In order to explore possible differences in the scope of end-of-life decisions and attitudes toward advance directives (AD) in palliative care, we conducted a survey of 159 patients in palliative care institutions and 93 health-care professionals experienced in palliative care in the United States, Germany, and Japan. Giving an AD in this clinical setting was considered important by patients and professionals. The prevalence of a formal written AD was 79% in the United States, 18% in Germany, and 9% in Japan. In Japan, there was a high prevalence of entrusting all decisions to the family (known as omakase). More than 80% of the patients had negative feelings toward their future decisions in the United States and Germany, in contrast to only 45% in Japan. Although favored by the professionals, there were no specific instruments for obtaining ADs. In Germany and Japan, some patients had given an informal AD. As a pilot content validity step, survey results were used to derive a checklist for content and procedural aspects in end-of-life decision-making. This checklist may provide the basis for developing an instrument to guide physicians, especially non-palliative care specialists, in communication with their patients and their families in this difficult clinical situation.

The PC-PTSD was an easy to administer screening tool. Patients reported PTSD symptoms at higher rates than previous studies. Patients with gunshot wounds and those injured greater than 30 days from the time of the screen were more likely to report PTSD symptoms. Although males represented 82% of positive screens, there was no statistical difference in PTSD symptoms between male and female participants because of the small number of females represented. Families also reported significant levels of PTSD. Both patients and families may benefit from additional screening and intervention in the early posttrauma period.

The hospice model of care for patients with advanced diseases exists in almost all industrialized countries. To date, there have been no international or crosscultural comparisons of the organization and patient outcomes associated with hospice services in different parts of the world. This survey evaluated 159 patients in the USA, Germany and Japan. There were differences between countries in the time of first contact, who recommended palliative care first, the underlying diagnoses, the location of patients, and how consent for hospice care was obtained. Across all countries, there were similar levels of comfort and satisfaction with care. We conclude that the hospice philosophy addresses the basic needs of dying patients which are independent of cultural background, but may be adapted to very different cultures.

BACKGROUND Emergency responders face a crisis of rising suicide rates, and many resist seeking help due to the stigma surrounding mental health. We sought to evaluate the feasibility of an urban trauma center to screen for posttraumatic stress (PTS) among emergency responders and to provide mental health services. METHODS Paramedics, firefighters, law enforcement, and corrections officers involved with patients in the trauma unit were asked to complete the Post-Traumatic Growth Inventory (PTGI) and Post-Traumatic Checklist for Diagnostic and Statistical Manual-5 (PCL-5). Additional factors known to affect PTS were correlated: occupation, age, sex, years of service, marital status, children, and pets. Willingness and barriers to seeking interventions for PTS were evaluated. RESULTS A total of 258 responded: 36.7% paramedics, 40.2% law enforcement officers, 18.4% corrections officers, 0.8% firefighters, and 3.5% with multiple positions. Responders had a mean of 14.5 years of service (SD, 9.9 years). Mean PTGI and PCL-5 scores were 52.1 (SD, 25.1) and 17.2 (SD, 16.5), respectively. Overall, 24.7% had diagnostic PTS disorder with no difference seen in rates between professions. Of these, 80.7% had not sought care. Barriers included that they were not concerned (46%), did not recognize symptoms (24%), and were worried about consequences (20%). Concern over career advancement or losing one's job was the greatest barrier cited for seeking care. Among law enforcement, 47.7% were concerned that they would lose their ability to carry a firearm if they sought care for PTS. The PTGI score, divorce, and 46 years to 50 years were the only factors examined that correlated with increased PCL-5 score. There were 82.5% that felt the trauma center was the right place to screen and intervene upon PTS. CONCLUSION Trauma centers are an ideal and safe place to both screen for PTS and offer mental health assistance. Comprehensive trauma-informed care by hospital-based intervention programs must expand to include emergency responders. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE Epidemiological study type, Level II.

No abstract

BACKGROUND Community violence remains a clinical concern for urban hospitals nationwide; however, research on resilience and posttraumatic growth (PTG) among survivors of violent injury is lacking. This study intends to assess survivors of violent injury for resilience and PTG to better inform mental health interventions. METHODS Adults who presented with nonaccidental penetrating trauma to an urban level 1 trauma center and were at least 1 month, but no more than 12 months, from treatment were eligible. Participants completed the Connor-Davidson Resiliency Scale, Posttraumatic Growth Inventory (PTGI), Primary Care Posttraumatic Stress Disorder screen, and a community violence exposure screen. Additional demographic, injury, and treatment factors were collected from medical record. RESULTS A total of 88 patients participated. The mean resiliency score was 83.2, with 71.1% scoring higher than the general population and 96.4% scoring higher than the reported scores of those seeking treatment for posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD). Participants demonstrated a mean PTGI score of 78 (SD, 20.4) with 92.4% scoring above the significant growth threshold of 45. In addition, 60.5% of patients screened positive for significant PTSD symptoms, approximately eight times higher than general population. Exposure to other traumatic events was high; an overwhelming 94% of participants stated that they have had a family member or a close friend killed, and 42% had personally witnessed a homicide. Higher resilience scores correlated with PTGI scores (p < 0.001) and lower PTSD screen (p = 0.02). CONCLUSION Victims of violent injury experience a myriad of traumatic events yet are highly resilient and exhibit traits of growth across multiple domains. Resiliency can coexist with posttraumatic stress symptoms. Practitioners should assess for resiliency and PTG in addition to PTSD. Further investigation is needed to clarify the relational balance between resilience and posttraumatic stress. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE Epidemiological study type, Level II.

No abstract

No abstract