YES

BY MALACHI G. SHEAHAN III, M.D.

Believe it or not, one thing just about all vascular surgeons will agree upon is the proper way to train. For most of us, the best way to become a surgeon is the way we became a surgeon. Therefore, unless there is some aberration in the readership circulation of Vascular Specialist, I begin this debate facing an uphill battle with most of you.

The question of how to become a vascular surgeon should not be some esoteric matter left to be debated in the late Friday session of some educational symposium. Indeed, I commend the editors for bringing this issue to a more public forum. As much as I enjoy listening to the twenty-seventh abstract redefining the risks of type 2 endoleaks at our national meeting, the matter of how to create a vascular surgeon will define our profession for years to come.

Data from the Association of American Medical Colleges shows that there is now one vascular surgeon for every 100,000 people in the U.S. That is one vascular surgeon for every 350 dialysis patients or one for every 2,600 individuals with peripheral artery disease. We are already in short supply and 40% of us are over 55 years old. Applicant numbers to traditional 5 + 2 programs have plateaued over the past 10 years, suggesting that expanding fellowship positions is not the answer. Who then will fill this gap? As Dr. Ian Malcolm warned us in “Jurassic Park,” life will find a way.

If vascular surgeons don’t act to address this need, I know two candidates who are interested. Both interventional cardiology (10% over 55) and interventional radiology (12% over 55) have younger workforces that are growing at a superior rate. Between 2008 and 2013, the largest increases in training positions offered among all medical specialties were seen in interventional cardiology and interventional radiology.

Luckily our profession has not been caught completely off guard. Integrated vascular residency positions were first offered in 2007. Based on the quality and quantity of applicants, the number of institutions offering the integrated 0 + 5 vascular residency has grown from 17 in 2009 to 51 in 2015.

As practiced today, vascular surgery bears little similarity to even a decade ago. Limb salvage, aortic interventions, vein care, and access management all require highly specific training not typically offered in a general surgery residency. Our new board certification emphasizes the ability to supervise and interpret radiologic tests. Vascular surgery training is no longer a honing of general surgical skills. We must teach and develop completely new areas of expertise in our trainees. I propose the longer we have to focus on these specific abilities, the better our product will be.

A classic argument against traditional 5 + 2 training is why have a postgraduate-year 4 or 5 performing a pancreaticoduodenectomy (Whipple procedure) when they will never perform one in practice? This, however, is a flawed point, as open abdominal cases contain many aspects that translate well to vascular surgery. I believe the enemy is not Allen O. Whipple, but rather Harvey J. Laparoscope.1 Much like the declining numbers of open aortic cases, laparoscopic surgery has replaced much of the open surgical volume in general surgery training programs. How well these skills translate to vascular is unknown, but at face value, the cross-applicability doesn’t seem to pass muster. So while no case is wasted, perhaps our trainees’ time could be spent more efficiently.

Integrated 0 + 5 programs give total control of the rotations and curriculum to the vascular program director. This allows a truly cohesive approach to developing vascular skills and knowledge over a five year period interspersed with core general surgery skills and principals. Surgery rotations such as trauma, ICU, and cardiothoracic surgery that provide the best educational content to our trainees can now be handpicked, while avoiding lower-yield content like advanced laparoscopy and breast. Quality control is now in the hands of a vascular surgeon.

After all, Erica, if the sanctity of the five year general surgery residency must be preserved, why do you run one of the world’s only 4 + 2 programs? Clearly you believe we can condense our trainees’ education without losing quality.

Using the available metrics and data points it would be difficult to prove superiority of the 0 + 5 pathway to the 5 + 2. Therefore, I will borrow a technique from my clinical trials’ friends and claim noninferiority. Follow my logic here and I promise not to include a convoluted endpoint like strokes, deaths, and non-Q wave MIs induced in training directors.

Our best test for measuring cognitive development during vascular training remains the Vascular Surgery In-Training Examination (VSITE). Looking at the 2015 results, the L5 integrated residents received a better average standard score (565 vs. 542) than their L2 fellowship counterparts. In fact, the L5 integrated residents had a superior score on seven of the nine vascular sub-tests.

For technical skill acquisition, we can look at both Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) case logs and the Fundamentals of Vascular Surgery (FVS) exam. The largest study of vascular surgical experience was published by P. Batista and colleagues from Thomas Jefferson University, Philadelphia, in 2015. They found integrated residents had performed 12% more vascular procedures than traditional 5 + 2 residents (851 vs. 758) despite 2 years less training time. Our own FVS exam was conducted on more than 280 vascular trainees representing all levels from both paradigms. On this validated exam of technical skill, 94% of PGY 5 integrated residents received a passing score, compared with 92% of PGY 7 fellows. Interestingly, means scores were significantly higher for PGY 5 integrated residents vs. first year fellows (P less than .005) despite the former group receiving one year less training.

Perhaps the final barrier to the success of the integrated pathway is our own preconceived notions. Doubters often cite some unmeasurable like “maturity” as a deterrent. Do we question the maturity of the general surgeon with five years of residency? How about the pediatrician or general practitioner with fewer? Isn’t maturity a key aspect of any physician?

I believe it is time to put our doubts to rest and embrace this new paradigm. We now have ample evidence that under the supervision of a vascular program director, a competent surgeon can be produced in five years.

These young people may not have followed our exact path, but they are our future.

Dr. Sheahan is an associate professor and the program director of the Vascular Surgery Fellowship at the Health Sciences Center, School of Medicine, Louisiana State University, New Orleans.

References

1. Possibly not the actual name of the inventor of the laparoscope, but I’m working on a deadline here. [Editor’s Note; A summary of the complex history of the development of laparascopy can be found here: J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech A. 1997 Dec;7:369-73.]

NO

BY ERICA L. MITCHELL, M.D.

Dr. Sheahan has already convinced himself that he has won this debate because he honestly believes that he has persuaded the Vascular Specialist readers of the merits and benefits of the integrated vascular surgery training paradigm. While I respect Mal for supporting a 5 year training paradigm, I am prepared to argue for a potentially even shorter surgical training model than that set by the integrated 0 + 5 (and in some cases 0 + 6 or 0 + 7) time-based archetype.

I propose, and implore, that vascular surgery educators adopt a competency-based educational (CBE) framework in which trainees complete their training when competence has been met and demonstrated through objective performance benchmarks, whether that is after 7 years, 5 years, or even 4 or fewer years of vascular surgical training.

The goal of all graduate medical education is to ensure that the graduating physician is competent to practice independently in his or her chosen field of medicine. For nearly a century, surgical training has been based on the apprenticeship model as articulated by Halsted. Residents work with faculty members on clinical rotations, gaining experience while providing service to patients. The rotations have formal educational goals and objectives, but resident experience relies heavily on the patients who present to the clinical service. The time in training is set and for vascular surgery, the required time in training is either 5 years via the integrated 0 + 5 track or 6-7 years via the early-specialization or traditional training tracks. Board eligibility requires completion of this training time, documentation of operative case logs, and a “ready to practice independently” attestation from the vascular surgery program director. It is unusual for surgical residents not to complete their program or to remain in their program for additional training, despite recent evidence suggesting that current surgical training may be resulting in suboptimal experiences.1

As a consequence of time-based residency training, residents completing vascular surgical training vary in competence, and currently there is no mechanism to solve this situation. While, I am sure you will agree, none of us think we are graduating incompetent vascular surgeons, we do, however, come across residents or fellows whom we believe are not yet ready for autonomous practice at completion of their training, regardless of their training paradigm. With time determining completion of training these residents, unfortunately, at the end of their designated training period the training is done, regardless of demonstrated skills or knowledge. While this is concerning, we also see the counter to this unprepared resident.

We have all witnessed exceptional trainees in our programs. These trainees, regardless of their training program, sail through their surgical residencies. They meet all of the defined educational milestones, finish all of the program requirements, and demonstrate ability to care for patients unsupervised way before their set graduation date. For both these types of residents, educational landmarks, as defined by the ACGME, are of secondary importance and since only time determines completion of training, the curriculum becomes irrelevant. The question then becomes: why work to define a body of vascular surgical knowledge or a required set of technical and non-technical skills if competence is defined as time in training? Mal, surely you don’t support graduating a trainee simply because they have spent five years in training? Hopefully you would want to know that this graduating trainee is ready and competent to safely and autonomously practice the full scope of vascular surgical practice.

Competency-based education is gaining momentum around the world as medical educators, physicians, and policy makers try to ensure that our graduating specialists are acquiring and demonstrating the competencies needed to practice in today’s rapidly evolving heath care systems. It is becoming the standard in training of physicians because of the perception that it provides more transparent standards and increased public accountability. Competency-based training is learner centric, outcomes based, and differentiated. A key distinguishing feature of CBE is that residents can progress through the educational process at different rates: the most capable and talented individuals should be able to make career transitions earlier, thus allowing them to enter the workforce at an accelerated rate. Others, requiring more time, would still attain the appropriate level of knowledge, skills, and attitudes needed to enter independent practice, and leave the program only when competent.

With the emerging reality of numerous nonsurgical specialties encroaching upon various traditional domains of vascular surgery, it is essential that our specialty lead the field in vascular education so as to maintain our stronghold on these areas of expertise. Competency-based training is a logical evolutionary step from our traditional years-in-place based system. Such training should improve, or at least verify, the quality of educational outcomes for our vascular trainees and our varying training programs. This model of education will allow comparisons among training programs, differing training tracks and even differing specialty practices. I urge the vascular surgery community to discuss this concept and ultimately to implement it.

Dr. Mitchell is a professor of surgery, program director for vascular surgery, and vice-chair of Quality, Department of Surgery, Division of Vascular Surgery, Oregon Health and Science University, Portland.

References

1. Ann Surg. 2009 May;249:719-24.

YES

BY MALACHI G. SHEAHAN III, M.D.

Believe it or not, one thing just about all vascular surgeons will agree upon is the proper way to train. For most of us, the best way to become a surgeon is the way we became a surgeon. Therefore, unless there is some aberration in the readership circulation of Vascular Specialist, I begin this debate facing an uphill battle with most of you.

The question of how to become a vascular surgeon should not be some esoteric matter left to be debated in the late Friday session of some educational symposium. Indeed, I commend the editors for bringing this issue to a more public forum. As much as I enjoy listening to the twenty-seventh abstract redefining the risks of type 2 endoleaks at our national meeting, the matter of how to create a vascular surgeon will define our profession for years to come.

Data from the Association of American Medical Colleges shows that there is now one vascular surgeon for every 100,000 people in the U.S. That is one vascular surgeon for every 350 dialysis patients or one for every 2,600 individuals with peripheral artery disease. We are already in short supply and 40% of us are over 55 years old. Applicant numbers to traditional 5 + 2 programs have plateaued over the past 10 years, suggesting that expanding fellowship positions is not the answer. Who then will fill this gap? As Dr. Ian Malcolm warned us in “Jurassic Park,” life will find a way.

If vascular surgeons don’t act to address this need, I know two candidates who are interested. Both interventional cardiology (10% over 55) and interventional radiology (12% over 55) have younger workforces that are growing at a superior rate. Between 2008 and 2013, the largest increases in training positions offered among all medical specialties were seen in interventional cardiology and interventional radiology.

Luckily our profession has not been caught completely off guard. Integrated vascular residency positions were first offered in 2007. Based on the quality and quantity of applicants, the number of institutions offering the integrated 0 + 5 vascular residency has grown from 17 in 2009 to 51 in 2015.

As practiced today, vascular surgery bears little similarity to even a decade ago. Limb salvage, aortic interventions, vein care, and access management all require highly specific training not typically offered in a general surgery residency. Our new board certification emphasizes the ability to supervise and interpret radiologic tests. Vascular surgery training is no longer a honing of general surgical skills. We must teach and develop completely new areas of expertise in our trainees. I propose the longer we have to focus on these specific abilities, the better our product will be.

A classic argument against traditional 5 + 2 training is why have a postgraduate-year 4 or 5 performing a pancreaticoduodenectomy (Whipple procedure) when they will never perform one in practice? This, however, is a flawed point, as open abdominal cases contain many aspects that translate well to vascular surgery. I believe the enemy is not Allen O. Whipple, but rather Harvey J. Laparoscope.1 Much like the declining numbers of open aortic cases, laparoscopic surgery has replaced much of the open surgical volume in general surgery training programs. How well these skills translate to vascular is unknown, but at face value, the cross-applicability doesn’t seem to pass muster. So while no case is wasted, perhaps our trainees’ time could be spent more efficiently.

Integrated 0 + 5 programs give total control of the rotations and curriculum to the vascular program director. This allows a truly cohesive approach to developing vascular skills and knowledge over a five year period interspersed with core general surgery skills and principals. Surgery rotations such as trauma, ICU, and cardiothoracic surgery that provide the best educational content to our trainees can now be handpicked, while avoiding lower-yield content like advanced laparoscopy and breast. Quality control is now in the hands of a vascular surgeon.

After all, Erica, if the sanctity of the five year general surgery residency must be preserved, why do you run one of the world’s only 4 + 2 programs? Clearly you believe we can condense our trainees’ education without losing quality.

Using the available metrics and data points it would be difficult to prove superiority of the 0 + 5 pathway to the 5 + 2. Therefore, I will borrow a technique from my clinical trials’ friends and claim noninferiority. Follow my logic here and I promise not to include a convoluted endpoint like strokes, deaths, and non-Q wave MIs induced in training directors.

Our best test for measuring cognitive development during vascular training remains the Vascular Surgery In-Training Examination (VSITE). Looking at the 2015 results, the L5 integrated residents received a better average standard score (565 vs. 542) than their L2 fellowship counterparts. In fact, the L5 integrated residents had a superior score on seven of the nine vascular sub-tests.

For technical skill acquisition, we can look at both Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) case logs and the Fundamentals of Vascular Surgery (FVS) exam. The largest study of vascular surgical experience was published by P. Batista and colleagues from Thomas Jefferson University, Philadelphia, in 2015. They found integrated residents had performed 12% more vascular procedures than traditional 5 + 2 residents (851 vs. 758) despite 2 years less training time. Our own FVS exam was conducted on more than 280 vascular trainees representing all levels from both paradigms. On this validated exam of technical skill, 94% of PGY 5 integrated residents received a passing score, compared with 92% of PGY 7 fellows. Interestingly, means scores were significantly higher for PGY 5 integrated residents vs. first year fellows (P less than .005) despite the former group receiving one year less training.

Perhaps the final barrier to the success of the integrated pathway is our own preconceived notions. Doubters often cite some unmeasurable like “maturity” as a deterrent. Do we question the maturity of the general surgeon with five years of residency? How about the pediatrician or general practitioner with fewer? Isn’t maturity a key aspect of any physician?

I believe it is time to put our doubts to rest and embrace this new paradigm. We now have ample evidence that under the supervision of a vascular program director, a competent surgeon can be produced in five years.

These young people may not have followed our exact path, but they are our future.

Dr. Sheahan is an associate professor and the program director of the Vascular Surgery Fellowship at the Health Sciences Center, School of Medicine, Louisiana State University, New Orleans.

References

1. Possibly not the actual name of the inventor of the laparoscope, but I’m working on a deadline here. [Editor’s Note; A summary of the complex history of the development of laparascopy can be found here: J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech A. 1997 Dec;7:369-73.]

NO

BY ERICA L. MITCHELL, M.D.

Dr. Sheahan has already convinced himself that he has won this debate because he honestly believes that he has persuaded the Vascular Specialist readers of the merits and benefits of the integrated vascular surgery training paradigm. While I respect Mal for supporting a 5 year training paradigm, I am prepared to argue for a potentially even shorter surgical training model than that set by the integrated 0 + 5 (and in some cases 0 + 6 or 0 + 7) time-based archetype.

I propose, and implore, that vascular surgery educators adopt a competency-based educational (CBE) framework in which trainees complete their training when competence has been met and demonstrated through objective performance benchmarks, whether that is after 7 years, 5 years, or even 4 or fewer years of vascular surgical training.

The goal of all graduate medical education is to ensure that the graduating physician is competent to practice independently in his or her chosen field of medicine. For nearly a century, surgical training has been based on the apprenticeship model as articulated by Halsted. Residents work with faculty members on clinical rotations, gaining experience while providing service to patients. The rotations have formal educational goals and objectives, but resident experience relies heavily on the patients who present to the clinical service. The time in training is set and for vascular surgery, the required time in training is either 5 years via the integrated 0 + 5 track or 6-7 years via the early-specialization or traditional training tracks. Board eligibility requires completion of this training time, documentation of operative case logs, and a “ready to practice independently” attestation from the vascular surgery program director. It is unusual for surgical residents not to complete their program or to remain in their program for additional training, despite recent evidence suggesting that current surgical training may be resulting in suboptimal experiences.1

As a consequence of time-based residency training, residents completing vascular surgical training vary in competence, and currently there is no mechanism to solve this situation. While, I am sure you will agree, none of us think we are graduating incompetent vascular surgeons, we do, however, come across residents or fellows whom we believe are not yet ready for autonomous practice at completion of their training, regardless of their training paradigm. With time determining completion of training these residents, unfortunately, at the end of their designated training period the training is done, regardless of demonstrated skills or knowledge. While this is concerning, we also see the counter to this unprepared resident.

We have all witnessed exceptional trainees in our programs. These trainees, regardless of their training program, sail through their surgical residencies. They meet all of the defined educational milestones, finish all of the program requirements, and demonstrate ability to care for patients unsupervised way before their set graduation date. For both these types of residents, educational landmarks, as defined by the ACGME, are of secondary importance and since only time determines completion of training, the curriculum becomes irrelevant. The question then becomes: why work to define a body of vascular surgical knowledge or a required set of technical and non-technical skills if competence is defined as time in training? Mal, surely you don’t support graduating a trainee simply because they have spent five years in training? Hopefully you would want to know that this graduating trainee is ready and competent to safely and autonomously practice the full scope of vascular surgical practice.

