Publications

OBJECTIVES

As shared decision making (SDM) has received increased attention as a method to improve the patient-centeredness of emergency department (ED) care, we sought to determine patients' desired level of involvement in medical decisions and their perceptions of potential barriers and facilitators to SDM in the ED.

METHODS

We surveyed a cross-sectional sample of adult ED patients at three academic medical centers across the United States. The survey included 32 items regarding patient involvement in medical decisions including a modified Control Preference Scale and questions about barriers and facilitators to SDM in the ED. Items were developed and refined based on prior literature and qualitative interviews with ED patients. Research assistants administered the survey in person.

RESULTS

Of 797 patients approached, 661 (83%) agreed to participate. Participants were 52% female, 45% white, and 30% Hispanic. The majority of respondents (85%-92%, depending on decision type) expressed a desire for some degree of involvement in decision making in the ED, while 8% to 15% preferred to leave decision making to their physician alone. Ninety-eight percent wanted to be involved with decisions when "something serious is going on." The majority of patients (94%) indicated that self-efficacy was not a barrier to SDM in the ED. However, most patients (55%) reported a tendency to defer to the physician's decision making during an ED visit, with about half reporting they would wait for a physician to ask them to be involved.

CONCLUSION

We found that the majority of ED patients in our large, diverse sample wanted to be involved in medical decisions, especially in the case of a "serious" medical problem, and felt that they had the ability to do so. Nevertheless, many patients were unlikely to actively seek involvement and defaulted to allowing the physician to make decisions during the ED visit. After fully explaining the consequences of a decision, clinicians should make an effort to explicitly ascertain patients' desired level of involvement in decision making.

Recent advances in the understanding of Waldenström macroglobulinemia (WM) biology have paved the way for development of a plethora of novel therapeutic strategies. The success of ibrutinib in WM has shifted treatment paradigms away from conventional chemoimmunotherapy approaches. Recognition of high-risk genomic subgroups as well as mechanisms of acquired resistance to ibrutinib have led to targeting of additional pathways. In this article, the authors review ongoing and emerging trials of novel therapies in WM that target the B-cell receptor pathway beyond ibrutinib, toll-like receptor pathway, chemokine signaling, apoptotic pathway, chromatin remodeling, protein transport, the immune microenvironment, and CD19-directed immunotherapy.

Catastrophic antiphospholipid syndrome (CAPS) is a rare but highly fatal clinical syndrome that occurs in up to 1% of patients with antiphospholipid syndrome (APS). The diagnosis of CAPS is often delayed because its presentation with multiple organ thromboses can be confused with other thrombotic microangiopathies and severe sepsis. We report a case of CAPS in a patient with APS and systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) presenting with thrombotic storm precipitated by trauma, cytomegalovirus (CMV) infection, and noncompliance with anticoagulation therapy. Our case reflects the "two-hit hypothesis" of APS in which the presence of antiphospholipid antibodies (first hit) increases the thrombophilic risk, and thromboses take place in the presence of another thrombophilic condition such as CMV infection in our case. In this case review, we discuss the diagnostic challenges and management of CAPS. In clinical practice, we aim to stress the importance of thorough evaluation and management of precipitating events such as infections in addition to timely diagnosis and treatment of this catastrophic clinical entity.