Bernard P Chang1, Jennifer A Sumner2, Myrta Haerizadeh3, Eileen Carter4, Donald Edmondson4. 1. Department of Emergency Medicine, Columbia University Medical Center, New York, USA. 2. Center for Behavioral Cardiovascular Health, Columbia University Medical Center, New York, USA Department of Epidemiology, Harvard T. H. Chan School of Public Health, Boston, Massachusetts, USA. 3. Columbia College of Physicians and Surgeons, New York, USA. 4. Center for Behavioral Cardiovascular Health, Columbia University Medical Center, New York, USA.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: Evaluation for a potentially life-threatening cardiac event in the emergency department (ED) is a stressful experience that can result in symptoms of post-traumatic stress disorder, which are associated with increased risk of morbidity and mortality in patients. No study has tested whether good clinician-patient communication in the ED is associated with better psychological outcomes in these individuals and whether it can mitigate other risk factors for post-traumatic stress symptoms (PSS) such as perception of life threat and vulnerability in the ED. METHODS: Data were analysed from 474 participants in the Reactions to Acute Care and Hospitalization (REACH) study, an observational cohort study of ED predictors of medical and psychological outcomes after evaluation for suspected acute coronary syndrome. Participants were recruited from November 2013 to January 2015 at a single-site academic medical centre (New York-Presbyterian-Columbia University Medical Center). Participants reported threat perceptions in the ED and provided information on their perceptions of clinician-patient communication using the Interpersonal Process of Care Survey. PSS were assessed using the Acute Stress Disorder Scale during follow-up. RESULTS: 474 subjects were enrolled in the study. Median length of follow-up was 3 days after ED presentation, range 0-30 days, 80% within 8 days. Perceptions of good clinician-patient communication in the ED were associated with lower PSS, whereas increased threat perception was associated with higher PSS. A significant interaction between clinician-patient communication and threat perception on PSS suggested that patients with higher threat perception benefited most from good clinician-patient communication. CONCLUSION: Our study found an association between good clinician-patient communication in the ED during evaluation of potentially life-threatening cardiac events and decreased subsequent post-traumatic stress reactions. This association is particularly marked for patients who perceive the greatest degree of life threat and vulnerability during evaluation. Published by the BMJ Publishing Group Limited. For permission to use (where not already granted under a licence) please go to http://www.bmj.com/company/products-services/rights-and-licensing/
OBJECTIVES: Evaluation for a potentially life-threatening cardiac event in the emergency department (ED) is a stressful experience that can result in symptoms of post-traumatic stress disorder, which are associated with increased risk of morbidity and mortality in patients. No study has tested whether good clinician-patient communication in the ED is associated with better psychological outcomes in these individuals and whether it can mitigate other risk factors for post-traumatic stress symptoms (PSS) such as perception of life threat and vulnerability in the ED. METHODS: Data were analysed from 474 participants in the Reactions to Acute Care and Hospitalization (REACH) study, an observational cohort study of ED predictors of medical and psychological outcomes after evaluation for suspected acute coronary syndrome. Participants were recruited from November 2013 to January 2015 at a single-site academic medical centre (New York-Presbyterian-Columbia University Medical Center). Participants reported threat perceptions in the ED and provided information on their perceptions of clinician-patient communication using the Interpersonal Process of Care