Competency-based education is gaining momentum around the world as medical educators, physicians, and policy makers try to ensure that our graduating specialists are acquiring and demonstrating the competencies needed to practice in today’s rapidly evolving heath care systems. It is becoming the standard in training of physicians because of the perception that it provides more transparent standards and increased public accountability. Competency-based training is learner centric, outcomes based, and differentiated. A key distinguishing feature of CBE is that residents can progress through the educational process at different rates: the most capable and talented individuals should be able to make career transitions earlier, thus allowing them to enter the workforce at an accelerated rate. Others, requiring more time, would still attain the appropriate level of knowledge, skills, and attitudes needed to enter independent practice, and leave the program only when competent.

With the emerging reality of numerous nonsurgical specialties encroaching upon various traditional domains of vascular surgery, it is essential that our specialty lead the field in vascular education so as to maintain our stronghold on these areas of expertise. Competency-based training is a logical evolutionary step from our traditional years-in-place based system. Such training should improve, or at least verify, the quality of educational outcomes for our vascular trainees and our varying training programs. This model of education will allow comparisons among training programs, differing training tracks and even differing specialty practices. I urge the vascular surgery community to discuss this concept and ultimately to implement it.

Dr. Mitchell is a professor of surgery, program director for vascular surgery, and vice-chair of Quality, Department of Surgery, Division of Vascular Surgery, Oregon Health and Science University, Portland.

References

1. Ann Surg. 2009 May;249:719-24.

YES

BY MALACHI G. SHEAHAN III, M.D.

Believe it or not, one thing just about all vascular surgeons will agree upon is the proper way to train. For most of us, the best way to become a surgeon is the way we became a surgeon. Therefore, unless there is some aberration in the readership circulation of Vascular Specialist, I begin this debate facing an uphill battle with most of you.

The question of how to become a vascular surgeon should not be some esoteric matter left to be debated in the late Friday session of some educational symposium. Indeed, I commend the editors for bringing this issue to a more public forum. As much as I enjoy listening to the twenty-seventh abstract redefining the risks of type 2 endoleaks at our national meeting, the matter of how to create a vascular surgeon will define our profession for years to come.

Data from the Association of American Medical Colleges shows that there is now one vascular surgeon for every 100,000 people in the U.S. That is one vascular surgeon for every 350 dialysis patients or one for every 2,600 individuals with peripheral artery disease. We are already in short supply and 40% of us are over 55 years old. Applicant numbers to traditional 5 + 2 programs have plateaued over the past 10 years, suggesting that expanding fellowship positions is not the answer. Who then will fill this gap? As Dr. Ian Malcolm warned us in “Jurassic Park,” life will find a way.

If vascular surgeons don’t act to address this need, I know two candidates who are interested. Both interventional cardiology (10% over 55) and interventional radiology (12% over 55) have younger workforces that are growing at a superior rate. Between 2008 and 2013, the largest increases in training positions offered among all medical specialties were seen in interventional cardiology and interventional radiology.

Luckily our profession has not been caught completely off guard. Integrated vascular residency positions were first offered in 2007. Based on the quality and quantity of applicants, the number of institutions offering the integrated 0 + 5 vascular residency has grown from 17 in 2009 to 51 in 2015.

As practiced today, vascular surgery bears little similarity to even a decade ago. Limb salvage, aortic interventions, vein care, and access management all require highly specific training not typically offered in a general surgery residency. Our new board certification emphasizes the ability to supervise and interpret radiologic tests. Vascular surgery training is no longer a honing of general surgical skills. We must teach and develop completely new areas of expertise in our trainees. I propose the longer we have to focus on these specific abilities, the better our product will be.

A classic argument against traditional 5 + 2 training is why have a postgraduate-year 4 or 5 performing a pancreaticoduodenectomy (Whipple procedure) when they will never perform one in practice? This, however, is a flawed point, as open abdominal cases contain many aspects that translate well to vascular surgery. I believe the enemy is not Allen O. Whipple, but rather Harvey J. Laparoscope.1 Much like the declining numbers of open aortic cases, laparoscopic surgery has replaced much of the open surgical volume in general surgery training programs. How well these skills translate to vascular is unknown, but at face value, the cross-applicability doesn’t seem to pass muster. So while no case is wasted, perhaps our trainees’ time could be spent more efficiently.

Integrated 0 + 5 programs give total control of the rotations and curriculum to the vascular program director. This allows a truly cohesive approach to developing vascular skills and knowledge over a five year period interspersed with core general surgery skills and principals. Surgery rotations such as trauma, ICU, and cardiothoracic surgery that provide the best educational content to our trainees can now be handpicked, while avoiding lower-yield content like advanced laparoscopy and breast. Quality control is now in the hands of a vascular surgeon.

After all, Erica, if the sanctity of the five year general surgery residency must be preserved, why do you run one of the world’s only 4 + 2 programs? Clearly you believe we can condense our trainees’ education without losing quality.

Using the available metrics and data points it would be difficult to prove superiority of the 0 + 5 pathway to the 5 + 2. Therefore, I will borrow a technique from my clinical trials’ friends and claim noninferiority. Follow my logic here and I promise not to include a convoluted endpoint like strokes, deaths, and non-Q wave MIs induced in training directors.

Our best test for measuring cognitive development during vascular training remains the Vascular Surgery In-Training Examination (VSITE). Looking at the 2015 results, the L5 integrated residents received a better average standard score (565 vs. 542) than their L2 fellowship counterparts. In fact, the L5 integrated residents had a superior score on seven of the nine vascular sub-tests.

For technical skill acquisition, we can look at both Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) case logs and the Fundamentals of Vascular Surgery (FVS) exam. The largest study of vascular surgical experience was published by P. Batista and colleagues from Thomas Jefferson University, Philadelphia, in 2015. They found integrated residents had performed 12% more vascular procedures than traditional 5 + 2 residents (851 vs. 758) despite 2 years less training time. Our own FVS exam was conducted on more than 280 vascular trainees representing all levels from both paradigms. On this validated exam of technical skill, 94% of PGY 5 integrated residents received a passing score, compared with 92% of PGY 7 fellows. Interestingly, means scores were significantly higher for PGY 5 integrated residents vs. first year fellows (P less than .005) despite the former group receiving one year less training.

Perhaps the final barrier to the success of the integrated pathway is our own preconceived notions. Doubters often cite some unmeasurable like “maturity” as a deterrent. Do we question the maturity of the general surgeon with five years of residency? How about the pediatrician or general practitioner with fewer? Isn’t maturity a key aspect of any physician?

I believe it is time to put our doubts to rest and embrace this new paradigm. We now have ample evidence that under the supervision of a vascular program director, a competent surgeon can be produced in five years.

These young people may not have followed our exact path, but they are our future.

Dr. Sheahan is an associate professor and the program director of the Vascular Surgery Fellowship at the Health Sciences Center, School of Medicine, Louisiana State University, New Orleans.

References

1. Possibly not the actual name of the inventor of the laparoscope, but I’m working on a deadline here. [Editor’s Note; A summary of the complex history of the development of laparascopy can be found here: J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech A. 1997 Dec;7:369-73.]

NO

BY ERICA L. MITCHELL, M.D.

Dr. Sheahan has already convinced himself that he has won this debate because he honestly believes that he has persuaded the Vascular Specialist readers of the merits and benefits of the integrated vascular surgery training paradigm. While I respect Mal for supporting a 5 year training paradigm, I am prepared to argue for a potentially even shorter surgical training model than that set by the integrated 0 + 5 (and in some cases 0 + 6 or 0 + 7) time-based archetype.

I propose, and implore, that vascular surgery educators adopt a competency-based educational (CBE) framework in which trainees complete their training when competence has been met and demonstrated through objective performance benchmarks, whether that is after 7 years, 5 years, or even 4 or fewer years of vascular surgical training.

The goal of all graduate medical education is to ensure that the graduating physician is competent to practice independently in his or her chosen field of medicine. For nearly a century, surgical training has been based on the apprenticeship model as articulated by Halsted. Residents work with faculty members on clinical rotations, gaining experience while providing service to patients. The rotations have formal educational goals and objectives, but resident experience relies heavily on the patients who present to the clinical service. The time in training is set and for vascular surgery, the required time in training is either 5 years via the integrated 0 + 5 track or 6-7 years via the early-specialization or traditional training tracks. Board eligibility requires completion of this training time, documentation of operative case logs, and a “ready to practice independently” attestation from the vascular surgery program director. It is unusual for surgical residents not to complete their program or to remain in their program for additional training, despite recent evidence suggesting that current surgical training may be resulting in suboptimal experiences.1

As a consequence of time-based residency training, residents completing vascular surgical training vary in competence, and currently there is no mechanism to solve this situation. While, I am sure you will agree, none of us think we are graduating incompetent vascular surgeons, we do, however, come across residents or fellows whom we believe are not yet ready for autonomous practice at completion of their training, regardless of their training paradigm. With time determining completion of training these residents, unfortunately, at the end of their designated training period the training is done, regardless of demonstrated skills or knowledge. While this is concerning, we also see the counter to this unprepared resident.

We have all witnessed exceptional trainees in our programs. These trainees, regardless of their training program, sail through their surgical residencies. They meet all of the defined educational milestones, finish all of the program requirements, and demonstrate ability to care for patients unsupervised way before their set graduation date. For both these types of residents, educational landmarks, as defined by the ACGME, are of secondary importance and since only time determines completion of training, the curriculum becomes irrelevant. The question then becomes: why work to define a body of vascular surgical knowledge or a required set of technical and non-technical skills if competence is defined as time in training? Mal, surely you don’t support graduating a trainee simply because they have spent five years in training? Hopefully you would want to know that this graduating trainee is ready and competent to safely and autonomously practice the full scope of vascular surgical practice.

Competency-based education is gaining momentum around the world as medical educators, physicians, and policy makers try to ensure that our graduating specialists are acquiring and demonstrating the competencies needed to practice in today’s rapidly evolving heath care systems. It is becoming the standard in training of physicians because of the perception that it provides more transparent standards and increased public accountability. Competency-based training is learner centric, outcomes based, and differentiated. A key distinguishing feature of CBE is that residents can progress through the educational process at different rates: the most capable and talented individuals should be able to make career transitions earlier, thus allowing them to enter the workforce at an accelerated rate. Others, requiring more time, would still attain the appropriate level of knowledge, skills, and attitudes needed to enter independent practice, and leave the program only when competent.

With the emerging reality of numerous nonsurgical specialties encroaching upon various traditional domains of vascular surgery, it is essential that our specialty lead the field in vascular education so as to maintain our stronghold on these areas of expertise. Competency-based training is a logical evolutionary step from our traditional years-in-place based system. Such training should improve, or at least verify, the quality of educational outcomes for our vascular trainees and our varying training programs. This model of education will allow comparisons among training programs, differing training tracks and even differing specialty practices. I urge the vascular surgery community to discuss this concept and ultimately to implement it.

Dr. Mitchell is a professor of surgery, program director for vascular surgery, and vice-chair of Quality, Department of Surgery, Division of Vascular Surgery, Oregon Health and Science University, Portland.

References

1. Ann Surg. 2009 May;249:719-24.

Appendicitis is the most common surgical emergency in children. It is seen at all ages; however, it is less common in infants and toddlers younger than 4 years of age and peaks at an incidence of 25/100,000 in children 12- to 18-years-old. Fortunately, appendicitis is rarely fatal but can be associated with significant morbidity, especially in young children in whom the diagnosis is often delayed and perforation is more common. Reducing morbidity requires early diagnosis and optimizing management such that perforation and associated peritonitis are prevented.

The classical signs and symptoms of appendicitis are periumbilical pain migrating to the right lower quadrant, nausea, and low-grade fever. Presentation may vary if the location of the appendix is atypical, but primarily is age associated. In young children, abdominal distension, hip pain with or without limp, and fever are commonplace. In older children, right lower quadrant abdominal pain that intensifies with coughing or movement is frequent. Localized tenderness also appears to be age related; right lower quadrant tenderness and rebound are more often found in older children and adolescents, whereas younger children have more diffuse signs.

When I started my career, abdominal x-rays would be performed in search of a fecalith. However, such studies were of low sensitivity, and clinical acumen had a primary role in the decision to take the child to the operating room. In the current era, ultrasound and CT scan provide reasonable sensitivity and specificity. Ultrasound criteria include a diameter greater than 6 mm, concentric rings (target sign), an appendicolith, high echogenicity, obstruction of the lumen, and fluid surrounding the appendix.

As the pathogenesis of appendicitis represents occlusion of the appendiceal lumen, followed by overgrowth or translocation of bowel flora resulting in inflammation of the wall of the appendix, anaerobes and gram-negative gut flora represent the most important pathogens. In advanced cases, necrosis and gangrene of the appendix result with progression to rupture and peritonitis.

The traditional management was early surgical intervention to reduce the risk of perforation and peritonitis with acceptance of high rates of negative abdominal explorations as an acceptable consequence. Today, the approach to management of appendicitis is undergoing reevaluation. Early antimicrobial treatment has become routine in the management of nonperforated, perforated, or abscessed appendicitis. However, the question being asked is, “Do all children with uncomplicated appendicitis need appendectomy, or is antibiotic management sufficient?”

P. Salminen et al. reported on the results of a randomized clinical trial in 530 patients aged 18-60 years, comparing antimicrobial treatment alone with early appendectomy. Among 273 patients in the surgical group, all but 1 underwent successful appendectomy, resulting in a success rate of 99.6% (95% CI, 98.0%-100.0%). In the antibiotic group, 186 of 256 patients (70%) treated with antibiotics did not require surgery; 70 (27%) underwent appendectomy within 1 year of initial presentation for appendicitis (JAMA. 2015 Jun 16;313[23]:2340-8). There were no intraabdominal abscesses or other major complications associated with delayed appendectomy in patients randomized to antibiotic treatment. The authors concluded that among patients with CT-proven, uncomplicated appendicitis, antibiotic treatment did not meet the prespecified criterion for noninferiority, compared with appendectomy. However, most patients randomized to antibiotics for uncomplicated appendicitis did not require appendectomy during the 1-year follow-up period.

J.A. Horst et al. reviewed published reports of medical management of appendicitis in children (Ann Emerg Med. 2015 Aug;66[2]:119-22). They concluded that medical management of uncomplicated appendicitis in a select low-risk pediatric population is safe and does not result in significant morbidity. The arguments against a nonoperative approach include the risk of recurrent appendicitis, including the anxiety associated with any recurrences of abdominal pain, the risk of antibiotic-related complications, the potential for increased duration of hospitalization, and the relatively low morbidity of appendectomy in children. Factors associated with failed antibiotic management included fecaliths, fluid collections, or an appendiceal diameter greater than 1.1 cm on CT scan. The investigators concluded such children are poor candidates for nonsurgical management.

The bottom line is that antimicrobial therapy, in the absence of surgery, can be effective. Certainly in remote settings where surgery is not readily available, antimicrobial therapy with fluid and electrolyte management and close observation can be used in children with uncomplicated appendicitis with few failures and relatively few children requiring subsequent appendectomy. In more complicated cases with evidence of fecalith, or appendiceal abscess or phlegm, initial antimicrobial therapy reduces the acute inflammation and urgent need for surgery, but persistent inflammation of the appendix is often observed and appendectomy, either acutely or after improvement following antimicrobial therapy, appears indicated. Many different antimicrobial regimens have proven effective; ceftriaxone and metronidazole are associated with low rates of complications, offer an opportunity for once-daily therapy, and are cost effective, compared with other once-daily regimens.

Dr. Pelton is chief of pediatric infectious disease and coordinator of the maternal-child HIV program at Boston Medical Center.

Appendicitis is the most common surgical emergency in children. It is seen at all ages; however, it is less common in infants and toddlers younger than 4 years of age and peaks at an incidence of 25/100,000 in children 12- to 18-years-old. Fortunately, appendicitis is rarely fatal but can be associated with significant morbidity, especially in young children in whom the diagnosis is often delayed and perforation is more common. Reducing morbidity requires early diagnosis and optimizing management such that perforation and associated peritonitis are prevented.

The classical signs and symptoms of appendicitis are periumbilical pain migrating to the right lower quadrant, nausea, and low-grade fever. Presentation may vary if the location of the appendix is atypical, but primarily is age associated. In young children, abdominal distension, hip pain with or without limp, and fever are commonplace. In older children, right lower quadrant abdominal pain that intensifies with coughing or movement is frequent. Localized tenderness also appears to be age related; right lower quadrant tenderness and rebound are more often found in older children and adolescents, whereas younger children have more diffuse signs.

When I started my career, abdominal x-rays would be performed in search of a fecalith. However, such studies were of low sensitivity, and clinical acumen had a primary role in the decision to take the child to the operating room. In the current era, ultrasound and CT scan provide reasonable sensitivity and specificity. Ultrasound criteria include a diameter greater than 6 mm, concentric rings (target sign), an appendicolith, high echogenicity, obstruction of the lumen, and fluid surrounding the appendix.

As the pathogenesis of appendicitis represents occlusion of the appendiceal lumen, followed by overgrowth or translocation of bowel flora resulting in inflammation of the wall of the appendix, anaerobes and gram-negative gut flora represent the most important pathogens. In advanced cases, necrosis and gangrene of the appendix result with progression to rupture and peritonitis.

The traditional management was early surgical intervention to reduce the risk of perforation and peritonitis with acceptance of high rates of negative abdominal explorations as an acceptable consequence. Today, the approach to management of appendicitis is undergoing reevaluation. Early antimicrobial treatment has become routine in the management of nonperforated, perforated, or abscessed appendicitis. However, the question being asked is, “Do all children with uncomplicated appendicitis need appendectomy, or is antibiotic management sufficient?”

