Max A Feinstein1, Richard R Sharp2, David J Sandness3, John C Feemster3, Mithri Junna4, Suresh Kotagal5, Melissa C Lipford6, Maja Tippmann-Peikert6, Bradley F Boeve6, Michael H Silber6, Erik K St Louis7. 1. Mayo Center for Sleep Medicine, Department of Medicine, USA; Biomedical Ethics Research Program, USA; University of California San Francisco School of Medicine, USA. 2. Biomedical Ethics Research Program, USA; Mayo Clinic College of Medicine, Rochester, MN, USA. 3. Mayo Center for Sleep Medicine, Department of Medicine, USA; Department of Neurology, USA. 4. Department of Neurology, USA; Mayo Clinic College of Medicine, Rochester, MN, USA. 5. Department of Neurology, USA; Mayo Clinic College of Medicine, Rochester, MN, USA; Department of Pediatrics and Adolescent Medicine, USA. 6. Mayo Center for Sleep Medicine, Department of Medicine, USA; Department of Neurology, USA; Mayo Clinic College of Medicine, Rochester, MN, USA. 7. Mayo Center for Sleep Medicine, Department of Medicine, USA; Biomedical Ethics Research Program, USA; Department of Neurology, USA; Mayo Clinic College of Medicine, Rochester, MN, USA. Electronic address: StLouis.Erik@mayo.edu.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES/ BACKGROUND: Prognostic counseling about the risk for developing overt neurodegenerative disorders for patients with idiopathic REM sleep-behavior disorder (iRBD) and isolated REM sleep without atonia (iRSWA) is difficult, given lack of disease-modifying interventions and uncertainty in accurate prognostication for individuals. We aimed to analyze patient and physician characteristics associated with documented prognostic discussions for patients with iRBD and iRSWA. PATIENTS/ METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed the medical records for 138 (112 iRBD and 26 iRSWA) patients seen at the Mayo Clinic between 2012 and 2015. We analyzed physician and patient demographics, initial complaint, and other information discussed during office visits. We then comparatively analyzed the impact of physician and patient characteristics on documented prognostic discussions using Chi Square or Fischer's exact test. RESULTS: Mean iRBD patient age was 65.0 ± 13.0, and mean iRSWA age was 58 ± 15 years. Seventy-eight (69.6%) iRBD and 22 (84.6%) iRSWA patients were men. Sixty-two (55%) iRBD and three (12%) iRSWA patients received prognostic counseling about phenoconversion risk. iRBD was a secondary complaint in 67 (59.8%). Patients over age 60 years and those having iRBD as a chief complaint more frequently received prognostic discussions than those with opposite characteristics (all p < 0.05). Patient sex and antidepressant use were not associated with counseling. Sleep neurologists disclosed prognostic information most frequently, with male more likely than female clinicians to disclose prognoses. CONCLUSIONS: Several patient and physician characteristics appear to influence documented prognostic counseling for iRBD/RSWA patients. Future studies of iRBD/RSWA patients' preferences are needed to clarify ethically appropriate physician-patient communication concerning prognosis.
OBJECTIVES/ BACKGROUND: Prognostic counseling about the risk for developing overt neurodegenerative disorders for patients with idiopathic REM sleep-behavior disorder (iRBD) and isolated REM sleep without atonia (iRSWA) is difficult, given lack of disease-modifying interventions and uncertainty in accurate prognostication for individuals. We aimed to analyze patient and physician characteristics associated with documented prognostic discussions for patients with iRBD and iRSWA. PATIENTS/ METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed the medical records for 138 (112 iRBD and 26 iRSWA) patients seen at the Mayo Clinic between 2012 and 2015. We analyzed physician and patient demographics, initial complaint, and other information discussed during office visits. We then comparatively analyzed the impact of physician and patient characteristics on documented prognostic discussions using Chi Square or Fischer's exact test. RESULTS: Mean iRBDpatient age was 65.0 ± 13.0, and mean iRSWA age was 58 ± 15 years. Seventy-eight (69.6%) iRBD and 22 (84.6%) iRSWA patients were men. Sixty-two (55%) iRBD and three (12%) iRSWA patients received prognostic counseling about phenoconversion risk. iRBD was a secondary complaint in 67 (59.8%). Patients over age 60 years and those having iRBD as a chief complaint more frequently received prognostic discussions than those with opposite characteristics (all p < 0.05). Patient sex and antidepressant use were not associated with counseling. Sleep neurologists disclosed prognostic information most frequently, with male more likely than female clinicians to disclose prognoses. CONCLUSIONS: Several patient and physician characteristics appear to influence documented prognostic counseling for iRBD/RSWA patients. Future studies of iRBD/RSWA patients' preferences are needed to clarify ethically appropriate physician-patient communication concerning prognosis.
Authors: Alex Iranzo; José Luis Molinuevo; Joan Santamaría; Mónica Serradell; María José Martí; Francesc Valldeoriola; Eduard Tolosa Journal: Lancet Neurol Date: 2006-07 Impact factor: 44.182
Authors: Judy Illes; Matthew P Kirschen; Emmeline Edwards; L R Stanford; Peter Bandettini; Mildred K Cho; Paul J Ford; Gary H Glover; Jennifer Kulynych; Ruth Macklin; Daniel B Michael; Susan M Wolf Journal: Science Date: 2006-02-10 Impact factor: 47.728
Authors: Bradley F Boeve; Jennifer R Molano; Tanis J Ferman; Siong-Chi Lin; Kevin Bieniek; Maja Tippmann-Peikert; Brendon Boot; Erik K St Louis; David S Knopman; Ronald C Petersen; Michael H Silber Journal: J Clin Sleep Med Date: 2013-05-15 Impact factor: 4.062
Authors: Bradley F Boeve; Jennifer R Molano; Tanis J Ferman; Glenn E Smith; Siong-Chi Lin; Kevin Bieniek; Wael Haidar; Maja Tippmann-Peikert; David S Knopman; Neill R Graff-Radford; John A Lucas; Ronald C Petersen; Michael H Silber Journal: Sleep Med Date: 2011-02-23 Impact factor: 3.492