Experiences of clinical psychologists working in palliative care:A qualitative study

Background Compassion fatigue refers to the emotional and physical exhaustion felt by professionals in caring roles, whereas compassion satisfaction encompasses the positive aspects of helping others. Levels of compassion satisfaction and fatigue have been found to be inconsistent in palliative care professionals, which could have serious implications for patients, professionals and organisations. Objectives This study explored the experiences of clinical psychologists working in palliative care, all worked with adults with cancer, to gain an understanding of the impact this work has on their self and how they manage this. Methods A qualitative approach was taken, using semi‐structured interviews and interpretative phenomenological analysis. Results Three superordinate themes were identified: commitment, existential impact on the self and the oracle. The participants' experiences were characterised by the relationship between themselves and their patients, the influence of working in palliative services on their world view and the impact of organisational changes. Differences between working as a clinical psychologist in palliative care versus non‐palliative settings were considered. Conclusions Professionals working in palliative care should be supported to reflect on their experiences of compassion and resilience, and services should provide resources that facilitate staff to practice positive self‐care to maintain their well‐being

Pipeline Embolization Device with or without Adjunctive Coil Embolization: Analysis of Complications from the IntrePED Registry

International audienceFlow diversion to treat cerebral aneurysms has revolutionized neurointerventional surgery. Because the addition of coils potentially increases the time and complexity of endovascular procedures, we sought to determine whether adjunctive coil use is associated with an increase in complications. Patients in the International Retrospective Study of Pipeline Embolization Device registry were divided into those treated with the Pipeline Embolization Device alone (n = 689 patients; n = 797 aneurysms; mean aneurysm size, 10.3 ± 7.6 mm) versus those treated with the Pipeline Embolization Device and concurrent coil embolization (n = 104 patients; n = 109 aneurysms; mean aneurysm size, 13.6 ± 7.8 mm). Patient demographics and aneurysm characteristics were examined. Rates of neurologic morbidity and mortality were compared between groups. The Pipeline Embolization Device with versus without coiling required a significantly longer procedure time (135.8 ± 63.9 versus 96.7 ± 46.2 min; P < .0001) and resulted in higher neurological morbidity (12.5% versus 7.8%; P = .13). These data suggest that either strategy represents an acceptable risk profile in the treatment of complex cerebral aneurysms and warrants further investigation