P. Salminen et al. reported on the results of a randomized clinical trial in 530 patients aged 18-60 years, comparing antimicrobial treatment alone with early appendectomy. Among 273 patients in the surgical group, all but 1 underwent successful appendectomy, resulting in a success rate of 99.6% (95% CI, 98.0%-100.0%). In the antibiotic group, 186 of 256 patients (70%) treated with antibiotics did not require surgery; 70 (27%) underwent appendectomy within 1 year of initial presentation for appendicitis (JAMA. 2015 Jun 16;313[23]:2340-8). There were no intraabdominal abscesses or other major complications associated with delayed appendectomy in patients randomized to antibiotic treatment. The authors concluded that among patients with CT-proven, uncomplicated appendicitis, antibiotic treatment did not meet the prespecified criterion for noninferiority, compared with appendectomy. However, most patients randomized to antibiotics for uncomplicated appendicitis did not require appendectomy during the 1-year follow-up period.

J.A. Horst et al. reviewed published reports of medical management of appendicitis in children (Ann Emerg Med. 2015 Aug;66[2]:119-22). They concluded that medical management of uncomplicated appendicitis in a select low-risk pediatric population is safe and does not result in significant morbidity. The arguments against a nonoperative approach include the risk of recurrent appendicitis, including the anxiety associated with any recurrences of abdominal pain, the risk of antibiotic-related complications, the potential for increased duration of hospitalization, and the relatively low morbidity of appendectomy in children. Factors associated with failed antibiotic management included fecaliths, fluid collections, or an appendiceal diameter greater than 1.1 cm on CT scan. The investigators concluded such children are poor candidates for nonsurgical management.

The bottom line is that antimicrobial therapy, in the absence of surgery, can be effective. Certainly in remote settings where surgery is not readily available, antimicrobial therapy with fluid and electrolyte management and close observation can be used in children with uncomplicated appendicitis with few failures and relatively few children requiring subsequent appendectomy. In more complicated cases with evidence of fecalith, or appendiceal abscess or phlegm, initial antimicrobial therapy reduces the acute inflammation and urgent need for surgery, but persistent inflammation of the appendix is often observed and appendectomy, either acutely or after improvement following antimicrobial therapy, appears indicated. Many different antimicrobial regimens have proven effective; ceftriaxone and metronidazole are associated with low rates of complications, offer an opportunity for once-daily therapy, and are cost effective, compared with other once-daily regimens.

Dr. Pelton is chief of pediatric infectious disease and coordinator of the maternal-child HIV program at Boston Medical Center.

Appendicitis is the most common surgical emergency in children. It is seen at all ages; however, it is less common in infants and toddlers younger than 4 years of age and peaks at an incidence of 25/100,000 in children 12- to 18-years-old. Fortunately, appendicitis is rarely fatal but can be associated with significant morbidity, especially in young children in whom the diagnosis is often delayed and perforation is more common. Reducing morbidity requires early diagnosis and optimizing management such that perforation and associated peritonitis are prevented.

The classical signs and symptoms of appendicitis are periumbilical pain migrating to the right lower quadrant, nausea, and low-grade fever. Presentation may vary if the location of the appendix is atypical, but primarily is age associated. In young children, abdominal distension, hip pain with or without limp, and fever are commonplace. In older children, right lower quadrant abdominal pain that intensifies with coughing or movement is frequent. Localized tenderness also appears to be age related; right lower quadrant tenderness and rebound are more often found in older children and adolescents, whereas younger children have more diffuse signs.

When I started my career, abdominal x-rays would be performed in search of a fecalith. However, such studies were of low sensitivity, and clinical acumen had a primary role in the decision to take the child to the operating room. In the current era, ultrasound and CT scan provide reasonable sensitivity and specificity. Ultrasound criteria include a diameter greater than 6 mm, concentric rings (target sign), an appendicolith, high echogenicity, obstruction of the lumen, and fluid surrounding the appendix.

As the pathogenesis of appendicitis represents occlusion of the appendiceal lumen, followed by overgrowth or translocation of bowel flora resulting in inflammation of the wall of the appendix, anaerobes and gram-negative gut flora represent the most important pathogens. In advanced cases, necrosis and gangrene of the appendix result with progression to rupture and peritonitis.

The traditional management was early surgical intervention to reduce the risk of perforation and peritonitis with acceptance of high rates of negative abdominal explorations as an acceptable consequence. Today, the approach to management of appendicitis is undergoing reevaluation. Early antimicrobial treatment has become routine in the management of nonperforated, perforated, or abscessed appendicitis. However, the question being asked is, “Do all children with uncomplicated appendicitis need appendectomy, or is antibiotic management sufficient?”

P. Salminen et al. reported on the results of a randomized clinical trial in 530 patients aged 18-60 years, comparing antimicrobial treatment alone with early appendectomy. Among 273 patients in the surgical group, all but 1 underwent successful appendectomy, resulting in a success rate of 99.6% (95% CI, 98.0%-100.0%). In the antibiotic group, 186 of 256 patients (70%) treated with antibiotics did not require surgery; 70 (27%) underwent appendectomy within 1 year of initial presentation for appendicitis (JAMA. 2015 Jun 16;313[23]:2340-8). There were no intraabdominal abscesses or other major complications associated with delayed appendectomy in patients randomized to antibiotic treatment. The authors concluded that among patients with CT-proven, uncomplicated appendicitis, antibiotic treatment did not meet the prespecified criterion for noninferiority, compared with appendectomy. However, most patients randomized to antibiotics for uncomplicated appendicitis did not require appendectomy during the 1-year follow-up period.

J.A. Horst et al. reviewed published reports of medical management of appendicitis in children (Ann Emerg Med. 2015 Aug;66[2]:119-22). They concluded that medical management of uncomplicated appendicitis in a select low-risk pediatric population is safe and does not result in significant morbidity. The arguments against a nonoperative approach include the risk of recurrent appendicitis, including the anxiety associated with any recurrences of abdominal pain, the risk of antibiotic-related complications, the potential for increased duration of hospitalization, and the relatively low morbidity of appendectomy in children. Factors associated with failed antibiotic management included fecaliths, fluid collections, or an appendiceal diameter greater than 1.1 cm on CT scan. The investigators concluded such children are poor candidates for nonsurgical management.

The bottom line is that antimicrobial therapy, in the absence of surgery, can be effective. Certainly in remote settings where surgery is not readily available, antimicrobial therapy with fluid and electrolyte management and close observation can be used in children with uncomplicated appendicitis with few failures and relatively few children requiring subsequent appendectomy. In more complicated cases with evidence of fecalith, or appendiceal abscess or phlegm, initial antimicrobial therapy reduces the acute inflammation and urgent need for surgery, but persistent inflammation of the appendix is often observed and appendectomy, either acutely or after improvement following antimicrobial therapy, appears indicated. Many different antimicrobial regimens have proven effective; ceftriaxone and metronidazole are associated with low rates of complications, offer an opportunity for once-daily therapy, and are cost effective, compared with other once-daily regimens.

Dr. Pelton is chief of pediatric infectious disease and coordinator of the maternal-child HIV program at Boston Medical Center.

Diagnosis: Pyoderma gangrenosum

Pyoderma gangrenosum (PG) is an uncommon, noninfectious neutrophilic dermatosis that results in chronic ulcerative lesions. This disease process favors adult women and can be associated with systemic diseases in the majority of cases. The most common underlying systemic ailments include inflammatory bowel disease, arthritis, infection, and hematologic malignancy; it can also be drug induced.

Typically, the lesions begin as an erythematous pustule or nodule on an extremity. As was the case with our patient, a history of a "spider bite" or other arthropod assault may be elicited in the history as patients try to attribute a cause to the development of the initial ulceration. The pustule then develops into an ulcer with a characteristic necrotic, violaceous undermined border with a purulent base. Also, this disease process is associated with pathergy, in which minor trauma can induce additional lesions at remote sites.

There are four well-known types of pyoderma gangrenosum including the classic ulcerative lesions, pustular, bullous, and superficial granulomatous type, also known as vegetative PG. The pustular type may be seen more frequently in patients with inflammatory bowel disease, the bullous type may predominate in hematologic disorders, and the superficial granulomatous type is known to occur following surgery or other trauma. 

The pathology of lesions can be nonspecific. However, in untreated lesions, widespread infiltration of neutrophils can be demonstrated at the base of the ulcers with accompanying necrosis at the periphery of lesions.

Dr. Bilu Martin is in private practice at Premier Dermatology, MD, in Aventura, Fla. More diagnostic cases are available at edermatologynews.com. To submit your case for possible publication, send an email to dermnews@frontlinemedcom.com.

Diagnosis: Pyoderma gangrenosum

Pyoderma gangrenosum (PG) is an uncommon, noninfectious neutrophilic dermatosis that results in chronic ulcerative lesions. This disease process favors adult women and can be associated with systemic diseases in the majority of cases. The most common underlying systemic ailments include inflammatory bowel disease, arthritis, infection, and hematologic malignancy; it can also be drug induced.

Typically, the lesions begin as an erythematous pustule or nodule on an extremity. As was the case with our patient, a history of a "spider bite" or other arthropod assault may be elicited in the history as patients try to attribute a cause to the development of the initial ulceration. The pustule then develops into an ulcer with a characteristic necrotic, violaceous undermined border with a purulent base. Also, this disease process is associated with pathergy, in which minor trauma can induce additional lesions at remote sites.

There are four well-known types of pyoderma gangrenosum including the classic ulcerative lesions, pustular, bullous, and superficial granulomatous type, also known as vegetative PG. The pustular type may be seen more frequently in patients with inflammatory bowel disease, the bullous type may predominate in hematologic disorders, and the superficial granulomatous type is known to occur following surgery or other trauma. 

The pathology of lesions can be nonspecific. However, in untreated lesions, widespread infiltration of neutrophils can be demonstrated at the base of the ulcers with accompanying necrosis at the periphery of lesions.

Dr. Bilu Martin is in private practice at Premier Dermatology, MD, in Aventura, Fla. More diagnostic cases are available at edermatologynews.com. To submit your case for possible publication, send an email to dermnews@frontlinemedcom.com.

Diagnosis: Pyoderma gangrenosum

Pyoderma gangrenosum (PG) is an uncommon, noninfectious neutrophilic dermatosis that results in chronic ulcerative lesions. This disease process favors adult women and can be associated with systemic diseases in the majority of cases. The most common underlying systemic ailments include inflammatory bowel disease, arthritis, infection, and hematologic malignancy; it can also be drug induced.

Typically, the lesions begin as an erythematous pustule or nodule on an extremity. As was the case with our patient, a history of a "spider bite" or other arthropod assault may be elicited in the history as patients try to attribute a cause to the development of the initial ulceration. The pustule then develops into an ulcer with a characteristic necrotic, violaceous undermined border with a purulent base. Also, this disease process is associated with pathergy, in which minor trauma can induce additional lesions at remote sites.

There are four well-known types of pyoderma gangrenosum including the classic ulcerative lesions, pustular, bullous, and superficial granulomatous type, also known as vegetative PG. The pustular type may be seen more frequently in patients with inflammatory bowel disease, the bullous type may predominate in hematologic disorders, and the superficial granulomatous type is known to occur following surgery or other trauma. 

The pathology of lesions can be nonspecific. However, in untreated lesions, widespread infiltration of neutrophils can be demonstrated at the base of the ulcers with accompanying necrosis at the periphery of lesions.

Dr. Bilu Martin is in private practice at Premier Dermatology, MD, in Aventura, Fla. More diagnostic cases are available at edermatologynews.com. To submit your case for possible publication, send an email to dermnews@frontlinemedcom.com.

By Catalina Matiz, M.D., and David Ginsberg

Nummular eczema

Nummular eczema is not an uncommon dermatosis that presents in pediatric and adult patients; its name, which derives from the Latin word nummulus (coin-like), refers to the coined-shape plaques that characterize this condition. It also has been referred to as discoid eczema and nummular dermatitis.¹

The lesions begin as erythematous papules and vesicles that extend into larger oval or circular plaques that often become crusted, and can later progress to dry and scaly plaques.^1,2 Patients often complain of intense pruritus.¹ The lesions can be single or multiple, and more commonly occur on the extensor extremities as well as the trunk, and rarely affect the neck and the head.^1-3 The pathophysiology of nummular eczema is not fully understood. It can occur in patients that exhibit atopic manifestations such as atopic dermatitis and other allergies, but there has been no clear link found between nummular eczema and atopy.^3,4

Many theories exist implicating causative factors including Staphylococcus aureus colonization and xerosis.¹ Similarly, some physicians believe that patch testing can be useful in these patients because of the potential for exacerbation caused by environmental allergens, but there is still no agreement on the ultimate cause.⁵ There is a higher incidence in males than females, and in the pediatric population, it is more common among “school aged” children between the ages of 2-12.⁶ Overall, nummular eczema is more commonly seen in adults, but it can occur at any age.^2,3,6

Differential diagnosis

Nummular eczema is commonly mistaken as tinea corporis.¹ The coined shape lesions, from which nummular eczema gets its name, can resemble the characteristic annular shape plaques of “ring worm,” but a potassium hydroxide (KOH) test or a fungal culture are simple ways to differentiate between the two conditions.

Nummular eczema occasionally can be confused for psoriasis as both entities can present with oval plaques. Psoriasis lesions tend to be pinker and less erythematous than nummular eczema lesions and most psoriasis plaques present with a characteristic silver scale.⁷ Clinically, nummular eczema is frequently associated with extreme pruritus, while in psoriasis the pruritus is less prominent.⁷

A biopsy would yield a more definitive diagnosis in difficult cases. Histologically, nummular eczema resembles other forms of spongiotic dermatitis, while psoriasis has very distinct histological features.⁷ Differentiating between contact dermatitis and nummular eczema relies on a thorough history of known allergies and potential exposure to environmental allergens. If history alone does not yield a definitive diagnosis and a suspicion for contact allergy is high, patch testing could help support one diagnosis over the other.⁵

Treatment

The generally accepted first line therapy includes mid to high potency topical corticosteroids in an ointment preparation or else under occlusion.^1,4 Other topical agents used include tar preparations and calcineurin inhibitors.⁴ Intralesional corticosteroid injection can be used to treat isolated lesions that fail to respond to topical treatments.⁴

As with almost all manifestations of dermatitis, general gentle skin care measures and daily moisturizing are recommended.¹ For more severe cases in older children, narrow-band UVB light therapy can be helpful.¹ Due to their efficacy in treatment of other forms of refractory dermatitis, systemic therapy with cyclosporine, azathioprine, mycophenolate mofetil, and methotrexate can be used in cases in which phototherapy fails or is not accessible.⁴

In cases recalcitrant to topical therapies, secondary staphylococcal infection always should be ruled out and treated with systemic antimicrobials such as first generation cephalosporins.¹

References

1. Eczematous eruptions in childhood in “Hurwitz Clinical Pediatric Dermatology,” 4th ed. (New York, N.Y.: Elsevier, pp. 59-60
2. Acta Derm Venereol. 1961;41:453-60.
3. Acta Derm Venereol. 1969;49(2):189-96.
4. Australas J Dermatol. 2010 May;51(2):128-30.
5. Contact Dermatitis. 1997 May;36(5):261-4.
6. Ped Dermatol. 2012 Oct;29(5):580-3.
7. Dermatol Ther. 2006 Mar-Apr;19(2):73-82.

Dr. Matiz is assistant professor of dermatology at Rady Children’s Hospital San Diego–University of California, San Diego and Mr. Ginsberg is a research associate at the hospital. Dr. Matiz and Mr. Ginsberg said they have no relevant financial disclosures.

By Catalina Matiz, M.D., and David Ginsberg

Nummular eczema

Nummular eczema is not an uncommon dermatosis that presents in pediatric and adult patients; its name, which derives from the Latin word nummulus (coin-like), refers to the coined-shape plaques that characterize this condition. It also has been referred to as discoid eczema and nummular dermatitis.¹

The lesions begin as erythematous papules and vesicles that extend into larger oval or circular plaques that often become crusted, and can later progress to dry and scaly plaques.^1,2 Patients often complain of intense pruritus.¹ The lesions can be single or multiple, and more commonly occur on the extensor extremities as well as the trunk, and rarely affect the neck and the head.^1-3 The pathophysiology of nummular eczema is not fully understood. It can occur in patients that exhibit atopic manifestations such as atopic dermatitis and other allergies, but there has been no clear link found between nummular eczema and atopy.^3,4

Many theories exist implicating causative factors including Staphylococcus aureus colonization and xerosis.¹ Similarly, some physicians believe that patch testing can be useful in these patients because of the potential for exacerbation caused by environmental allergens, but there is still no agreement on the ultimate cause.⁵ There is a higher incidence in males than females, and in the pediatric population, it is more common among “school aged” children between the ages of 2-12.⁶ Overall, nummular eczema is more commonly seen in adults, but it can occur at any age.^2,3,6

Differential diagnosis

Nummular eczema is commonly mistaken as tinea corporis.¹ The coined shape lesions, from which nummular eczema gets its name, can resemble the characteristic annular shape plaques of “ring worm,” but a potassium hydroxide (KOH) test or a fungal culture are simple ways to differentiate between the two conditions.

Nummular eczema occasionally can be confused for psoriasis as both entities can present with oval plaques. Psoriasis lesions tend to be pinker and less erythematous than nummular eczema lesions and most psoriasis plaques present with a characteristic silver scale.⁷ Clinically, nummular eczema is frequently associated with extreme pruritus, while in psoriasis the pruritus is less prominent.⁷

A biopsy would yield a more definitive diagnosis in difficult cases. Histologically, nummular eczema resembles other forms of spongiotic dermatitis, while psoriasis has very distinct histological features.⁷ Differentiating between contact dermatitis and nummular eczema relies on a thorough history of known allergies and potential exposure to environmental allergens. If history alone does not yield a definitive diagnosis and a suspicion for contact allergy is high, patch testing could help support one diagnosis over the other.⁵

Treatment

The generally accepted first line therapy includes mid to high potency topical corticosteroids in an ointment preparation or else under occlusion.^1,4 Other topical agents used include tar preparations and calcineurin inhibitors.⁴ Intralesional corticosteroid injection can be used to treat isolated lesions that fail to respond to topical treatments.⁴

As with almost all manifestations of dermatitis, general gentle skin care measures and daily moisturizing are recommended.¹ For more severe cases in older children, narrow-band UVB light therapy can be helpful.¹ Due to their efficacy in treatment of other forms of refractory dermatitis, systemic therapy with cyclosporine, azathioprine, mycophenolate mofetil, and methotrexate can be used in cases in which phototherapy fails or is not accessible.⁴

In cases recalcitrant to topical therapies, secondary staphylococcal infection always should be ruled out and treated with systemic antimicrobials such as first generation cephalosporins.¹

References

1. Eczematous eruptions in childhood in “Hurwitz Clinical Pediatric Dermatology,” 4th ed. (New York, N.Y.: Elsevier, pp. 59-60
2. Acta Derm Venereol. 1961;41:453-60.
3. Acta Derm Venereol. 1969;49(2):189-96.
4. Australas J Dermatol. 2010 May;51(2):128-30.
5. Contact Dermatitis. 1997 May;36(5):261-4.
6. Ped Dermatol. 2012 Oct;29(5):580-3.
7. Dermatol Ther. 2006 Mar-Apr;19(2):73-82.

Dr. Matiz is assistant professor of dermatology at Rady Children’s Hospital San Diego–University of California, San Diego and Mr. Ginsberg is a research associate at the hospital. Dr. Matiz and Mr. Ginsberg said they have no relevant financial disclosures.

By Catalina Matiz, M.D., and David Ginsberg

Nummular eczema

Nummular eczema is not an uncommon dermatosis that presents in pediatric and adult patients; its name, which derives from the Latin word nummulus (coin-like), refers to the coined-shape plaques that characterize this condition. It also has been referred to as discoid eczema and nummular dermatitis.¹

The lesions begin as erythematous papules and vesicles that extend into larger oval or circular plaques that often become crusted, and can later progress to dry and scaly plaques.^1,2 Patients often complain of intense pruritus.¹ The lesions can be single or multiple, and more commonly occur on the extensor extremities as well as the trunk, and rarely affect the neck and the head.^1-3 The pathophysiology of nummular eczema is not fully understood. It can occur in patients that exhibit atopic manifestations such as atopic dermatitis and other allergies, but there has been no clear link found between nummular eczema and atopy.^3,4

Many theories exist implicating causative factors including Staphylococcus aureus colonization and xerosis.¹ Similarly, some physicians believe that patch testing can be useful in these patients because of the potential for exacerbation caused by environmental allergens, but there is still no agreement on the ultimate cause.⁵ There is a higher incidence in males than females, and in the pediatric population, it is more common among “school aged” children between the ages of 2-12.⁶ Overall, nummular eczema is more commonly seen in adults, but it can occur at any age.^2,3,6

Differential diagnosis

Nummular eczema is commonly mistaken as tinea corporis.¹ The coined shape lesions, from which nummular eczema gets its name, can resemble the characteristic annular shape plaques of “ring worm,” but a potassium hydroxide (KOH) test or a fungal culture are simple ways to differentiate between the two conditions.

Nummular eczema occasionally can be confused for psoriasis as both entities can present with oval plaques. Psoriasis lesions tend to be pinker and less erythematous than nummular eczema lesions and most psoriasis plaques present with a characteristic silver scale.⁷ Clinically, nummular eczema is frequently associated with extreme pruritus, while in psoriasis the pruritus is less prominent.⁷

A biopsy would yield a more definitive diagnosis in difficult cases. Histologically, nummular eczema resembles other forms of spongiotic dermatitis, while psoriasis has very distinct histological features.⁷ Differentiating between contact dermatitis and nummular eczema relies on a thorough history of known allergies and potential exposure to environmental allergens. If history alone does not yield a definitive diagnosis and a suspicion for contact allergy is high, patch testing could help support one diagnosis over the other.⁵

Treatment

The generally accepted first line therapy includes mid to high potency topical corticosteroids in an ointment preparation or else under occlusion.^1,4 Other topical agents used include tar preparations and calcineurin inhibitors.⁴ Intralesional corticosteroid injection can be used to treat isolated lesions that fail to respond to topical treatments.⁴

As with almost all manifestations of dermatitis, general gentle skin care measures and daily moisturizing are recommended.¹ For more severe cases in older children, narrow-band UVB light therapy can be helpful.¹ Due to their efficacy in treatment of other forms of refractory dermatitis, systemic therapy with cyclosporine, azathioprine, mycophenolate mofetil, and methotrexate can be used in cases in which phototherapy fails or is not accessible.⁴

In cases recalcitrant to topical therapies, secondary staphylococcal infection always should be ruled out and treated with systemic antimicrobials such as first generation cephalosporins.¹

References

1. Eczematous eruptions in childhood in “Hurwitz Clinical Pediatric Dermatology,” 4th ed. (New York, N.Y.: Elsevier, pp. 59-60
2. Acta Derm Venereol. 1961;41:453-60.
3. Acta Derm Venereol. 1969;49(2):189-96.
4. Australas J Dermatol. 2010 May;51(2):128-30.
5. Contact Dermatitis. 1997 May;36(5):261-4.
6. Ped Dermatol. 2012 Oct;29(5):580-3.
7. Dermatol Ther. 2006 Mar-Apr;19(2):73-82.

Dr. Matiz is assistant professor of dermatology at Rady Children’s Hospital San Diego–University of California, San Diego and Mr. Ginsberg is a research associate at the hospital. Dr. Matiz and Mr. Ginsberg said they have no relevant financial disclosures.

Women in perimenopause are at increased risk of high-frequency headache, compared with premenopausal women, according to data published online ahead of print January 21 in Headache. Women in menopause also are at increased risk of high-frequency headache, but the effect of menopause on headache frequency may be mediated or confounded by medication overuse or depression.

“Our results confirm the commonly held belief that the perimenopause worsens headache, but challenge the idea that migraine ‘always’ improves during the menopause,” said Vincent T. Martin, MD, Professor of Internal Medicine in the University of Cincinnati’s (UC) Division of General Internal Medicine and codirector of the Headache and Facial Pain Program at the UC Neuroscience Institute. “Recognition of the increased risk of high-frequency headache during the menopausal transition suggests a need for optimized preventive treatment of migraine during this time of women’s life.”

Research has suggested a lower prevalence of headache or migraine during menopause, compared with premenopause. No previous studies have analyzed whether frequency of headache attacks changes during the menopausal transition among women with migraine, however. Dr. Martin and colleagues sought to determine whether the percentage of female migraineurs with high-frequency headache, defined as 10 or more days/month, is greater during the perimenopausal and menopausal time periods, compared with the premenopausal period. The researchers also set out to examine whether any increase in high-frequency headache during a particular reproductive phase was restricted to the early or late stages of the phase.

An Analysis of AMPP Data

To answer their questions, the investigators conducted a cross-sectional study using data from the American Migraine Prevalence and Prevention (AMPP) study. The AMPP researchers elicited data about headache from 162,756 respondents age 12 or older in 2004 and invited a random subset of 24,000 people age 18 or older with self-reported severe headache to participate in annual follow-up surveys for the subsequent five years. Follow-up surveys included questions about sociodemographics (eg, BMI, smoking, and household income) and headache types and characteristics, in addition to the Migraine Disability Assessment Score. Dr. Martin and colleagues examined data from the 2006 follow-up survey because it contained questions on the menstrual cycle.

Eligible participants in the cross-sectional study were women with a diagnosis of migraine between ages 35 and 65. Women who were pregnant, breastfeeding, had a history of hysterectomy or oophorectomy, or used hormonal therapies were excluded from the analysis. The investigators classified respondents as premenopause, perimenopause, and menopause according to Stages of Reproductive Aging Workshop criteria.

Late Perimenopause and Headache Frequency

The analysis included 3,664 women, of whom 3,454 had episodic migraine and 210 had chronic migraine. In all, 1,263 women were classified as premenopausal, 1,283 as perimenopausal, and 1,118 as menopausal. Compared with women in premenopause, women in perimenopause and menopause used more migraine preventives and were more likely to overuse medication.

Approximately 8% of premenopausal women had high-frequency headache, compared with 12.2% of perimenopausal women and 12.0% of postmenopausal women. After adjustments for sociodemographics alone, the odds ratios (ORs) of high-frequency headache were 1.62 for perimenopausal women and 1.76 for menopausal women, compared with premenopausal women. After adjustment for BMI, current migraine preventive use, medication overuse, and depression, the OR decreased, but remained significant in the perimenopausal group (OR, 1.42) and lost significance for the menopausal group (OR, 1.27). Depression and medication overuse significantly increased the likelihood of high-frequency headache.

When the researchers examined participants in the early and late stages of perimenopause and adjusted data for all covariates, women in late perimenopause had an increased likelihood of high-frequency headache (OR, 1.72), but women in early perimenopause had a statistically insignificant increased risk of this outcome (OR, 1.22), compared with premenopausal women. When the researchers examined the early and late stages of menopause, compared with premenopause, they found no significant difference in risk of high-frequency headache after controlling for all covariates.

Results Contradict Common Belief

“These results suggest that the hormonal milieu of the late perimenopause is particularly provocative for high-frequency headache among migraineurs,” said Dr. Martin. Because the researchers did not collect data on premenstrual syndrome (PMS) disorder, they could not determine whether the increased risk for high-frequency headache during perimenopause only occurred in female migraineurs with PMS or in the entire population.

Epidemiologic studies have contributed to an impression that migraine prevalence declines in menopausal women, but the current study’s results contradict this impression. “Our study used high-frequency headache as its primary outcome measure, rather than migraine prevalence. It is plausible that during menopause, migraine prevalence decreases and migraine attacks occur more frequently in subgroups of women,” said Dr. Martin. “Women, as they get older, develop lots of aches and pains, joint [pain], and back pain, and it is possible [that] their overuse of pain medications for headache and other conditions might actually drive an increase in headaches for the menopause group,” he added.

Estrogen withdrawal in the late luteal phase, low serum levels of estrogen or progesterone, and increased uterine prostaglandin release could precipitate headache during the menopausal transition, said the researchers. These hormonal changes also may change the characteristics of the menstrual cycle, which could in turn affect headache frequency.

An advantage of the cross-sectional analysis is that it was a large population-based study of persons with migraine “that should have wide generalizability to the general population,” said Dr. Martin. The outcome measure of high-frequency headache, however, was not limited to migraine, but included all headaches. In addition, headache frequency was self-reported, and investigators did not confirm it with daily headache diaries. Finally, the researchers did not account or control for aura. “Our results should be considered preliminary until confirmed in future studies,” Dr. Martin concluded.

—Erik Greb

Women in perimenopause are at increased risk of high-frequency headache, compared with premenopausal women, according to data published online ahead of print January 21 in Headache. Women in menopause also are at increased risk of high-frequency headache, but the effect of menopause on headache frequency may be mediated or confounded by medication overuse or depression.

“Our results confirm the commonly held belief that the perimenopause worsens headache, but challenge the idea that migraine ‘always’ improves during the menopause,” said Vincent T. Martin, MD, Professor of Internal Medicine in the University of Cincinnati’s (UC) Division of General Internal Medicine and codirector of the Headache and Facial Pain Program at the UC Neuroscience Institute. “Recognition of the increased risk of high-frequency headache during the menopausal transition suggests a need for optimized preventive treatment of migraine during this time of women’s life.”

Research has suggested a lower prevalence of headache or migraine during menopause, compared with premenopause. No previous studies have analyzed whether frequency of headache attacks changes during the menopausal transition among women with migraine, however. Dr. Martin and colleagues sought to determine whether the percentage of female migraineurs with high-frequency headache, defined as 10 or more days/month, is greater during the perimenopausal and menopausal time periods, compared with the premenopausal period. The researchers also set out to examine whether any increase in high-frequency headache during a particular reproductive phase was restricted to the early or late stages of the phase.

An Analysis of AMPP Data

To answer their questions, the investigators conducted a cross-sectional study using data from the American Migraine Prevalence and Prevention (AMPP) study. The AMPP researchers elicited data about headache from 162,756 respondents age 12 or older in 2004 and invited a random subset of 24,000 people age 18 or older with self-reported severe headache to participate in annual follow-up surveys for the subsequent five years. Follow-up surveys included questions about sociodemographics (eg, BMI, smoking, and household income) and headache types and characteristics, in addition to the Migraine Disability Assessment Score. Dr. Martin and colleagues examined data from the 2006 follow-up survey because it contained questions on the menstrual cycle.

Eligible participants in the cross-sectional study were women with a diagnosis of migraine between ages 35 and 65. Women who were pregnant, breastfeeding, had a history of hysterectomy or oophorectomy, or used hormonal therapies were excluded from the analysis. The investigators classified respondents as premenopause, perimenopause, and menopause according to Stages of Reproductive Aging Workshop criteria.

Late Perimenopause and Headache Frequency

The analysis included 3,664 women, of whom 3,454 had episodic migraine and 210 had chronic migraine. In all, 1,263 women were classified as premenopausal, 1,283 as perimenopausal, and 1,118 as menopausal. Compared with women in premenopause, women in perimenopause and menopause used more migraine preventives and were more likely to overuse medication.

Approximately 8% of premenopausal women had high-frequency headache, compared with 12.2% of perimenopausal women and 12.0% of postmenopausal women. After adjustments for sociodemographics alone, the odds ratios (ORs) of high-frequency headache were 1.62 for perimenopausal women and 1.76 for menopausal women, compared with premenopausal women. After adjustment for BMI, current migraine preventive use, medication overuse, and depression, the OR decreased, but remained significant in the perimenopausal group (OR, 1.42) and lost significance for the menopausal group (OR, 1.27). Depression and medication overuse significantly increased the likelihood of high-frequency headache.

When the researchers examined participants in the early and late stages of perimenopause and adjusted data for all covariates, women in late perimenopause had an increased likelihood of high-frequency headache (OR, 1.72), but women in early perimenopause had a statistically insignificant increased risk of this outcome (OR, 1.22), compared with premenopausal women. When the researchers examined the early and late stages of menopause, compared with premenopause, they found no significant difference in risk of high-frequency headache after controlling for all covariates.

Results Contradict Common Belief

“These results suggest that the hormonal milieu of the late perimenopause is particularly provocative for high-frequency headache among migraineurs,” said Dr. Martin. Because the researchers did not collect data on premenstrual syndrome (PMS) disorder, they could not determine whether the increased risk for high-frequency headache during perimenopause only occurred in female migraineurs with PMS or in the entire population.

Epidemiologic studies have contributed to an impression that migraine prevalence declines in menopausal women, but the current study’s results contradict this impression. “Our study used high-frequency headache as its primary outcome measure, rather than migraine prevalence. It is plausible that during menopause, migraine prevalence decreases and migraine attacks occur more frequently in subgroups of women,” said Dr. Martin. “Women, as they get older, develop lots of aches and pains, joint [pain], and back pain, and it is possible [that] their overuse of pain medications for headache and other conditions might actually drive an increase in headaches for the menopause group,” he added.

Estrogen withdrawal in the late luteal phase, low serum levels of estrogen or progesterone, and increased uterine prostaglandin release could precipitate headache during the menopausal transition, said the researchers. These hormonal changes also may change the characteristics of the menstrual cycle, which could in turn affect headache frequency.

An advantage of the cross-sectional analysis is that it was a large population-based study of persons with migraine “that should have wide generalizability to the general population,” said Dr. Martin. The outcome measure of high-frequency headache, however, was not limited to migraine, but included all headaches. In addition, headache frequency was self-reported, and investigators did not confirm it with daily headache diaries. Finally, the researchers did not account or control for aura. “Our results should be considered preliminary until confirmed in future studies,” Dr. Martin concluded.

—Erik Greb

Women in perimenopause are at increased risk of high-frequency headache, compared with premenopausal women, according to data published online ahead of print January 21 in Headache. Women in menopause also are at increased risk of high-frequency headache, but the effect of menopause on headache frequency may be mediated or confounded by medication overuse or depression.

“Our results confirm the commonly held belief that the perimenopause worsens headache, but challenge the idea that migraine ‘always’ improves during the menopause,” said Vincent T. Martin, MD, Professor of Internal Medicine in the University of Cincinnati’s (UC) Division of General Internal Medicine and codirector of the Headache and Facial Pain Program at the UC Neuroscience Institute. “Recognition of the increased risk of high-frequency headache during the menopausal transition suggests a need for optimized preventive treatment of migraine during this time of women’s life.”

Research has suggested a lower prevalence of headache or migraine during menopause, compared with premenopause. No previous studies have analyzed whether frequency of headache attacks changes during the menopausal transition among women with migraine, however. Dr. Martin and colleagues sought to determine whether the percentage of female migraineurs with high-frequency headache, defined as 10 or more days/month, is greater during the perimenopausal and menopausal time periods, compared with the premenopausal period. The researchers also set out to examine whether any increase in high-frequency headache during a particular reproductive phase was restricted to the early or late stages of the phase.

An Analysis of AMPP Data

To answer their questions, the investigators conducted a cross-sectional study using data from the American Migraine Prevalence and Prevention (AMPP) study. The AMPP researchers elicited data about headache from 162,756 respondents age 12 or older in 2004 and invited a random subset of 24,000 people age 18 or older with self-reported severe headache to participate in annual follow-up surveys for the subsequent five years. Follow-up surveys included questions about sociodemographics (eg, BMI, smoking, and household income) and headache types and characteristics, in addition to the Migraine Disability Assessment Score. Dr. Martin and colleagues examined data from the 2006 follow-up survey because it contained questions on the menstrual cycle.

