Prevalence and Determinants of Physician Bedside Rationing: Data from Europe

BACKGROUND: Bedside rationing by physicians is controversial. The debate, however, is clouded by lack of information regarding the extent and character of bedside rationing. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: We developed a survey instrument to examine the frequency, criteria, and strategies used for bedside rationing. Content validity was assessed through expert assessment and scales were tested for internal consistency. The questionnaire was translated and administered to General Internists in Norway, Switzerland, Italy, and the United Kingdom. Logistic regression was used to identify the variables associated with reported rationing. RESULTS: Survey respondents (N =656, response rate 43%) ranged in age from 28 to 82, and averaged 25 years in practice. Most respondents (82.3%) showed some degree of agreement with rationing, and 56.3% reported that they did ration interventions. The most frequently mentioned criteria for rationing were a small expected benefit (82.3%), low chances of success (79.8%), an intervention intended to prolong life when quality of life is low (70.6%), and a patient over 85 years of age (70%). The frequency of rationing by clinicians was positively correlated with perceived scarcity of resources (odds ratio [OR]=1.11, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.06 to 1.16), perceived pressure to ration (OR=2.14, 95% CI 1.52 to 3.01), and agreement with rationing (OR=1.13, 95% CI 1.05 to 1.23). CONCLUSION: Bedside rationing is prevalent in all surveyed European countries and varies with physician attitudes and resource availability. The prevalence of physician bedside rationing, which presents physicians with difficult moral dilemmas, highlights the importance of discussions regarding how to ration care in the most ethically justifiable manner

Physicians' views on resource availability and equity in four European health care systems

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>In response to limited resources, health care systems have adopted diverse cost-containment strategies and give priority to differing types of interventions. The perception of physicians, who witness the effects of these strategies, may provide useful insights regarding the impact of system-wide priority setting on access to care.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>We conducted a cross-sectional survey to ascertain generalist physicians' perspectives on resources allocation and its consequences in Norway, Switzerland, Italy and the UK.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Survey respondents (N = 656, response rate 43%) ranged in age from 28–82, and averaged 25 years in practice. Most respondents (87.7%) perceived some resources as scarce, with the most restrictive being: access to nursing home, mental health services, referral to a specialist, and rehabilitation for stroke. Respondents attributed adverse outcomes to scarcity, and some respondents had encountered severe adverse events such as death or permanent disability. Despite universal coverage, 45.6% of respondents reported instances of underinsurance. Most respondents (78.7%) also reported some patient groups as more likely than others to be denied beneficial care on the basis of cost. Almost all respondents (97.3%) found at least one cost-containment policy acceptable. The types of policies preferred suggest that respondents are willing to participate in cost-containment, and do not want to be guided by administrative rules (11.2%) or restrictions on hospital beds (10.7%).</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>Physician reports can provide an indication of how organizational factors may affect availability and equity of health care services. Physicians are willing to participate in cost-containment decisions, rather than be guided by administrative rules. Tools should be developed to enable physicians, who are in a unique position to observe unequal access or discrimination in their health care environment, to address these issues in a more targeted way.</p

Efficacy and safety assessment of two enterococci phages in an in vitro biofilm wound model

Chronic wounds affect thousands of people worldwide, causing pain and discomfort to patients and represent significant economical burdens to health care systems. The treatment of chronic wounds is very difficult and complex, particularly when wounds are colonized by bacterial biofilms which are highly tolerant to antibiotics. Enterococcus faecium and Enterococcus faecalis are within the most frequent bacteria present in chronic wounds. Bacteriophages (phages) have been proposed as an efficient and alternative against antibiotic-resistant infections, as those found in chronic wounds. We have isolated and characterized two novel enterococci phages, the siphovirus vB_EfaS-Zip (Zip) and the podovirus vB_EfaP-Max (Max) to be applied during wound treatment. Both phages demonstrated lytic behavior against E. faecalis and E. faecium. Genome analysis of both phages suggests the absence of genes associated with lysogeny. A phage cocktail containing both phages was tested against biofilms formed in wound simulated conditions at a multiplicity of infection of 1.0 and a 2.5log CFU.mL1 reduction in the bacterial load after at 3h of treatment was observed. Phages were also tested in epithelial cells colonized by these bacterial species and a 3log CFU.mL1 reduction was observed using both phages. The high efficacy of these new isolated phages against multi-species biofilms, their stability at different temperatures and pH ranges, short latent periods and non-cytotoxicity to epithelial cells suggest their therapeutic use to control infectious biofilms present in chronic wounds.This study was supported by the Portuguese Foundation for Science and Technology (FCT) under the scope of the strategic funding of UID/BIO/04469/2013 unit, COMPETE 2020 (POCI-01-0145-FEDER-006684) and the Project PTDC/BBB-BSS/6471/2014 (POCI-01-0145-FEDER-016678). This work was also supported by BioTecNorte operation (NORTE-01-0145-FEDER-000004) funded by the European Regional Development Fund under the scope of Norte2020 - Programa Operacional Regional do Norte. A.R.C. and H.O. acknowledge FCT for grant SFRH/BPD/94648/2013 and SFRH/BPD/111653/2015, respectively. The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersio