Cargando…

Decision Conflicts in Clinical Care during COVID-19: A Multi-Perspective Inquiry

Background: The early COVID-19-pandemic was characterized by changes in decision making, decision-relevant value systems and the related perception of decisional uncertainties and conflicts resulting in decisional burden and stress. The vulnerability of clinical care professionals to these decisiona...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Haier, Joerg, Beller, Johannes, Adorjan, Kristina, Bleich, Stefan, de Greck, Moritz, Griesinger, Frank, Heppt, Markus, Hurlemann, René, Mees, Soeren Torge, Philipsen, Alexandra, Rohde, Gernot, Schilling, Georgia, Trautmann, Karolin, Combs, Stephanie E., Geyer, Siegfried, Schaefers, Juergen
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: MDPI 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9602416/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36292361
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/healthcare10101914
_version_ 1784817311523274752
author Haier, Joerg
Beller, Johannes
Adorjan, Kristina
Bleich, Stefan
de Greck, Moritz
Griesinger, Frank
Heppt, Markus
Hurlemann, René
Mees, Soeren Torge
Philipsen, Alexandra
Rohde, Gernot
Schilling, Georgia
Trautmann, Karolin
Combs, Stephanie E.
Geyer, Siegfried
Schaefers, Juergen
author_facet Haier, Joerg
Beller, Johannes
Adorjan, Kristina
Bleich, Stefan
de Greck, Moritz
Griesinger, Frank
Heppt, Markus
Hurlemann, René
Mees, Soeren Torge
Philipsen, Alexandra
Rohde, Gernot
Schilling, Georgia
Trautmann, Karolin
Combs, Stephanie E.
Geyer, Siegfried
Schaefers, Juergen
author_sort Haier, Joerg
collection PubMed
description Background: The early COVID-19-pandemic was characterized by changes in decision making, decision-relevant value systems and the related perception of decisional uncertainties and conflicts resulting in decisional burden and stress. The vulnerability of clinical care professionals to these decisional dilemmas has not been characterized yet. Methods: A cross-sectional questionnaire study (540 patients, 322 physicians and 369 nurses in 11 institutions throughout Germany) was carried out. The inclusion criterion was active involvement in clinical treatment or decision making in oncology or psychiatry during the first year of COVID-19. The questionnaires covered five decision dimensions (conflicts and uncertainty, resources, risk perception, perception of consequences for clinical processes, and the perception of consequences for patients). Data analysis was performed using ANOVA, Pearson rank correlations, and the Chi²-test, and for inferential analysis, nominal logistic regression and tree classification were conducted. Results: Professionals reported changes in clinical management (27.5%) and a higher workload (29.2%), resulting in decisional uncertainty (19.2%) and decisional conflicts (22.7%), with significant differences between professional groups (p < 0.005), including anxiety, depression, loneliness and stress in professional subgroups (p < 0.001). Nominal regression analysis targeting “Decisional Uncertainty” provided a highly significant prediction model (LQ p < 0.001) containing eight variables, and the analysis for “Decisional Conflicts” included six items. The classification rates were 64.4% and 92.7%, respectively. Tree analysis confirmed three levels of determinants. Conclusions: Decisional uncertainty and conflicts during the COVID-19 pandemic were independent of the actual pandemic load. Vulnerable professional groups for the perception of a high number of decisional dilemmas were characterized by individual perception and the psychological framework. Coping and management strategies should target vulnerability, enable the handling of the individual perception of decisional dilemmas and ensure information availability and specific support for younger professionals.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9602416
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher MDPI
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-96024162022-10-27 Decision Conflicts in Clinical Care during COVID-19: A Multi-Perspective Inquiry Haier, Joerg Beller, Johannes Adorjan, Kristina Bleich, Stefan de Greck, Moritz Griesinger, Frank Heppt, Markus Hurlemann, René Mees, Soeren Torge Philipsen, Alexandra Rohde, Gernot Schilling, Georgia Trautmann, Karolin Combs, Stephanie E. Geyer, Siegfried Schaefers, Juergen Healthcare (Basel) Article Background: The early COVID-19-pandemic was characterized by changes in decision making, decision-relevant value systems and the related perception of decisional uncertainties and conflicts resulting in decisional burden and stress. The vulnerability of clinical care