Eligible participants in the cross-sectional study were women with a diagnosis of migraine between ages 35 and 65. Women who were pregnant, breastfeeding, had a history of hysterectomy or oophorectomy, or used hormonal therapies were excluded from the analysis. The investigators classified respondents as premenopause, perimenopause, and menopause according to Stages of Reproductive Aging Workshop criteria.

Late Perimenopause and Headache Frequency

The analysis included 3,664 women, of whom 3,454 had episodic migraine and 210 had chronic migraine. In all, 1,263 women were classified as premenopausal, 1,283 as perimenopausal, and 1,118 as menopausal. Compared with women in premenopause, women in perimenopause and menopause used more migraine preventives and were more likely to overuse medication.

Approximately 8% of premenopausal women had high-frequency headache, compared with 12.2% of perimenopausal women and 12.0% of postmenopausal women. After adjustments for sociodemographics alone, the odds ratios (ORs) of high-frequency headache were 1.62 for perimenopausal women and 1.76 for menopausal women, compared with premenopausal women. After adjustment for BMI, current migraine preventive use, medication overuse, and depression, the OR decreased, but remained significant in the perimenopausal group (OR, 1.42) and lost significance for the menopausal group (OR, 1.27). Depression and medication overuse significantly increased the likelihood of high-frequency headache.

When the researchers examined participants in the early and late stages of perimenopause and adjusted data for all covariates, women in late perimenopause had an increased likelihood of high-frequency headache (OR, 1.72), but women in early perimenopause had a statistically insignificant increased risk of this outcome (OR, 1.22), compared with premenopausal women. When the researchers examined the early and late stages of menopause, compared with premenopause, they found no significant difference in risk of high-frequency headache after controlling for all covariates.

Results Contradict Common Belief

“These results suggest that the hormonal milieu of the late perimenopause is particularly provocative for high-frequency headache among migraineurs,” said Dr. Martin. Because the researchers did not collect data on premenstrual syndrome (PMS) disorder, they could not determine whether the increased risk for high-frequency headache during perimenopause only occurred in female migraineurs with PMS or in the entire population.

Epidemiologic studies have contributed to an impression that migraine prevalence declines in menopausal women, but the current study’s results contradict this impression. “Our study used high-frequency headache as its primary outcome measure, rather than migraine prevalence. It is plausible that during menopause, migraine prevalence decreases and migraine attacks occur more frequently in subgroups of women,” said Dr. Martin. “Women, as they get older, develop lots of aches and pains, joint [pain], and back pain, and it is possible [that] their overuse of pain medications for headache and other conditions might actually drive an increase in headaches for the menopause group,” he added.

Estrogen withdrawal in the late luteal phase, low serum levels of estrogen or progesterone, and increased uterine prostaglandin release could precipitate headache during the menopausal transition, said the researchers. These hormonal changes also may change the characteristics of the menstrual cycle, which could in turn affect headache frequency.

An advantage of the cross-sectional analysis is that it was a large population-based study of persons with migraine “that should have wide generalizability to the general population,” said Dr. Martin. The outcome measure of high-frequency headache, however, was not limited to migraine, but included all headaches. In addition, headache frequency was self-reported, and investigators did not confirm it with daily headache diaries. Finally, the researchers did not account or control for aura. “Our results should be considered preliminary until confirmed in future studies,” Dr. Martin concluded.

—Erik Greb

Judging by the crowd and the difficulty in finding a locker at my gym on January 1, a lot of people are serious about their 2016 New Year’s resolution to exercise and lose weight. But as most of us have experienced personally and professionally, embarking on a well-intended effort to exercise in the hope of losing weight more often results in frustration than a trip to the store to buy smaller-sized clothes.

The frequent answer to the question “What did the doctor say at your visit?” provides a partial explanation of this phenomenon: “Nothing, just that I should exercise and lose weight” is the usual hackneyed response. Nothing—as in nothing unexpected, nothing significant, and nothing specific was said. It is with this lack of specific advice that I feel many of us let our patients down.

We admonish patients to eat fewer calories, avoid the evil carbs, walk 10,000 steps, ride a bike, use the elliptical, or swim three times a week. There is a concrete but broad nature to these suggestions, but there is also a familiarity and a lack of specificity that leaves patients feeling that there is no science behind them. And the truth is that many of us are not comfortable enough with current data from our exercise physiology colleagues to have a detailed discussion with our patients that pairs their specific goals with an exercise regimen and diet most likely to be beneficial. We may fear sounding like the morning talk show doctors, offering sound bites instead of engaging in an evidence-based dialogue with our patients.

Many of our patients cannot afford a personal trainer to guide and cajole them through a successful regimen—assuming that they, or we, can separate myth and fact and choose an appropriate trainer. We should try to be their guide and sounding board as well as coach and cheerleader.

In this issue of the Journal, John and Christopher Higgins present a primer on the background information to use when talking with our patients about starting an exercise program focused on weight loss. They provide useful references that support specific approaches to achieve realistic expectations, and they review and compare various strategies.

I’m sure by March it will again be easier to find a locker at my gym. And I hope by then that my new workout plan will be more scientifically based, as well as a bit more effective. Even data-based hope springs eternal.

Judging by the crowd and the difficulty in finding a locker at my gym on January 1, a lot of people are serious about their 2016 New Year’s resolution to exercise and lose weight. But as most of us have experienced personally and professionally, embarking on a well-intended effort to exercise in the hope of losing weight more often results in frustration than a trip to the store to buy smaller-sized clothes.

The frequent answer to the question “What did the doctor say at your visit?” provides a partial explanation of this phenomenon: “Nothing, just that I should exercise and lose weight” is the usual hackneyed response. Nothing—as in nothing unexpected, nothing significant, and nothing specific was said. It is with this lack of specific advice that I feel many of us let our patients down.

We admonish patients to eat fewer calories, avoid the evil carbs, walk 10,000 steps, ride a bike, use the elliptical, or swim three times a week. There is a concrete but broad nature to these suggestions, but there is also a familiarity and a lack of specificity that leaves patients feeling that there is no science behind them. And the truth is that many of us are not comfortable enough with current data from our exercise physiology colleagues to have a detailed discussion with our patients that pairs their specific goals with an exercise regimen and diet most likely to be beneficial. We may fear sounding like the morning talk show doctors, offering sound bites instead of engaging in an evidence-based dialogue with our patients.

Many of our patients cannot afford a personal trainer to guide and cajole them through a successful regimen—assuming that they, or we, can separate myth and fact and choose an appropriate trainer. We should try to be their guide and sounding board as well as coach and cheerleader.

In this issue of the Journal, John and Christopher Higgins present a primer on the background information to use when talking with our patients about starting an exercise program focused on weight loss. They provide useful references that support specific approaches to achieve realistic expectations, and they review and compare various strategies.

I’m sure by March it will again be easier to find a locker at my gym. And I hope by then that my new workout plan will be more scientifically based, as well as a bit more effective. Even data-based hope springs eternal.

Judging by the crowd and the difficulty in finding a locker at my gym on January 1, a lot of people are serious about their 2016 New Year’s resolution to exercise and lose weight. But as most of us have experienced personally and professionally, embarking on a well-intended effort to exercise in the hope of losing weight more often results in frustration than a trip to the store to buy smaller-sized clothes.

The frequent answer to the question “What did the doctor say at your visit?” provides a partial explanation of this phenomenon: “Nothing, just that I should exercise and lose weight” is the usual hackneyed response. Nothing—as in nothing unexpected, nothing significant, and nothing specific was said. It is with this lack of specific advice that I feel many of us let our patients down.

We admonish patients to eat fewer calories, avoid the evil carbs, walk 10,000 steps, ride a bike, use the elliptical, or swim three times a week. There is a concrete but broad nature to these suggestions, but there is also a familiarity and a lack of specificity that leaves patients feeling that there is no science behind them. And the truth is that many of us are not comfortable enough with current data from our exercise physiology colleagues to have a detailed discussion with our patients that pairs their specific goals with an exercise regimen and diet most likely to be beneficial. We may fear sounding like the morning talk show doctors, offering sound bites instead of engaging in an evidence-based dialogue with our patients.

Many of our patients cannot afford a personal trainer to guide and cajole them through a successful regimen—assuming that they, or we, can separate myth and fact and choose an appropriate trainer. We should try to be their guide and sounding board as well as coach and cheerleader.

In this issue of the Journal, John and Christopher Higgins present a primer on the background information to use when talking with our patients about starting an exercise program focused on weight loss. They provide useful references that support specific approaches to achieve realistic expectations, and they review and compare various strategies.

I’m sure by March it will again be easier to find a locker at my gym. And I hope by then that my new workout plan will be more scientifically based, as well as a bit more effective. Even data-based hope springs eternal.

In 1975, Julia and Joseph Quinlan approached the administrator of St. Clare’s Hospital in Denville, New Jersey, and requested that the mechanical ventilator on which their adopted daughter, Karen, was dependent be turned off. Karen Ann Quinlan, 21 years old, was in a permanent vegetative state after a severe anoxic event, and her parents had been informed by the hospital’s medical staff that she would never regain consciousness.

See related article

To the Quinlans’ request to withdraw the ventilator, the hospital administrator replied, “You have to understand our position, Mrs. Quinlan. In this hospital we don’t kill people.”¹

The administrator’s response was consistent with prevailing ethical and legal perspectives, analyses, and directives at that time related to discontinuation of life-sustaining treatment. In the mid-1970s, the American Medical Association’s position was that it was permissible to not put a patient on a ventilator (ie, a physician could withhold a life-sustaining treatment), but once a patient was on a ventilator, it was not permissible to take the patient off if the intention was to allow death to occur.¹ However, the New Jersey Supreme Court ultimately found this distinction between withholding and withdrawing unconvincing, and ruled unanimously that Karen Quinlan’s ventilator could be turned off.²

THE HASTINGS CENTER REPORT: STOPPING IS THE SAME AS NOT STARTING

During the subsequent decade, further ethical analysis and additional legal cases resulted in new insights and more nuanced thinking about forgoing life-sustaining treatment.

These developments were summarized in a 1987 report by the Hastings Center,³ a leading bioethics research and policy institute. The report provided normative guidance for the termination of life-sustaining treatment and for the care of dying patients. It acknowledged that deciding not to start a life-sustaining treatment can emotionally and psychologically affect healthcare professionals differently than deciding to stop such a treatment. However, the report also asserted that there is no morally important difference between withholding and withdrawing such treatments.

There is no ethical requirement that treatment, once started, must continue against the patient’s wishes

Reflecting a partnership model between patients and professionals for healthcare decision-making, and affirming the ethical significance of both a burden-benefit analysis and patient autonomy, the report stated that when a patient or surrogate in collaboration with a responsible healthcare professional decides that a treatment under way and the life it supports have become more burdensome than beneficial to the patient, that is sufficient reason to stop. There is no ethical requirement that treatment, once initiated, must continue against the patient’s wishes or when the surrogate determines that it is more burdensome than beneficial from the patient’s perspective. In fact, imposing treatment in such circumstances violates the patient’s right to self-determination.³

The report noted further that, because of frequent uncertainty about the efficacy of proposed treatments, it is preferable to initiate time-limited trials of treatments and then later stop them if they prove ineffective or become overly burdensome from a patient’s perspective.

ICDs ARE LIKE OTHER LIFE-SUSTAINING THERAPIES

In this issue of Cleveland Clinic Journal of Medicine, Baibars et al⁴ address the question of how implantable cardioverter-defibrillators (ICDs) should be managed at the end of life. The historical events and developments recounted above regarding withdrawing life-sustaining technologies are an appropriate context for ethically assessing the management of ICDs for dying patients.

ICDs are not ventilators, but like ventilators, they are a life-sustaining therapy

Obviously, ICDs are not ventilators, but like ventilators, they are life-sustaining therapy, as are dialysis machines, blood transfusions, medically supplied nutrition and hydration, ventricular assist devices, and other implantable electronic cardiac devices such as pacemakers. Each of these life-sustaining therapies, depending on a patient’s clinical condition, underlying illness, and comorbidities, can become a death-prolonging technology.

An ethical framework and analysis about whether to continue any life-sustaining therapy, including an ICD, must include an assessment of the benefit-to-burden ratio from the patient’s perspective. Does the therapy enhance or maintain a quality of life acceptable to the patient? Or has it become overly burdensome and does it maintain a quality of life the patient finds (or would find) unacceptable? If the latter is true, and especially in the context of an underlying terminal condition, then shifting the goals of care to focus on comfort is always appropriate and ethically justified. Treatments—including ICDs—that do not contribute to patient comfort should be withdrawn.

TOWARD COMPETENCY IN ETHICAL MANAGEMENT

Baibars et al note that much more needs to be done to enhance competencies, increase proficiencies, and mitigate the moral distress of healthcare professionals caring for dying patients with ICDs and other devices. To help clinicians achieve a personal and professional “comfort zone” for ethically managing patients with ICDs, we recommend that healthcare institutions, medical schools, and nursing schools take the following steps:

Develop comprehensive end-of-life policies, procedures, and protocols that incorporate specific guidance for managing cardiac devices and that have been endorsed by a hospital ethics committee. Such guidance can be informative and educational and can ensure that decisions and resulting actions (including stopping cardiac devices) are ethically supportable.

Provide more palliative care training in medical and nursing schools, residency programs, and continuing education activities so that front-line clinicians can deliver “basic,” “primary” palliative care not requiring specialty palliative medicine. This training, called for in the Institute of Medicine’s 2014 report, Dying in America,⁵ should include explicit ethics discussions about managing cardiac devices at the end of life.

Provide ongoing training in communication skills needed for all patient-professional encounters. Effectively engaging patients in goals-of-care discussions, especially patients with life-limiting illnesses such as heart failure, cannot be achieved without these skills.

In 1975, Julia and Joseph Quinlan approached the administrator of St. Clare’s Hospital in Denville, New Jersey, and requested that the mechanical ventilator on which their adopted daughter, Karen, was dependent be turned off. Karen Ann Quinlan, 21 years old, was in a permanent vegetative state after a severe anoxic event, and her parents had been informed by the hospital’s medical staff that she would never regain consciousness.

See related article

To the Quinlans’ request to withdraw the ventilator, the hospital administrator replied, “You have to understand our position, Mrs. Quinlan. In this hospital we don’t kill people.”¹

The administrator’s response was consistent with prevailing ethical and legal perspectives, analyses, and directives at that time related to discontinuation of life-sustaining treatment. In the mid-1970s, the American Medical Association’s position was that it was permissible to not put a patient on a ventilator (ie, a physician could withhold a life-sustaining treatment), but once a patient was on a ventilator, it was not permissible to take the patient off if the intention was to allow death to occur.¹ However, the New Jersey Supreme Court ultimately found this distinction between withholding and withdrawing unconvincing, and ruled unanimously that Karen Quinlan’s ventilator could be turned off.²

THE HASTINGS CENTER REPORT: STOPPING IS THE SAME AS NOT STARTING

During the subsequent decade, further ethical analysis and additional legal cases resulted in new insights and more nuanced thinking about forgoing life-sustaining treatment.

These developments were summarized in a 1987 report by the Hastings Center,³ a leading bioethics research and policy institute. The report provided normative guidance for the termination of life-sustaining treatment and for the care of dying patients. It acknowledged that deciding not to start a life-sustaining treatment can emotionally and psychologically affect healthcare professionals differently than deciding to stop such a treatment. However, the report also asserted that there is no morally important difference between withholding and withdrawing such treatments.

There is no ethical requirement that treatment, once started, must continue against the patient’s wishes

Reflecting a partnership model between patients and professionals for healthcare decision-making, and affirming the ethical significance of both a burden-benefit analysis and patient autonomy, the report stated that when a patient or surrogate in collaboration with a responsible healthcare professional decides that a treatment under way and the life it supports have become more burdensome than beneficial to the patient, that is sufficient reason to stop. There is no ethical requirement that treatment, once initiated, must continue against the patient’s wishes or when the surrogate determines that it is more burdensome than beneficial from the patient’s perspective. In fact, imposing treatment in such circumstances violates the patient’s right to self-determination.³

The report noted further that, because of frequent uncertainty about the efficacy of proposed treatments, it is preferable to initiate time-limited trials of treatments and then later stop them if they prove ineffective or become overly burdensome from a patient’s perspective.

ICDs ARE LIKE OTHER LIFE-SUSTAINING THERAPIES

In this issue of Cleveland Clinic Journal of Medicine, Baibars et al⁴ address the question of how implantable cardioverter-defibrillators (ICDs) should be managed at the end of life. The historical events and developments recounted above regarding withdrawing life-sustaining technologies are an appropriate context for ethically assessing the management of ICDs for dying patients.

ICDs are not ventilators, but like ventilators, they are a life-sustaining therapy

Obviously, ICDs are not ventilators, but like ventilators, they are life-sustaining therapy, as are dialysis machines, blood transfusions, medically supplied nutrition and hydration, ventricular assist devices, and other implantable electronic cardiac devices such as pacemakers. Each of these life-sustaining therapies, depending on a patient’s clinical condition, underlying illness, and comorbidities, can become a death-prolonging technology.

An ethical framework and analysis about whether to continue any life-sustaining therapy, including an ICD, must include an assessment of the benefit-to-burden ratio from the patient’s perspective. Does the therapy enhance or maintain a quality of life acceptable to the patient? Or has it become overly burdensome and does it maintain a quality of life the patient finds (or would find) unacceptable? If the latter is true, and especially in the context of an underlying terminal condition, then shifting the goals of care to focus on comfort is always appropriate and ethically justified. Treatments—including ICDs—that do not contribute to patient comfort should be withdrawn.

