Are we comfortable managing oral anticoagulation at the end of life? A national survey of secondary care clinicians in the UK.

IF 3.9 4区 医学 Q1 MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL
Clinical Medicine Pub Date : 2025-09-01 Epub Date: 2025-08-23 DOI:10.1016/j.clinme.2025.100505
Thomas Shevlin, Michelle Kidd, Hannah Cronin, Alastair Gilmore, Catherine Hayle, Elizabeth Jones, Rachel Parry, Rose Penfold, Olga Tsiamita
{"title":"Are we comfortable managing oral anticoagulation at the end of life? A national survey of secondary care clinicians in the UK.","authors":"Thomas Shevlin, Michelle Kidd, Hannah Cronin, Alastair Gilmore, Catherine Hayle, Elizabeth Jones, Rachel Parry, Rose Penfold, Olga Tsiamita","doi":"10.1016/j.clinme.2025.100505","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Aims/background: </strong>Prior research has demonstrated variation of opinion among physicians regarding management of oral anticoagulation (OAC) at the end of life (EOL). To investigate current practice and attitudes towards OAC at the EOL among secondary care clinicians in the UK, with particular emphasis on how comfortable clinicians feel in making these decisions.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A digital, self-report survey was designed, validated by experts in relevant fields and then distributed via email to secondary care clinicians in the UK involved in EOL care, utilising the existing mailing lists of national societies and research groups.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>186 responses were received across 10 specialties and 47 NHS trusts. 56% of clinicians routinely seek advice from colleagues regarding these decisions. 53% of respondents reported having worried about the medico-legal implications of discontinuing OAC, 52% of whom reported that these worries influence their decision making. Patient characteristics are more commonly considered than anticipated life expectancy in deciding whether to suspend or continue OAC at the EOL (56.5% versus 43.5%), 83% of respondents would feel more confident in broaching this subject if national guidance existed.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Our findings demonstrate a significant variation in practice, a widely reported discomfort and a strong desire for professional guidance regarding the management of OAC at the EOL, among UK-based secondary care clinicians.</p>","PeriodicalId":10492,"journal":{"name":"Clinical Medicine","volume":" ","pages":"100505"},"PeriodicalIF":3.9000,"publicationDate":"2025-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12447989/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Clinical Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clinme.2025.100505","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/8/23 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Aims/background: Prior research has demonstrated variation of opinion among physicians regarding management of oral anticoagulation (OAC) at the end of life (EOL). To investigate current practice and attitudes towards OAC at the EOL among secondary care clinicians in the UK, with particular emphasis on how comfortable clinicians feel in making these decisions.

Methods: A digital, self-report survey was designed, validated by experts in relevant fields and then distributed via email to secondary care clinicians in the UK involved in EOL care, utilising the existing mailing lists of national societies and research groups.

Results: 186 responses were received across 10 specialties and 47 NHS trusts. 56% of clinicians routinely seek advice from colleagues regarding these decisions. 53% of respondents reported having worried about the medico-legal implications of discontinuing OAC, 52% of whom reported that these worries influence their decision making. Patient characteristics are more commonly considered than anticipated life expectancy in deciding whether to suspend or continue OAC at the EOL (56.5% versus 43.5%), 83% of respondents would feel more confident in broaching this subject if national guidance existed.

Conclusions: Our findings demonstrate a significant variation in practice, a widely reported discomfort and a strong desire for professional guidance regarding the management of OAC at the EOL, among UK-based secondary care clinicians.

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

在生命的最后阶段,口服抗凝治疗是否合适?在英国二级护理临床医生的全国调查。
目的/背景:先前的研究表明,医生对生命末期(EOL)口服抗凝剂(OAC)的管理意见存在差异。调查英国二级医疗临床医生在EOL中对OAC的当前实践和态度,特别强调临床医生在做出这些决定时的舒适程度。方法:设计了一个数字化的自我报告调查,由相关领域的专家验证,然后通过电子邮件分发给英国参与EOL护理的二级护理临床医生,利用现有的国家协会和研究小组的邮件列表。结果:186答复收到横跨10个专业和47 NHS信托。56%的临床医生经常就这些决定向同事寻求建议。53%的答复者报告说,他们担心停止OAC的医学法律影响,其中52%的人报告说,这些担忧影响了他们的决策。在决定是否在EOL暂停或继续OAC时,患者特征比预期寿命更常被考虑(56.5%对43.5%)。83%的受访者表示,如果有国家指导,他们会更有信心提出这个问题。结论:我们的研究结果表明,在实践中存在显著差异,广泛报道的不适和对EOL OAC管理的专业指导的强烈愿望,在英国的二级护理临床医生中。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Clinical Medicine
Clinical Medicine 医学-医学:内科
CiteScore
7.20
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: Clinical Medicine is aimed at practising physicians in the UK and overseas and has relevance to all those managing or working within the healthcare sector. Available in print and online, the journal seeks to encourage high standards of medical care by promoting good clinical practice through original research, review and comment. The journal also includes a dedicated continuing medical education (CME) section in each issue. This presents the latest advances in a chosen specialty, with self-assessment questions at the end of each topic enabling CPD accreditation to be acquired. ISSN: 1470-2118 E-ISSN: 1473-4893 Frequency: 6 issues per year
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信