Survey. PSS were assessed using the Acute Stress Disorder Scale during follow-up. RESULTS: 474 subjects were enrolled in the study. Median length of follow-up was 3 days after ED presentation, range 0-30 days, 80% within 8 days. Perceptions of good clinician-patient communication in the ED were associated with lower PSS, whereas increased threat perception was associated with higher PSS. A significant interaction between clinician-patient communication and threat perception on PSS suggested that patients with higher threat perception benefited most from good clinician-patient communication. CONCLUSION: Our study found an association between good clinician-patient communication in the ED during evaluation of potentially life-threatening cardiac events and decreased subsequent post-traumatic stress reactions. This association is particularly marked for patients who perceive the greatest degree of life threat and vulnerability during evaluation. Published by the BMJ Publishing Group Limited. For permission to use (where not already granted under a licence) please go to http://www.bmj.com/company/products-services/rights-and-licensing/
Authors: Kristian Thygesen; Joseph S Alpert; Allan S Jaffe; Maarten L Simoons; Bernard R Chaitman; Harvey D White; Kristian Thygesen; Joseph S Alpert; Harvey D White; Allan S Jaffe; Hugo A Katus; Fred S Apple; Bertil Lindahl; David A Morrow; Bernard R Chaitman; Peter M Clemmensen; Per Johanson; Hanoch Hod; Richard Underwood; Jeroen J Bax; Jeroen J Bonow; Fausto Pinto; Raymond J Gibbons; Keith A Fox; Dan Atar; L Kristin Newby; Marcello Galvani; Christian W Hamm; Barry F Uretsky; Ph Gabriel Steg; William Wijns; Jean-Pierre Bassand; Phillippe Menasche; Jan Ravkilde; E Magnus Ohman; Elliott M Antman; Lars C Wallentin; Paul W Armstrong; Maarten L Simoons; James L Januzzi; Markku S Nieminen; Mihai Gheorghiade; Gerasimos Filippatos; Russell V Luepker; Stephen P Fortmann; Wayne D Rosamond; Dan Levy; David Wood; Sidney C Smith; Dayi Hu; Jose-Luis Lopez-Sendon; Rose Marie Robertson; Douglas Weaver; Michal Tendera; Alfred A Bove; Alexander N Parkhomenko; Elena J Vasilieva; Shanti Mendis; Jeroen J Bax; Helmut Baumgartner; Claudio Ceconi; Veronica Dean; Christi Deaton; Robert Fagard; Christian Funck-Brentano; David Hasdai; Arno Hoes; Paulus Kirchhof; Juhani Knuuti; Philippe Kolh; Theresa McDonagh; Cyril Moulin; Bogdan A Popescu; Zeljko Reiner; Udo Sechtem; Per Anton Sirnes; Michal Tendera; Adam Torbicki; Alec Vahanian; Stephan Windecker; Joao Morais; Carlos Aguiar; Wael Almahmeed; David O Arnar; Fabio Barili; Kenneth D Bloch; Ann F Bolger; Hans Erik Botker; Biykem Bozkurt; Raffaele Bugiardini; Christopher Cannon; James de Lemos; Franz R Eberli; Edgardo Escobar; Mark Hlatky; Stefan James; Karl B Kern; David J Moliterno; Christian Mueller; Aleksandar N Neskovic; Burkert Mathias Pieske; Steven P Schulman; Robert F Storey; Kathryn A Taubert; Pascal Vranckx; Daniel R Wagner Journal: J Am Coll Cardiol Date: 2012-09-05 Impact factor: 24.094
Authors: Richard A Bryant; Mark Creamer; Meaghan L O'Donnell; Derrick Silove; Alexander C McFarlane Journal: J Clin Psychiatry Date: 2008-06 Impact factor: 4.384
Authors: Yihang Liu; Jennifer L Malin; Allison L Diamant; Amardeep Thind; Rose C Maly Journal: Breast Cancer Res Treat Date: 2012-12-23 Impact factor: 4.872
Authors: Donald Edmondson; Safiya Richardson; Jennifer K Fausett; Louise Falzon; Virginia J Howard; Ian M Kronish Journal: PLoS One Date: 2013-06-19 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Matthew White; Donald Edmondson; Redeana Umland; Gabriel Sanchez; Bernard P Chang Journal: Am J Emerg Med Date: 2016-10-25 Impact factor: 2.469
Authors: Jennifer A Sumner; Ian M Kronish; Bernard P Chang; Ying Wei; Joseph E Schwartz; Donald Edmondson Journal: Int J Cardiol Date: 2017-03-24 Impact factor: 4.164
Authors: Jeffrey L Birk; Jennifer A Sumner; Mytra Haerizadeh; Reuben Heyman-Kantor; Louise Falzon; Christopher Gonzalez; Liliya Gershengoren; Peter Shapiro; Donald Edmondson; Ian M Kronish Journal: J Anxiety Disord Date: 2019-03-20