TOWARD COMPETENCY IN ETHICAL MANAGEMENT

Baibars et al note that much more needs to be done to enhance competencies, increase proficiencies, and mitigate the moral distress of healthcare professionals caring for dying patients with ICDs and other devices. To help clinicians achieve a personal and professional “comfort zone” for ethically managing patients with ICDs, we recommend that healthcare institutions, medical schools, and nursing schools take the following steps:

Develop comprehensive end-of-life policies, procedures, and protocols that incorporate specific guidance for managing cardiac devices and that have been endorsed by a hospital ethics committee. Such guidance can be informative and educational and can ensure that decisions and resulting actions (including stopping cardiac devices) are ethically supportable.

Provide more palliative care training in medical and nursing schools, residency programs, and continuing education activities so that front-line clinicians can deliver “basic,” “primary” palliative care not requiring specialty palliative medicine. This training, called for in the Institute of Medicine’s 2014 report, Dying in America,⁵ should include explicit ethics discussions about managing cardiac devices at the end of life.

Provide ongoing training in communication skills needed for all patient-professional encounters. Effectively engaging patients in goals-of-care discussions, especially patients with life-limiting illnesses such as heart failure, cannot be achieved without these skills.

In 1975, Julia and Joseph Quinlan approached the administrator of St. Clare’s Hospital in Denville, New Jersey, and requested that the mechanical ventilator on which their adopted daughter, Karen, was dependent be turned off. Karen Ann Quinlan, 21 years old, was in a permanent vegetative state after a severe anoxic event, and her parents had been informed by the hospital’s medical staff that she would never regain consciousness.

See related article

To the Quinlans’ request to withdraw the ventilator, the hospital administrator replied, “You have to understand our position, Mrs. Quinlan. In this hospital we don’t kill people.”¹

The administrator’s response was consistent with prevailing ethical and legal perspectives, analyses, and directives at that time related to discontinuation of life-sustaining treatment. In the mid-1970s, the American Medical Association’s position was that it was permissible to not put a patient on a ventilator (ie, a physician could withhold a life-sustaining treatment), but once a patient was on a ventilator, it was not permissible to take the patient off if the intention was to allow death to occur.¹ However, the New Jersey Supreme Court ultimately found this distinction between withholding and withdrawing unconvincing, and ruled unanimously that Karen Quinlan’s ventilator could be turned off.²

THE HASTINGS CENTER REPORT: STOPPING IS THE SAME AS NOT STARTING

During the subsequent decade, further ethical analysis and additional legal cases resulted in new insights and more nuanced thinking about forgoing life-sustaining treatment.

These developments were summarized in a 1987 report by the Hastings Center,³ a leading bioethics research and policy institute. The report provided normative guidance for the termination of life-sustaining treatment and for the care of dying patients. It acknowledged that deciding not to start a life-sustaining treatment can emotionally and psychologically affect healthcare professionals differently than deciding to stop such a treatment. However, the report also asserted that there is no morally important difference between withholding and withdrawing such treatments.

There is no ethical requirement that treatment, once started, must continue against the patient’s wishes

Reflecting a partnership model between patients and professionals for healthcare decision-making, and affirming the ethical significance of both a burden-benefit analysis and patient autonomy, the report stated that when a patient or surrogate in collaboration with a responsible healthcare professional decides that a treatment under way and the life it supports have become more burdensome than beneficial to the patient, that is sufficient reason to stop. There is no ethical requirement that treatment, once initiated, must continue against the patient’s wishes or when the surrogate determines that it is more burdensome than beneficial from the patient’s perspective. In fact, imposing treatment in such circumstances violates the patient’s right to self-determination.³

The report noted further that, because of frequent uncertainty about the efficacy of proposed treatments, it is preferable to initiate time-limited trials of treatments and then later stop them if they prove ineffective or become overly burdensome from a patient’s perspective.

ICDs ARE LIKE OTHER LIFE-SUSTAINING THERAPIES

In this issue of Cleveland Clinic Journal of Medicine, Baibars et al⁴ address the question of how implantable cardioverter-defibrillators (ICDs) should be managed at the end of life. The historical events and developments recounted above regarding withdrawing life-sustaining technologies are an appropriate context for ethically assessing the management of ICDs for dying patients.

ICDs are not ventilators, but like ventilators, they are a life-sustaining therapy

Obviously, ICDs are not ventilators, but like ventilators, they are life-sustaining therapy, as are dialysis machines, blood transfusions, medically supplied nutrition and hydration, ventricular assist devices, and other implantable electronic cardiac devices such as pacemakers. Each of these life-sustaining therapies, depending on a patient’s clinical condition, underlying illness, and comorbidities, can become a death-prolonging technology.

An ethical framework and analysis about whether to continue any life-sustaining therapy, including an ICD, must include an assessment of the benefit-to-burden ratio from the patient’s perspective. Does the therapy enhance or maintain a quality of life acceptable to the patient? Or has it become overly burdensome and does it maintain a quality of life the patient finds (or would find) unacceptable? If the latter is true, and especially in the context of an underlying terminal condition, then shifting the goals of care to focus on comfort is always appropriate and ethically justified. Treatments—including ICDs—that do not contribute to patient comfort should be withdrawn.

TOWARD COMPETENCY IN ETHICAL MANAGEMENT

Baibars et al note that much more needs to be done to enhance competencies, increase proficiencies, and mitigate the moral distress of healthcare professionals caring for dying patients with ICDs and other devices. To help clinicians achieve a personal and professional “comfort zone” for ethically managing patients with ICDs, we recommend that healthcare institutions, medical schools, and nursing schools take the following steps:

Develop comprehensive end-of-life policies, procedures, and protocols that incorporate specific guidance for managing cardiac devices and that have been endorsed by a hospital ethics committee. Such guidance can be informative and educational and can ensure that decisions and resulting actions (including stopping cardiac devices) are ethically supportable.

Provide more palliative care training in medical and nursing schools, residency programs, and continuing education activities so that front-line clinicians can deliver “basic,” “primary” palliative care not requiring specialty palliative medicine. This training, called for in the Institute of Medicine’s 2014 report, Dying in America,⁵ should include explicit ethics discussions about managing cardiac devices at the end of life.

Provide ongoing training in communication skills needed for all patient-professional encounters. Effectively engaging patients in goals-of-care discussions, especially patients with life-limiting illnesses such as heart failure, cannot be achieved without these skills.

Suicidal behavior is a major cause of morbidity and mortality in the United States,1 and active-duty and reserve military personnel and veterans account for nearly 18% of suicide deaths.² By one estimate, as many as 22 veterans die by suicide each day.³ These rates are thought to be due to a higher incidence of mental illness in certain veteran populations relative to the general population.^4–8 Consequently, a number of mental health services are available to veterans in a variety of clinical and community settings.

See related commentary

Chaplains and clinicians bring complementary skills and services to the problem of suicide risk among veterans. In particular, helping at-risk veterans deal with experiences of guilt is an opportunity for interdisciplinary collaboration. Available literature supports the potential utility of chaplaincy services in supporting at-risk veteran populations.^9–15

But while most healthcare facilities have chaplains on staff, there is little information to guide any such collaboration. Further, healthcare providers appear to have a limited understanding of chaplaincy services, the “language” within which chaplains operate, or the roles chaplains play in healthcare settings.¹⁶

In the following discussion, using the example of experiences of guilt, we offer our insights and suggestions on how chaplaincy services may prove useful in alleviating this complex emotion in veterans at risk of suicide.

BENEFITS OF TALKING TO A CHAPLAIN

By one estimate, as many as 22 veterans die by suicide each day

Collaboration between healthcare providers and pastoral care professionals has been suggested as a means of enhancing the treatment of patients with mental illness.^17,18 Chaplains draw from a variety of faith traditions and are usually trained to respond to the needs of people from a variety of religious and spiritual backgrounds. They provide some non-faith­based services (eg, crisis intervention, life review, bereavement counseling) resembling those also provided in formal mental healthcare settings.¹⁹ By facilitating religious and spiritual coping and religious practice and responding to religious and spiritual needs, chaplains also offer a level of support not typically offered by formal mental healthcare providers.²⁰

Veterans at risk of suicide sometimes look to pastoral care providers, particularly chaplains, for mental health support.^9,10 Research on the effects of chaplaincy services on suicidal behavior is just beginning to emerge.¹⁵ Still, the US Department of Health and Human Services has recognized pastoral care services as having a “beneficial and therapeutic effect on the medical condition of a patient.”¹¹

For example, in one study, hospital inpatients reported higher satisfaction if they had been visited by a chaplain.¹² Chaplains help align treatment plans with patient values and wishes.¹³ In another study,¹⁴ patients undergoing coronary artery bypass grafting who were randomized to receive five visits from a chaplain were found to have a higher rate of positive religious coping (eg, forgiveness, letting go of anger). Positive religious coping has been correlated with lower levels of psychological stress and better mental health outcomes.

EXPERIENCING GUILT IS LINKED TO RISK OF SUICIDE

Suicidal behavior is complex, multifaceted, and linked to genetic, neurologic, psychological, social, and cultural factors.²¹

Assessing for and addressing certain complex emotions, such as guilt and shame, is an important part of suicide prevention efforts. Guilt is defined as a “controllable psychological state that is typically linked to a specific action or behavior, and which entails regret or remorse.”²²

Close to 75% of veterans who had thought about suicide said they frequently experienced guilt

Guilt has been linked to risk of suicide in veterans.^23–25 In one study, close to 75% of veterans who had thought about suicide said they frequently experienced guilt about having violated the precepts of their faith group, family, God, life, or the military.²⁶

Such findings suggest that the sense of guilt experienced by some at-risk veterans may be grounded in a variety of contexts. For example, faith communities that place a strong emphasis on obedience to moral, ethical, and religious precepts may contribute to the experience of guilt unless balanced by a message of grace or favor from a benevolent God or deity. Without this balance, engaging in activities that are not fully sanctioned by one’s faith community may lead to guilt.

Families might also contribute to veterans’ experiences of guilt by placing unrealistic expectations on them. And the family environment may not be conducive to resolving feelings of guilt in veterans, harboring resentment and antipathies and making it very difficult to alleviate any ensuing sense of distress.

CLINICIAN’S ROLE IN ASSESSING GUILT

In addressing and assessing guilt in veterans at risk of suicide, clinicians should try to recognize the source and clinical implications of this emotion.

Recognize the source of guilt

Guilt may indicate a clinical disorder such as a mood disorder (eg, major depression).²⁷ Mood disorders significantly increase the risk of suicidal behavior.^28,29

Beyond diagnosing a clinical disorder, prescribing pharmacotherapy, and referring for mental healthcare services, recognizing the source of this emotion remains an important part of addressing a patient’s experience of guilt. Especially when associated with a clinical disorder, guilt is often irrational and excessive and does not appropriately reflect the experience or situation in question.

Case conceptualization, defined as “synthesizing the patient’s experience with relevant clinical theory and research,”³⁰ can be used to understand the context in which the guilt-inducing action or behavior occurred and the veteran’s own interpretation of his or her actions. Understanding the source of the patient’s guilt could be used to plan treatment and resolve any underlying sense of distress.

As with other negative emotions, the affective component of guilt is often the result of cognitive distortions made as the person tries to make sense of what has occurred or to reconcile beliefs of right and wrong with the guilt-inducing behavior.³¹ The common cognitive errors associated with guilt include:

• Hindsight bias (a belief that one should have known what was going to happen as a result of one’s actions)
• Responsibility distortion (a belief that one’s actions directly caused an adverse event)
• Justification distortion (a belief that one’s actions were not justified by the situation)
• Wrongdoing distortion (a belief that one violated one’s own standards of right and wrong).³¹

Cognitive therapy to counter cognitive distortions

A variety of clinical options exist to help veterans manage and resolve guilt.

Mood disorders significantly increase the risk of suicidal behavior

Cognitive therapy can counter the cognitive distortions that drive feelings of guilt. The goal is to guide patients to examine the evidence, process the event, and realize that their behavior was appropriate for the given situation. Cognitive processing therapy and prolonged exposure therapy have both been shown to decrease trauma-related guilt, though cognitive processing therapy was found to be better at decreasing guilt that arose from cognitive distortions.³²

Guilt and suicide ideation have also been associated with a belief that one’s actions constituted an unforgivable sin.³³ Responding to these inherently religious-spiritual cognitive distortions may be beyond the scope of expertise for many healthcare professionals. In such cases, it may be prudent to consider complementing clinical services with pastoral care. It follows that pastoral care services should only be provided if the veteran voices a desire and readiness for them. The clinician and chaplain can then work together to provide coordinated care to best meet the patient’s needs, to address the experience of guilt, and to alleviate the sense of distress.

A CHAPLAIN’S PERSPECTIVE ON GUILT

A prominent feature of pastoral practice is  helping people, including at-risk veterans, resolve feelings of guilt regardless of the context on which the emotion is founded (eg, religion, shame).¹⁰ For many people, guilt is an impenetrable barrier, preventing resolution of whatever experience led to a sense of inner turmoil.

Forgiveness

In the context of pastoral care, resolution of guilt is ordinarily tied to a need for forgiveness. There are multiple ways in which forgiveness can be grounded in religious and spiritual contexts.³⁴ Examples include forgiving others (ie, forswearing resentment, anger, or hatred directed toward another person), being forgiven by God or another benevolent deity, and forgiving oneself for violating perceived personal transgressions.³⁵ In some cases, divine forgiveness may be conditional on interpersonal forgiveness.³⁶ Forgiveness is also sometimes seen as a remedy for sin and a way to restore moral order.³⁷

Some people may initially think they can never be forgiven. With time and the weight of one’s experiences, the impossibility of forgiveness can become so ingrained that it becomes a core belief. These core beliefs set up a vicious circle of thoughts and feelings, in which people and places and events from the past are continuously brought forward into the present. Anger and resentment become the steady diet for the tormented self that feels forever powerless over experienced injustices. These relived experiences drive the person into a deep isolation where the self becomes less human—a thing, an object. This experience of losing oneself proves excruciating and often leads to contemplation of suicide as a way to resolve anguish.

Hope emerges

Pastoral care services provide a means to reframe one’s core beliefs, manage and resolve the burden of guilt, and uncover new motivation for living.

The practice of spiritual direction within the discipline of pastoral care listens for these inner movements and encourages the person to give voice to them in his or her own words. No longer limited by a diminished, tormented self, the real self begins to relate to another reality that changes his or her identity, relieves the burden of guilt, and gives reason, purpose, and meaning to life.

Even with this opportunity for a new life, however, cognitive distortions based on a disproportional “faith-based prism” may persist. In this case, clinicians and chaplains must work closely together to reframe old understandings of self and incorrect understandings of religion and spirituality into one that continues to reinforce this newfound sense of hope.³⁸

A VETERAN OF IRAQ WITH SUICIDE IDEATION

The following case illustrates how clinicians and chaplains may be able to work together to help facilitate the resolution of guilt.

A veteran who had served in Iraq had entered the Domiciliary Care Program at a US Department of Veterans Affairs medical center. He reported experiencing problems with guilt, forgiveness, and suicide ideation. A clinical therapeutic program was prescribed after a psychological evaluation uncovered that he was also struggling with depression and posttraumatic stress disorder.

Guilt is often irrational and excessive and does not appropriately reflect the experience or situation

His mental healthcare providers recognized the importance of incorporating a religious-spiritual component into the therapeutic plan, and so consulted with a chaplain to plan a suitable course of action. Specifically, this veteran reported feeling that he could not be forgiven for his military experiences, a feeling that was giving way to alienation and isolation from the God of his faith tradition.

The chaplain helped this veteran reflect on his military experiences, giving him the perspective he needed to view his God as one who truly loves him. He recognized instances in which he could have lost his life had it not been for others who intervened on his behalf at just the right time. This awareness caused him to think about his life differently, challenging him to reframe his relationship with God. Instead of simple coincidences, the veteran began to consider the mystery behind these times and places.

Over time and in keeping with the tenets of his faith tradition, the veteran stated that he was ultimately able to accept and receive God’s love and forgiveness. He now reports that these inner spiritual movements serve as a source of support during occasional relapses into emotional distress. These movements allow him to consider the mystery of his present life and its value based on his experience of his God’s love and forgiveness.

CARE FOR SUICIDE SURVIVORS

The experience of guilt is not limited to veterans. Those bereaved by suicide are also left to manage their own experiences of the loss and ensuing complex emotions. Friends and loved ones who survive a suicide decedent may experience guilt, feeling that they somehow contributed to or failed to prevent the suicide. Such feelings of guilt are hypothesized to lower the threshold for suicidal behavior in those bereaved.³⁹

Guilt and shame are also frequently encountered in survivors of nonfatal suicide attempts.⁴⁰ Chaplaincy services might also prove useful for these individuals.

TIME IS EVERYTHING

Patients who may have an active psychopathology should have their clinical therapeutic needs attended to first. If the clinician deems pastoral care services to be an appropriate complementary support option, care should be taken to select a pastoral care provider who is adequately prepared for this role. Different professional organizations (eg, Association of Professional Chaplains) have established board-certification procedures, minimum education requirements, and supervised practical experience required for chaplaincy certification.

Also, spiritual growth and development remain a core focus of pastoral practice. Clinicians should discontinue any collaboration with pastoral care providers who question an individual’s faith or commitment to his or her faith, or who promote thinking or actions that could be deleterious to the patient’s therapeutic trajectory.

SUMMING UP

We have here presented our perspectives on how chaplaincy services can be used to complement clinical services in support of at-risk veterans struggling with experiences of guilt. Unfortunately, the current level of collaboration between chaplains and clinicians in support of at-risk veteran populations is limited.²⁰ Our hope is that clinicians managing these at-risk patients will develop a greater awareness of how chaplaincy services might be able to help in alleviating experiences of guilt in at-risk veteran populations. A further hope is that such cases will serve as an opportunity for greater interdisciplinary collaboration, benefiting at-risk veterans most in need of support.
 

