Search

Background: In end-of-life care hygiene, measures concerning multidrug-resistant bacterial microorganisms may contradict the palliative care approach of social inclusion and be burdensome for patients. Objectives: To integrate patients’ perspectives on handling multidrug-resistant bacterial microorganisms at their end of life, their quality of life, the impact of positive multidrug-resistant bacterial microorganisms’ diagnosis, protection and isolation measures on their well-being and patients’ wishes and needs regarding their care. Design: A mixed-methods convergent parallel design embedded quantitative data on the patients’ multidrug-resistant bacterial microorganisms’ trajectory and quality of life assessed by the Schedule for the Evaluation of Individual Quality of Life in qualitative data collection via interviews and focus groups. Data analysis was performed according to Grounded Theory and qualitative and quantitative results were interrelated. Setting/participants: Between March 2014 and September 2015 at two hospitals adult patients diagnosed with multidrug-resistant bacterial microorganisms and treated in a palliative care department or a geriatric ward were included in the sample group. Results: Patients in end-of-life and geriatric care reported emotional and social impact through multidrug-resistant bacterial microorganisms’ diagnosis itself, hygiene measures and lack of information. This impact affects aspects relevant to the patients’ quality of life. Patients’ wishes for comprehensive communication/information and reduction of social strain were identified from the focus group discussion. Conclusion: Patients would benefit from comprehensible information on multidrug-resistant bacterial microorganisms. Strategies minimizing social exclusion and emotional impact of multidrug-resistant bacterial microorganisms’ diagnosis in end-of-life care are needed as well as adaption or supplementation of standard multidrug-resistant bacterial microorganisms’ policies of hospitals.

There is a lack of research into how hospital staff and institutional stakeholders (i. e. institutional representatives from public health authorities, hospital hygiene, and the departments of microbiology, palliative care, and geriatrics) engage with patients who are carriers of multidrug-resistant organisms and receiving end-of-life care. Knowledge of their experiences, workload, and needs should be considered in dealing with hospitalized carriers of multidrug-resistant organisms as well as staff education. This study explored and compared staff members’ and stakeholders’ perspectives on multidrug-resistant organisms and on provision of end-of-life care to carrier patients. In this study four focus groups consisting of hospital staff members and institutional stakeholders were formed within a mixed-methods parent study in a palliative care unit at a university clinic and a geriatric ward of a Catholic and academic teaching hospital. Participants discussed results from staff and stakeholder interviews from a former study phase. Data were analyzed according to Grounded Theory and perspectives of staff members and institutional stakeholders were compared and contrasted. Key issues debated by staff members (N = 19) and institutional stakeholders (N = 10) were 1) the additional workload, 2) reasons for uncertainty about handling carrier patients, 3) the format of continuing education, and 4) the preferred management approach for dealing with multidrug-resistant organism carrier patients. Although similar barriers (e. g. colleagues’ ambiguous opinions) were identified, both groups drew different conclusions concerning the management of these barriers. While institutional stakeholders recommended making decisions on hygiene measures under consideration of the specific patient situation, staff members preferred the use of standardized hygiene measures which should be applied uniformly to all patients. Staff members and institutional stakeholders perceived similar barriers to practice caused by multidrug-resistant organisms and similar needs for continuing education. The staff members’ preferred management approach might originate from an uncertainty about the multidrug-resistant organism infection risk. Experiences and visions of both groups should be included in a specific recommendation for end-of-life care to ensure behavioral confidence.

Palliative care professionals are frequently confronted with patients colonized or infected with MDRO. One major challenge is how to balance necessary isolation measures and social inclusion as one of the main principles of palliative and end-of-life care. To date, MDRO-specific policies and protocols vary widely between institutions. Aim: provide empirical recommendations on how to deal with hospitalized MDRO patients in end-of-life care. Recommendations were developed based on (i) initial results of face-to-face interviews and focus groups, (ii) impartial experts’ comments and consensus on the draft via online survey and (iii) a face-to-face meeting with consortium members to finalize recommendations. Findings of 158 interviews and six focus groups (39 participants) with patients, family caregivers, staff members and institutional stakeholders contributed to the recommendations. The assessments of 17 experts were considered. In total, 21 recommendations were approved. The recommended strategy in dealing with MDRO at the end of life allows case-based application of protection and isolation measures. MDRO diagnostics and therapy involve screening at admission. The recommendations suggest consideration of required accommodation facilities, provided material as well as staff and time resources. The recommendations further highlight the importance of providing for strategies enabling the patient’s social inclusion and provision of verbal and written information about MDRO for patients and family caregivers, transparent medical documentation, and staff member training. The recommendations summarize the perspectives of individuals and groups affected by MDRO at the end of life and provide practical guidance for clinical routine. Further dissemination and implementation requirements are discussed and should contain the evaluation of the knowledge, views, worries, and anxieties of the target groups.

Bei 41 Patienten mit peripheren Fazialisparesen und sieben gesunden Kontrollpersonen wurden nach Pilocarpinstimulation speichelchemische Analysen im Seitenvergleich durchgefuhrt. Dabei zeigten sich die Elektrolyte Natrium und Calcium sowie das Ferment Amylase im Speichel der paretischen Seite erhoht. Die Natriumkonzentrationserhohungen werden nach entsprechenden Modellvorstellungen als Storung der physiologischen Natriumruckresorption (zellulare Natriumpumpe) des Drusengangepithels interpretiert. Die Natriumkonzentrationserhohungen waren abhangig vom Schweregrad der Parese und bildeten sich wahrend der Ausheilung zuruck. Es liegen noch nicht genugend Befunde im Fruhstadium einer Fazialisparese vor, um die Zuverlassigkeit dieses Parameters zur Fazialisdiagnostik beurteilen zu konnen.

The chemistry of the saliva produced by the submaxillary glands after pilocarpin stimulation has been investigated in normal cases and cases of peripheral facial paralysis.