de confiance et sa désignation provoquent souvent une angoisse supplémentaire du patient face à sa possible mort prochaine. Il lui est parfois difficile de choisir entre ses enfants. Les professionnels pressentent que la personne de confiance n’a pas la même utilité pour tous. Elle est intéressante en soins d’urgence et de réanimation, mais les patients n’ont souvent pas le temps de la désigner avant d’en avoir besoin. Elle prend tout son sens dans les maladies chroniques, dont la maladie d’Alzheimer, pour lesquelles la désignation de la personne de confiance pourrait être anticipée par rapport à l’arrivée à l’hôpital. Il ne semble pas y avoir de limite, autre que celle de l’a priori moral des professionnels, à la possibilité de désigner une personne de confiance, même pour un patient atteint de maladie d’Alzheimer, la personne de confiance permettant alors au patient d’exprimer ses volontés au-delà de son handicap, en prenant au mieux en compte son ancienne personnalité et ses désirs actuels. Cette réflexion amène à certaines réserves éthiques. Le patient, sa personne de confiance et le médecin peuvent-ils conclure une alliance thérapeutique en médecine aiguë, alors que la patient est dépendant du médecin, par le fait même de sa maladie et de la proximité de la mort ? La logique des droits des patients a-t-elle une limite, puisque tous les patients n’ont pas accès à la désignation de leur personne de confiance ? Le risque de routinisation de la procédure est majeur, si le sens même de cette désignation n’est pas perçu par les différents acteurs. La réflexion autour de la prise de décision montre que le patient en semble souvent absent et pas toujours représenté par la personne de confiance. Le tuteur ne semble pas être le représentant idéal du patient, qui ne peut légalement plus désigner sa personne de confiance. Une amélioration du processus par le biais de bonnes pratiques de la désignation de la personne de confiance sont proposées : améliorer l’information de la population et des patients, former les professionnels aux conditions de désignation optimale pour le patient, informer la personne de confiance sur son rôle et sur sa responsabilité vis-à-vis du patient, de l’aidant familial et de la famille, extension de la procédure de désignation partout où il y a du soin / The Act of March 4th, 2002, has created a new actor in the doctor-patient relationship: the health care surrogate. This person can be designated by every patient at the beginning of the hospitalization, except patients under legal protection. This person can escort the patient to receive the medical information, so with a derogation of medical confidentiality. This person can also tell the doctor what the patient would want, if the patient is not able to communicate. So this health care surrogate could be the witness, who allows the patient who can no longer communicate, to advise the medical decision. Ten years after the law, few health care surrogates are designated, even in geriatric care and for people suffering from Alzheimer disease. Different studies have been done with people acting in geriatric care: patients, caregivers, geriatricians, general practioners, and patient’s associations. The aim of these studies was to appreciate how professional of geriatrics appropriated the juridical notion of health care surrogate and how they changed their practices. Results showed that the role and missions of the health care surrogate are insufficiently known by the patients and also by the professionals. But professionals can be trained and can give to the health care surrogate his right place. Some risks are described: health care surrogate taking power on the patient, discharge from medical responsibility, spacing proxies in the benefit of the health care surrogate, burden to the surrogate. Professionals found that the procedure is time consuming, that a written document is not always adapted and that it’s an additional burden, so they are already exhausted. The lack of practice leads to a lack of use. Designation is often difficult for patients that are then faced with their own death and particularly for those who had communication difficulties. Sometimes patients did not want to choose between their children, who will be their surrogate. Health care surrogate designation was interesting in acute care and emergency room but people did not have often enough time to do it. It makes sense in chronicle diseases, for which the designation may be anticipated before patient’s arrival in the hospital. It does not seem to be any limit to designate health care surrogate, other than the moral prejudices of professionals, even for patients with Alzheimer disease. Health care surrogates allowed Alzheimer patient to express himself his will, taking care of his old personality and his actual wishes. This reflexion leads to some ethical reserves. Can patient, health care surrogate and doctors make a therapeutic alliance in acute care? Thus patient is under medical power, due to his illness and the possibility to die. Do the patient’s rights have a limit, as some patients are not allowed to designate their surrogate? The risk of routine is extreme if the sense itself of the designation is lost or not seen by professionals. Patients are often excluded from the decision process. The legal protector of the patient does not seem to be the ideal health care surrogate. This could be ameliorated by good practice recommendations: improving population and patient information, improving professional’s training, informing the health care surrogates, caregivers and families. The designation’s procedure can be extended everywhere where care is done: home, networks, nursing homes… the tools for information and designation must be adapted to everyone, and be as different as patients can be. Progressive appropriation of the concept of the health care surrogate by the care system can be done, with help of the peer’s societies and patient’s associations

No description available.