Acknowledgment: Dr. Rasmussen was supported by the Office of Academic Affiliations, Advanced Fellowship Program in Mental Illness Research and Treatment, US Department of Veterans Affairs, VISN 2 Center of Excellence for Suicide Prevention.

Suicidal behavior is a major cause of morbidity and mortality in the United States,1 and active-duty and reserve military personnel and veterans account for nearly 18% of suicide deaths.² By one estimate, as many as 22 veterans die by suicide each day.³ These rates are thought to be due to a higher incidence of mental illness in certain veteran populations relative to the general population.^4–8 Consequently, a number of mental health services are available to veterans in a variety of clinical and community settings.

See related commentary

Chaplains and clinicians bring complementary skills and services to the problem of suicide risk among veterans. In particular, helping at-risk veterans deal with experiences of guilt is an opportunity for interdisciplinary collaboration. Available literature supports the potential utility of chaplaincy services in supporting at-risk veteran populations.^9–15

But while most healthcare facilities have chaplains on staff, there is little information to guide any such collaboration. Further, healthcare providers appear to have a limited understanding of chaplaincy services, the “language” within which chaplains operate, or the roles chaplains play in healthcare settings.¹⁶

In the following discussion, using the example of experiences of guilt, we offer our insights and suggestions on how chaplaincy services may prove useful in alleviating this complex emotion in veterans at risk of suicide.

BENEFITS OF TALKING TO A CHAPLAIN

By one estimate, as many as 22 veterans die by suicide each day

Collaboration between healthcare providers and pastoral care professionals has been suggested as a means of enhancing the treatment of patients with mental illness.^17,18 Chaplains draw from a variety of faith traditions and are usually trained to respond to the needs of people from a variety of religious and spiritual backgrounds. They provide some non-faith­based services (eg, crisis intervention, life review, bereavement counseling) resembling those also provided in formal mental healthcare settings.¹⁹ By facilitating religious and spiritual coping and religious practice and responding to religious and spiritual needs, chaplains also offer a level of support not typically offered by formal mental healthcare providers.²⁰

Veterans at risk of suicide sometimes look to pastoral care providers, particularly chaplains, for mental health support.^9,10 Research on the effects of chaplaincy services on suicidal behavior is just beginning to emerge.¹⁵ Still, the US Department of Health and Human Services has recognized pastoral care services as having a “beneficial and therapeutic effect on the medical condition of a patient.”¹¹

For example, in one study, hospital inpatients reported higher satisfaction if they had been visited by a chaplain.¹² Chaplains help align treatment plans with patient values and wishes.¹³ In another study,¹⁴ patients undergoing coronary artery bypass grafting who were randomized to receive five visits from a chaplain were found to have a higher rate of positive religious coping (eg, forgiveness, letting go of anger). Positive religious coping has been correlated with lower levels of psychological stress and better mental health outcomes.

EXPERIENCING GUILT IS LINKED TO RISK OF SUICIDE

Suicidal behavior is complex, multifaceted, and linked to genetic, neurologic, psychological, social, and cultural factors.²¹

Assessing for and addressing certain complex emotions, such as guilt and shame, is an important part of suicide prevention efforts. Guilt is defined as a “controllable psychological state that is typically linked to a specific action or behavior, and which entails regret or remorse.”²²

Close to 75% of veterans who had thought about suicide said they frequently experienced guilt

Guilt has been linked to risk of suicide in veterans.^23–25 In one study, close to 75% of veterans who had thought about suicide said they frequently experienced guilt about having violated the precepts of their faith group, family, God, life, or the military.²⁶

Such findings suggest that the sense of guilt experienced by some at-risk veterans may be grounded in a variety of contexts. For example, faith communities that place a strong emphasis on obedience to moral, ethical, and religious precepts may contribute to the experience of guilt unless balanced by a message of grace or favor from a benevolent God or deity. Without this balance, engaging in activities that are not fully sanctioned by one’s faith community may lead to guilt.

Families might also contribute to veterans’ experiences of guilt by placing unrealistic expectations on them. And the family environment may not be conducive to resolving feelings of guilt in veterans, harboring resentment and antipathies and making it very difficult to alleviate any ensuing sense of distress.

CLINICIAN’S ROLE IN ASSESSING GUILT

In addressing and assessing guilt in veterans at risk of suicide, clinicians should try to recognize the source and clinical implications of this emotion.

Recognize the source of guilt

Guilt may indicate a clinical disorder such as a mood disorder (eg, major depression).²⁷ Mood disorders significantly increase the risk of suicidal behavior.^28,29

Beyond diagnosing a clinical disorder, prescribing pharmacotherapy, and referring for mental healthcare services, recognizing the source of this emotion remains an important part of addressing a patient’s experience of guilt. Especially when associated with a clinical disorder, guilt is often irrational and excessive and does not appropriately reflect the experience or situation in question.

Case conceptualization, defined as “synthesizing the patient’s experience with relevant clinical theory and research,”³⁰ can be used to understand the context in which the guilt-inducing action or behavior occurred and the veteran’s own interpretation of his or her actions. Understanding the source of the patient’s guilt could be used to plan treatment and resolve any underlying sense of distress.

As with other negative emotions, the affective component of guilt is often the result of cognitive distortions made as the person tries to make sense of what has occurred or to reconcile beliefs of right and wrong with the guilt-inducing behavior.³¹ The common cognitive errors associated with guilt include:

• Hindsight bias (a belief that one should have known what was going to happen as a result of one’s actions)
• Responsibility distortion (a belief that one’s actions directly caused an adverse event)
• Justification distortion (a belief that one’s actions were not justified by the situation)
• Wrongdoing distortion (a belief that one violated one’s own standards of right and wrong).³¹

Cognitive therapy to counter cognitive distortions

A variety of clinical options exist to help veterans manage and resolve guilt.

Mood disorders significantly increase the risk of suicidal behavior

Cognitive therapy can counter the cognitive distortions that drive feelings of guilt. The goal is to guide patients to examine the evidence, process the event, and realize that their behavior was appropriate for the given situation. Cognitive processing therapy and prolonged exposure therapy have both been shown to decrease trauma-related guilt, though cognitive processing therapy was found to be better at decreasing guilt that arose from cognitive distortions.³²

Guilt and suicide ideation have also been associated with a belief that one’s actions constituted an unforgivable sin.³³ Responding to these inherently religious-spiritual cognitive distortions may be beyond the scope of expertise for many healthcare professionals. In such cases, it may be prudent to consider complementing clinical services with pastoral care. It follows that pastoral care services should only be provided if the veteran voices a desire and readiness for them. The clinician and chaplain can then work together to provide coordinated care to best meet the patient’s needs, to address the experience of guilt, and to alleviate the sense of distress.

A CHAPLAIN’S PERSPECTIVE ON GUILT

A prominent feature of pastoral practice is  helping people, including at-risk veterans, resolve feelings of guilt regardless of the context on which the emotion is founded (eg, religion, shame).¹⁰ For many people, guilt is an impenetrable barrier, preventing resolution of whatever experience led to a sense of inner turmoil.

Forgiveness

In the context of pastoral care, resolution of guilt is ordinarily tied to a need for forgiveness. There are multiple ways in which forgiveness can be grounded in religious and spiritual contexts.³⁴ Examples include forgiving others (ie, forswearing resentment, anger, or hatred directed toward another person), being forgiven by God or another benevolent deity, and forgiving oneself for violating perceived personal transgressions.³⁵ In some cases, divine forgiveness may be conditional on interpersonal forgiveness.³⁶ Forgiveness is also sometimes seen as a remedy for sin and a way to restore moral order.³⁷

Some people may initially think they can never be forgiven. With time and the weight of one’s experiences, the impossibility of forgiveness can become so ingrained that it becomes a core belief. These core beliefs set up a vicious circle of thoughts and feelings, in which people and places and events from the past are continuously brought forward into the present. Anger and resentment become the steady diet for the tormented self that feels forever powerless over experienced injustices. These relived experiences drive the person into a deep isolation where the self becomes less human—a thing, an object. This experience of losing oneself proves excruciating and often leads to contemplation of suicide as a way to resolve anguish.

Hope emerges

Pastoral care services provide a means to reframe one’s core beliefs, manage and resolve the burden of guilt, and uncover new motivation for living.

The practice of spiritual direction within the discipline of pastoral care listens for these inner movements and encourages the person to give voice to them in his or her own words. No longer limited by a diminished, tormented self, the real self begins to relate to another reality that changes his or her identity, relieves the burden of guilt, and gives reason, purpose, and meaning to life.

Even with this opportunity for a new life, however, cognitive distortions based on a disproportional “faith-based prism” may persist. In this case, clinicians and chaplains must work closely together to reframe old understandings of self and incorrect understandings of religion and spirituality into one that continues to reinforce this newfound sense of hope.³⁸

A VETERAN OF IRAQ WITH SUICIDE IDEATION

The following case illustrates how clinicians and chaplains may be able to work together to help facilitate the resolution of guilt.

A veteran who had served in Iraq had entered the Domiciliary Care Program at a US Department of Veterans Affairs medical center. He reported experiencing problems with guilt, forgiveness, and suicide ideation. A clinical therapeutic program was prescribed after a psychological evaluation uncovered that he was also struggling with depression and posttraumatic stress disorder.

Guilt is often irrational and excessive and does not appropriately reflect the experience or situation

His mental healthcare providers recognized the importance of incorporating a religious-spiritual component into the therapeutic plan, and so consulted with a chaplain to plan a suitable course of action. Specifically, this veteran reported feeling that he could not be forgiven for his military experiences, a feeling that was giving way to alienation and isolation from the God of his faith tradition.

The chaplain helped this veteran reflect on his military experiences, giving him the perspective he needed to view his God as one who truly loves him. He recognized instances in which he could have lost his life had it not been for others who intervened on his behalf at just the right time. This awareness caused him to think about his life differently, challenging him to reframe his relationship with God. Instead of simple coincidences, the veteran began to consider the mystery behind these times and places.

Over time and in keeping with the tenets of his faith tradition, the veteran stated that he was ultimately able to accept and receive God’s love and forgiveness. He now reports that these inner spiritual movements serve as a source of support during occasional relapses into emotional distress. These movements allow him to consider the mystery of his present life and its value based on his experience of his God’s love and forgiveness.

CARE FOR SUICIDE SURVIVORS

The experience of guilt is not limited to veterans. Those bereaved by suicide are also left to manage their own experiences of the loss and ensuing complex emotions. Friends and loved ones who survive a suicide decedent may experience guilt, feeling that they somehow contributed to or failed to prevent the suicide. Such feelings of guilt are hypothesized to lower the threshold for suicidal behavior in those bereaved.³⁹

Guilt and shame are also frequently encountered in survivors of nonfatal suicide attempts.⁴⁰ Chaplaincy services might also prove useful for these individuals.

TIME IS EVERYTHING

Patients who may have an active psychopathology should have their clinical therapeutic needs attended to first. If the clinician deems pastoral care services to be an appropriate complementary support option, care should be taken to select a pastoral care provider who is adequately prepared for this role. Different professional organizations (eg, Association of Professional Chaplains) have established board-certification procedures, minimum education requirements, and supervised practical experience required for chaplaincy certification.

Also, spiritual growth and development remain a core focus of pastoral practice. Clinicians should discontinue any collaboration with pastoral care providers who question an individual’s faith or commitment to his or her faith, or who promote thinking or actions that could be deleterious to the patient’s therapeutic trajectory.

SUMMING UP

We have here presented our perspectives on how chaplaincy services can be used to complement clinical services in support of at-risk veterans struggling with experiences of guilt. Unfortunately, the current level of collaboration between chaplains and clinicians in support of at-risk veteran populations is limited.²⁰ Our hope is that clinicians managing these at-risk patients will develop a greater awareness of how chaplaincy services might be able to help in alleviating experiences of guilt in at-risk veteran populations. A further hope is that such cases will serve as an opportunity for greater interdisciplinary collaboration, benefiting at-risk veterans most in need of support.
 

Acknowledgment: Dr. Rasmussen was supported by the Office of Academic Affiliations, Advanced Fellowship Program in Mental Illness Research and Treatment, US Department of Veterans Affairs, VISN 2 Center of Excellence for Suicide Prevention.

Suicidal behavior is a major cause of morbidity and mortality in the United States,1 and active-duty and reserve military personnel and veterans account for nearly 18% of suicide deaths.² By one estimate, as many as 22 veterans die by suicide each day.³ These rates are thought to be due to a higher incidence of mental illness in certain veteran populations relative to the general population.^4–8 Consequently, a number of mental health services are available to veterans in a variety of clinical and community settings.

See related commentary

Chaplains and clinicians bring complementary skills and services to the problem of suicide risk among veterans. In particular, helping at-risk veterans deal with experiences of guilt is an opportunity for interdisciplinary collaboration. Available literature supports the potential utility of chaplaincy services in supporting at-risk veteran populations.^9–15

But while most healthcare facilities have chaplains on staff, there is little information to guide any such collaboration. Further, healthcare providers appear to have a limited understanding of chaplaincy services, the “language” within which chaplains operate, or the roles chaplains play in healthcare settings.¹⁶

In the following discussion, using the example of experiences of guilt, we offer our insights and suggestions on how chaplaincy services may prove useful in alleviating this complex emotion in veterans at risk of suicide.

BENEFITS OF TALKING TO A CHAPLAIN

By one estimate, as many as 22 veterans die by suicide each day

Collaboration between healthcare providers and pastoral care professionals has been suggested as a means of enhancing the treatment of patients with mental illness.^17,18 Chaplains draw from a variety of faith traditions and are usually trained to respond to the needs of people from a variety of religious and spiritual backgrounds. They provide some non-faith­based services (eg, crisis intervention, life review, bereavement counseling) resembling those also provided in formal mental healthcare settings.¹⁹ By facilitating religious and spiritual coping and religious practice and responding to religious and spiritual needs, chaplains also offer a level of support not typically offered by formal mental healthcare providers.²⁰

Veterans at risk of suicide sometimes look to pastoral care providers, particularly chaplains, for mental health support.^9,10 Research on the effects of chaplaincy services on suicidal behavior is just beginning to emerge.¹⁵ Still, the US Department of Health and Human Services has recognized pastoral care services as having a “beneficial and therapeutic effect on the medical condition of a patient.”¹¹

For example, in one study, hospital inpatients reported higher satisfaction if they had been visited by a chaplain.¹² Chaplains help align treatment plans with patient values and wishes.¹³ In another study,¹⁴ patients undergoing coronary artery bypass grafting who were randomized to receive five visits from a chaplain were found to have a higher rate of positive religious coping (eg, forgiveness, letting go of anger). Positive religious coping has been correlated with lower levels of psychological stress and better mental health outcomes.

EXPERIENCING GUILT IS LINKED TO RISK OF SUICIDE

Suicidal behavior is complex, multifaceted, and linked to genetic, neurologic, psychological, social, and cultural factors.²¹

Assessing for and addressing certain complex emotions, such as guilt and shame, is an important part of suicide prevention efforts. Guilt is defined as a “controllable psychological state that is typically linked to a specific action or behavior, and which entails regret or remorse.”²²

Close to 75% of veterans who had thought about suicide said they frequently experienced guilt

Guilt has been linked to risk of suicide in veterans.^23–25 In one study, close to 75% of veterans who had thought about suicide said they frequently experienced guilt about having violated the precepts of their faith group, family, God, life, or the military.²⁶

Such findings suggest that the sense of guilt experienced by some at-risk veterans may be grounded in a variety of contexts. For example, faith communities that place a strong emphasis on obedience to moral, ethical, and religious precepts may contribute to the experience of guilt unless balanced by a message of grace or favor from a benevolent God or deity. Without this balance, engaging in activities that are not fully sanctioned by one’s faith community may lead to guilt.

Families might also contribute to veterans’ experiences of guilt by placing unrealistic expectations on them. And the family environment may not be conducive to resolving feelings of guilt in veterans, harboring resentment and antipathies and making it very difficult to alleviate any ensuing sense of distress.

CLINICIAN’S ROLE IN ASSESSING GUILT

In addressing and assessing guilt in veterans at risk of suicide, clinicians should try to recognize the source and clinical implications of this emotion.

Recognize the source of guilt

Guilt may indicate a clinical disorder such as a mood disorder (eg, major depression).²⁷ Mood disorders significantly increase the risk of suicidal behavior.^28,29

Beyond diagnosing a clinical disorder, prescribing pharmacotherapy, and referring for mental healthcare services, recognizing the source of this emotion remains an important part of addressing a patient’s experience of guilt. Especially when associated with a clinical disorder, guilt is often irrational and excessive and does not appropriately reflect the experience or situation in question.

Case conceptualization, defined as “synthesizing the patient’s experience with relevant clinical theory and research,”³⁰ can be used to understand the context in which the guilt-inducing action or behavior occurred and the veteran’s own interpretation of his or her actions. Understanding the source of the patient’s guilt could be used to plan treatment and resolve any underlying sense of distress.

As with other negative emotions, the affective component of guilt is often the result of cognitive distortions made as the person tries to make sense of what has occurred or to reconcile beliefs of right and wrong with the guilt-inducing behavior.³¹ The common cognitive errors associated with guilt include:

• Hindsight bias (a belief that one should have known what was going to happen as a result of one’s actions)
• Responsibility distortion (a belief that one’s actions directly caused an adverse event)
• Justification distortion (a belief that one’s actions were not justified by the situation)
• Wrongdoing distortion (a belief that one violated one’s own standards of right and wrong).³¹

Cognitive therapy to counter cognitive distortions

A variety of clinical options exist to help veterans manage and resolve guilt.