professionals to these decisional dilemmas has not been characterized yet. Methods: A cross-sectional questionnaire study (540 patients, 322 physicians and 369 nurses in 11 institutions throughout Germany) was carried out. The inclusion criterion was active involvement in clinical treatment or decision making in oncology or psychiatry during the first year of COVID-19. The questionnaires covered five decision dimensions (conflicts and uncertainty, resources, risk perception, perception of consequences for clinical processes, and the perception of consequences for patients). Data analysis was performed using ANOVA, Pearson rank correlations, and the Chi²-test, and for inferential analysis, nominal logistic regression and tree classification were conducted. Results: Professionals reported changes in clinical management (27.5%) and a higher workload (29.2%), resulting in decisional uncertainty (19.2%) and decisional conflicts (22.7%), with significant differences between professional groups (p < 0.005), including anxiety, depression, loneliness and stress in professional subgroups (p < 0.001). Nominal regression analysis targeting “Decisional Uncertainty” provided a highly significant prediction model (LQ p < 0.001) containing eight variables, and the analysis for “Decisional Conflicts” included six items. The classification rates were 64.4% and 92.7%, respectively. Tree analysis confirmed three levels of determinants. Conclusions: Decisional uncertainty and conflicts during the COVID-19 pandemic were independent of the actual pandemic load. Vulnerable professional groups for the perception of a high number of decisional dilemmas were characterized by individual perception and the psychological framework. Coping and management strategies should target vulnerability, enable the handling of the individual perception of decisional dilemmas and ensure information availability and specific support for younger professionals. MDPI 2022-09-29 /pmc/articles/PMC9602416/ /pubmed/36292361 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/healthcare10101914 Text en © 2022 by the authors. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
spellingShingle Article
Haier, Joerg
Beller, Johannes
Adorjan, Kristina
Bleich, Stefan
de Greck, Moritz
Griesinger, Frank
Heppt, Markus
Hurlemann, René
Mees, Soeren Torge
Philipsen, Alexandra
Rohde, Gernot
Schilling, Georgia
Trautmann, Karolin
Combs, Stephanie E.
Geyer, Siegfried
Schaefers, Juergen
Decision Conflicts in Clinical Care during COVID-19: A Multi-Perspective Inquiry
title Decision Conflicts in Clinical Care during COVID-19: A Multi-Perspective Inquiry
title_full Decision Conflicts in Clinical Care during COVID-19: A Multi-Perspective Inquiry
title_fullStr Decision Conflicts in Clinical Care during COVID-19: A Multi-Perspective Inquiry
title_full_unstemmed Decision Conflicts in Clinical Care during COVID-19: A Multi-Perspective Inquiry
title_short Decision Conflicts in Clinical Care during COVID-19: A Multi-Perspective Inquiry
title_sort decision conflicts in clinical care during covid-19: a multi-perspective inquiry
topic Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9602416/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36292361
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/healthcare10101914
work_keys_str_mv AT haierjoerg decisionconflictsinclinicalcareduringcovid19amultiperspectiveinquiry
AT bellerjohannes decisionconflictsinclinicalcareduringcovid19amultiperspectiveinquiry
AT adorjankristina decisionconflictsinclinicalcareduringcovid19amultiperspectiveinquiry
AT bleichstefan decisionconflictsinclinicalcareduringcovid19amultiperspectiveinquiry
AT degreckmoritz decisionconflictsinclinicalcareduringcovid19amultiperspectiveinquiry
AT griesingerfrank decisionconflictsinclinicalcareduringcovid19amultiperspectiveinquiry
AT hepptmarkus decisionconflictsinclinicalcareduringcovid19amultiperspectiveinquiry
AT hurlemannrene decisionconflictsinclinicalcareduringcovid19amultiperspectiveinquiry
AT meessoerentorge decisionconflictsinclinicalcareduringcovid19amultiperspectiveinquiry
AT philipsenalexandra decisionconflictsinclinicalcareduringcovid19amultiperspectiveinquiry
AT rohdegernot decisionconflictsinclinicalcareduringcovid19amultiperspectiveinquiry
AT schillinggeorgia decisionconflictsinclinicalcareduringcovid19amultiperspectiveinquiry
AT trautmannkarolin decisionconflictsinclinicalcareduringcovid19amultiperspectiveinquiry
AT combsstephaniee decisionconflictsinclinicalcareduringcovid19amultiperspectiveinquiry
AT geyersiegfried decisionconflictsinclinicalcareduringcovid19amultiperspectiveinquiry
AT schaefersjuergen decisionconflictsinclinicalcareduringcovid19amultiperspectiveinquiry