Mood disorders significantly increase the risk of suicidal behavior

Cognitive therapy can counter the cognitive distortions that drive feelings of guilt. The goal is to guide patients to examine the evidence, process the event, and realize that their behavior was appropriate for the given situation. Cognitive processing therapy and prolonged exposure therapy have both been shown to decrease trauma-related guilt, though cognitive processing therapy was found to be better at decreasing guilt that arose from cognitive distortions.³²

Guilt and suicide ideation have also been associated with a belief that one’s actions constituted an unforgivable sin.³³ Responding to these inherently religious-spiritual cognitive distortions may be beyond the scope of expertise for many healthcare professionals. In such cases, it may be prudent to consider complementing clinical services with pastoral care. It follows that pastoral care services should only be provided if the veteran voices a desire and readiness for them. The clinician and chaplain can then work together to provide coordinated care to best meet the patient’s needs, to address the experience of guilt, and to alleviate the sense of distress.

A CHAPLAIN’S PERSPECTIVE ON GUILT

A prominent feature of pastoral practice is  helping people, including at-risk veterans, resolve feelings of guilt regardless of the context on which the emotion is founded (eg, religion, shame).¹⁰ For many people, guilt is an impenetrable barrier, preventing resolution of whatever experience led to a sense of inner turmoil.

Forgiveness

In the context of pastoral care, resolution of guilt is ordinarily tied to a need for forgiveness. There are multiple ways in which forgiveness can be grounded in religious and spiritual contexts.³⁴ Examples include forgiving others (ie, forswearing resentment, anger, or hatred directed toward another person), being forgiven by God or another benevolent deity, and forgiving oneself for violating perceived personal transgressions.³⁵ In some cases, divine forgiveness may be conditional on interpersonal forgiveness.³⁶ Forgiveness is also sometimes seen as a remedy for sin and a way to restore moral order.³⁷

Some people may initially think they can never be forgiven. With time and the weight of one’s experiences, the impossibility of forgiveness can become so ingrained that it becomes a core belief. These core beliefs set up a vicious circle of thoughts and feelings, in which people and places and events from the past are continuously brought forward into the present. Anger and resentment become the steady diet for the tormented self that feels forever powerless over experienced injustices. These relived experiences drive the person into a deep isolation where the self becomes less human—a thing, an object. This experience of losing oneself proves excruciating and often leads to contemplation of suicide as a way to resolve anguish.

Hope emerges

Pastoral care services provide a means to reframe one’s core beliefs, manage and resolve the burden of guilt, and uncover new motivation for living.

The practice of spiritual direction within the discipline of pastoral care listens for these inner movements and encourages the person to give voice to them in his or her own words. No longer limited by a diminished, tormented self, the real self begins to relate to another reality that changes his or her identity, relieves the burden of guilt, and gives reason, purpose, and meaning to life.

Even with this opportunity for a new life, however, cognitive distortions based on a disproportional “faith-based prism” may persist. In this case, clinicians and chaplains must work closely together to reframe old understandings of self and incorrect understandings of religion and spirituality into one that continues to reinforce this newfound sense of hope.³⁸

A VETERAN OF IRAQ WITH SUICIDE IDEATION

The following case illustrates how clinicians and chaplains may be able to work together to help facilitate the resolution of guilt.

A veteran who had served in Iraq had entered the Domiciliary Care Program at a US Department of Veterans Affairs medical center. He reported experiencing problems with guilt, forgiveness, and suicide ideation. A clinical therapeutic program was prescribed after a psychological evaluation uncovered that he was also struggling with depression and posttraumatic stress disorder.

Guilt is often irrational and excessive and does not appropriately reflect the experience or situation

His mental healthcare providers recognized the importance of incorporating a religious-spiritual component into the therapeutic plan, and so consulted with a chaplain to plan a suitable course of action. Specifically, this veteran reported feeling that he could not be forgiven for his military experiences, a feeling that was giving way to alienation and isolation from the God of his faith tradition.

The chaplain helped this veteran reflect on his military experiences, giving him the perspective he needed to view his God as one who truly loves him. He recognized instances in which he could have lost his life had it not been for others who intervened on his behalf at just the right time. This awareness caused him to think about his life differently, challenging him to reframe his relationship with God. Instead of simple coincidences, the veteran began to consider the mystery behind these times and places.

Over time and in keeping with the tenets of his faith tradition, the veteran stated that he was ultimately able to accept and receive God’s love and forgiveness. He now reports that these inner spiritual movements serve as a source of support during occasional relapses into emotional distress. These movements allow him to consider the mystery of his present life and its value based on his experience of his God’s love and forgiveness.

CARE FOR SUICIDE SURVIVORS

The experience of guilt is not limited to veterans. Those bereaved by suicide are also left to manage their own experiences of the loss and ensuing complex emotions. Friends and loved ones who survive a suicide decedent may experience guilt, feeling that they somehow contributed to or failed to prevent the suicide. Such feelings of guilt are hypothesized to lower the threshold for suicidal behavior in those bereaved.³⁹

Guilt and shame are also frequently encountered in survivors of nonfatal suicide attempts.⁴⁰ Chaplaincy services might also prove useful for these individuals.

TIME IS EVERYTHING

Patients who may have an active psychopathology should have their clinical therapeutic needs attended to first. If the clinician deems pastoral care services to be an appropriate complementary support option, care should be taken to select a pastoral care provider who is adequately prepared for this role. Different professional organizations (eg, Association of Professional Chaplains) have established board-certification procedures, minimum education requirements, and supervised practical experience required for chaplaincy certification.

Also, spiritual growth and development remain a core focus of pastoral practice. Clinicians should discontinue any collaboration with pastoral care providers who question an individual’s faith or commitment to his or her faith, or who promote thinking or actions that could be deleterious to the patient’s therapeutic trajectory.

SUMMING UP

We have here presented our perspectives on how chaplaincy services can be used to complement clinical services in support of at-risk veterans struggling with experiences of guilt. Unfortunately, the current level of collaboration between chaplains and clinicians in support of at-risk veteran populations is limited.²⁰ Our hope is that clinicians managing these at-risk patients will develop a greater awareness of how chaplaincy services might be able to help in alleviating experiences of guilt in at-risk veteran populations. A further hope is that such cases will serve as an opportunity for greater interdisciplinary collaboration, benefiting at-risk veterans most in need of support.
 

Acknowledgment: Dr. Rasmussen was supported by the Office of Academic Affiliations, Advanced Fellowship Program in Mental Illness Research and Treatment, US Department of Veterans Affairs, VISN 2 Center of Excellence for Suicide Prevention.

In their commentary, Kopacz et al¹ propose that collaboration with professionally trained and certified clinical chaplains provides an opportunity for interdisciplinary care with increased benefit to veterans at risk of suicide. They rightly identify the pivotal issue of guilt as one that falls squarely in the domain of spiritual (or pastoral) care.

See related commentary

As professionals involved in the training of board-certifiable chaplains (and one of us is a veteran), we find that guilt in patients with suicidal tendencies is a profoundly spiritual issue that can be addressed effectively through collaboration among chaplains, physicians, and mental health providers.

Guilt is a serious spiritual condition that can easily be undertreated, or treated under the rubric of depression, which is related but not identical. Undertreatment occurs when caregivers, eager to see the guilt-sufferer experience relief, inadvertently short-circuit the necessary process of working through, rather than around, the guilt. Allowing patients to talk about their feelings of guilt without minimizing those feelings can be helpful even if, as Kopacz et al point out, the feelings are often irrational. We believe that people have an innate need to be truly heard and understood before they can become open to a reinterpretation of their feelings. Only then can the seeds of self-forgiveness begin to take root.

Hearing the words “There is hope for you to feel forgiven” can be more helpful than hearing “You didn’t really do anything bad,” particularly if the patient is religious. Hearing these words from a chaplain is often more effective than hearing them from a lay person, just as many of us take basic health information more seriously when we hear it from a physician. Even if the veteran is not overtly religious, there may be a unique exchange between that person and a religious authority when it concerns the violation of a millennia­old, widely known teaching from the Bible, such as “Thou shalt not kill.”

Guilt in patients with suicidal tendencies is a profoundly spiritual issue

Kopacz et al also rightly suggest that unless religious prohibitions have been balanced with teachings on forgiveness and grace, the teachings can actually exacerbate feelings of guilt and elevate them to harmful proportions, especially in the potentially vulnerable psyche of a veteran who may have been traumatized. If there is no religious or spiritual guidance for balancing prohibitions with graces, the patient may be left to spiral in an unending loop of guilt with no way out.

We therefore propose the following categories for different types (or “shades”) of guilt that can be effectively addressed by chaplains in concert with other members of the healthcare team. For simplicity, we call these types real guilt, survivor guilt, mistaken guilt, and complex-compound guilt.

REAL GUILT

An important role professional chaplains can play is to allow patients (in this case, veterans) to express their remorse and regret for violations of their own moral codes. In many cases, they have in fact hurt or killed another person, and they need the chance to unburden their hearts and spirits, especially if they were taught that killing people is a sin. Veterans who have harmed or killed others, even if under orders, are often left with bona fide feelings of guilt that need to be aired and released in a safe and confidential environment. This is often most effective when done by someone who not only is trained in nonjudgmental and nondirective listening, but also is a religious authority who can assure the patient of his or her innate worthiness and of the ability to be forgiven.

As Kopacz et al note, guilt is linked to a specific action or behavior and usually entails regret or remorse. Many veterans belong to or have had exposure to faith groups with strong moral codes and prohibitions, and so may see the chaplain as having authority to act as confessor and granter of absolution.

SURVIVOR GUILT

Survivor guilt is commonly understood as the feeling of surviving a terrible event or situation while someone else did not. Those who suffer from survivor guilt judge themselves unworthy of survival and believe the deceased to have been more courageous, virtuous, or somehow a better person than they. They torture themselves with ideas of the deceased person’s virtues—imagined or real—and sometimes go on to believe that “It should have been me who was killed.”

The burden of feeling that the wrong person died can be overwhelming. If these people are not helped to see their own worth and helped to find outlets for their sense of having been spared (by God, by their own wits, or by sheer luck), they are likely to struggle more. This is related but not identical to what we  call mistaken guilt. The two types are similar because they share a sense of randomness and helplessness, but they are different for reasons we will explain below.

Chaplains can be particularly effective partners in the care of veterans with survivor guilt, helping them to make meaning out of a life-changing event, rather than find meaning inherently in that event. Meaning, purpose, and “God’s plan for my life” are common themes in the pastoral conversation that can provide a compass for the disoriented survivor.

MISTAKEN GUILT

Mistaken guilt describes when a person who is involved in the death of another but is absolutely blameless—and could not possibly have prevented that death—literally “mis-takes” the guilt upon himself or herself in spite of the facts. Because of the helplessness induced by this feeling, mistaken guilt can be more difficult to treat than other forms. These patients continue to suffer despite assurances that the death occurred through absolutely no fault of their own.²

‘There is hope to feel forgiven’ can be more helpful than ‘You didn’t do anything bad’

Hickling³ has written extensively about this phenomenon in innocent motor vehicle drivers who cause pedestrian deaths, and he considers this type of guilt one of the most difficult to recover from precisely because of the helplessness factor. He has explained that if patients can find a real reason by which they were culpable for what happened, they can change their ways. But if they were absolutely innocent (as in many incidents in training or combat), they often cannot make sense of what happened in a way that allows them to move on because there is nothing they could have done differently and therefore nothing they can change.⁴

These patients almost certainly need long-term intervention such as cognitive behavioral therapy in order to train their mind away from such destructive thoughts. However, they are also very likely to be helped by a chaplain if they find that the event triggers memories of other past infractions of which they may need to unburden themselves (ie, confess).

COMPOUND-COMPLEX GUILT

As the name implies, compound-complex guilt is a combination of the other types and may have additional layers.

Compound-complex guilt leaves sufferers literally feeling guilty for feeling guilty. Though this may border on a genuine clinical disorder, it is also to some degree normal (eg, due to cultural taboos and norms) for people to feel culpable for not being able to “move on” or “forgive themselves” as quickly as others may want them to. Buddhists call this tendency the “second arrow effect.” The first arrow is the feeling of guilt (or other painful feeling) that strikes the individual, but the second arrow is the one he or she drives in afterward by thinking it is wrong or weak to even have the feeling.

Patients who suffer from this type of guilt blame themselves for the conundrum they are in and feel even worse. This is not unlike the vortex of unresolved and complicated grief.

Those who suffer from compound-complex guilt may layer the primary guilt with additional guilt for feeling weak, for needing help, or for asking for help. Especially in the culture of the military, the fear of stigma when asking for help (especially with mental health) is still quite strong. Therefore, chaplains can serve as a less threatening entry point for the veteran needing multiple professionals involved in his or her care.

NONJUDGMENTAL LISTENING

Nonjudgmental listening is essential to get at the source or sources of guilt, regardless of the type, in order to allow the wounds to air out and begin healing. Many veterans suffering from guilt may need intensive pharmacologic and cognitive therapy to fully recover, and care from a chaplain is not a substitute for psychiatric evaluation and treatment, especially if there is a risk of suicide.

However, chaplains may be able to help with the “deep work” of spiritual healing that is part of veterans’ overall recovery. This is true not only because chaplains are especially trained to do this, but also because they are the team members most likely to have uniquely spiritual language to speak to the condition. The language of confession, absolution, repentance, redemption, atonement, and forgiveness is language of the spiritual realm.

In addition, chaplains’ freedom from hourly billing concerns and their often less formalized interactions with patients may help to build trust. Well-trained chaplains, who are often quite gifted at creating an atmosphere of reverence and safety (sanctuary) in the most unlikely situations, are well suited to help the interdisciplinary team treat this vulnerable patient population.

SUGGESTED READING

For more insights into the role of chaplains on the interdisciplinary healthcare team, we recommend the following book: Cadge W. Paging God: Religion in the Halls of Medicine. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press; 2012.

In their commentary, Kopacz et al¹ propose that collaboration with professionally trained and certified clinical chaplains provides an opportunity for interdisciplinary care with increased benefit to veterans at risk of suicide. They rightly identify the pivotal issue of guilt as one that falls squarely in the domain of spiritual (or pastoral) care.

See related commentary

As professionals involved in the training of board-certifiable chaplains (and one of us is a veteran), we find that guilt in patients with suicidal tendencies is a profoundly spiritual issue that can be addressed effectively through collaboration among chaplains, physicians, and mental health providers.

Guilt is a serious spiritual condition that can easily be undertreated, or treated under the rubric of depression, which is related but not identical. Undertreatment occurs when caregivers, eager to see the guilt-sufferer experience relief, inadvertently short-circuit the necessary process of working through, rather than around, the guilt. Allowing patients to talk about their feelings of guilt without minimizing those feelings can be helpful even if, as Kopacz et al point out, the feelings are often irrational. We believe that people have an innate need to be truly heard and understood before they can become open to a reinterpretation of their feelings. Only then can the seeds of self-forgiveness begin to take root.

Hearing the words “There is hope for you to feel forgiven” can be more helpful than hearing “You didn’t really do anything bad,” particularly if the patient is religious. Hearing these words from a chaplain is often more effective than hearing them from a lay person, just as many of us take basic health information more seriously when we hear it from a physician. Even if the veteran is not overtly religious, there may be a unique exchange between that person and a religious authority when it concerns the violation of a millennia­old, widely known teaching from the Bible, such as “Thou shalt not kill.”

Guilt in patients with suicidal tendencies is a profoundly spiritual issue

Kopacz et al also rightly suggest that unless religious prohibitions have been balanced with teachings on forgiveness and grace, the teachings can actually exacerbate feelings of guilt and elevate them to harmful proportions, especially in the potentially vulnerable psyche of a veteran who may have been traumatized. If there is no religious or spiritual guidance for balancing prohibitions with graces, the patient may be left to spiral in an unending loop of guilt with no way out.

We therefore propose the following categories for different types (or “shades”) of guilt that can be effectively addressed by chaplains in concert with other members of the healthcare team. For simplicity, we call these types real guilt, survivor guilt, mistaken guilt, and complex-compound guilt.

REAL GUILT

An important role professional chaplains can play is to allow patients (in this case, veterans) to express their remorse and regret for violations of their own moral codes. In many cases, they have in fact hurt or killed another person, and they need the chance to unburden their hearts and spirits, especially if they were taught that killing people is a sin. Veterans who have harmed or killed others, even if under orders, are often left with bona fide feelings of guilt that need to be aired and released in a safe and confidential environment. This is often most effective when done by someone who not only is trained in nonjudgmental and nondirective listening, but also is a religious authority who can assure the patient of his or her innate worthiness and of the ability to be forgiven.

As Kopacz et al note, guilt is linked to a specific action or behavior and usually entails regret or remorse. Many veterans belong to or have had exposure to faith groups with strong moral codes and prohibitions, and so may see the chaplain as having authority to act as confessor and granter of absolution.

SURVIVOR GUILT

Survivor guilt is commonly understood as the feeling of surviving a terrible event or situation while someone else did not. Those who suffer from survivor guilt judge themselves unworthy of survival and believe the deceased to have been more courageous, virtuous, or somehow a better person than they. They torture themselves with ideas of the deceased person’s virtues—imagined or real—and sometimes go on to believe that “It should have been me who was killed.”

The burden of feeling that the wrong person died can be overwhelming. If these people are not helped to see their own worth and helped to find outlets for their sense of having been spared (by God, by their own wits, or by sheer luck), they are likely to struggle more. This is related but not identical to what we  call mistaken guilt. The two types are similar because they share a sense of randomness and helplessness, but they are different for reasons we will explain below.

Chaplains can be particularly effective partners in the care of veterans with survivor guilt, helping them to make meaning out of a life-changing event, rather than find meaning inherently in that event. Meaning, purpose, and “God’s plan for my life” are common themes in the pastoral conversation that can provide a compass for the disoriented survivor.

MISTAKEN GUILT

Mistaken guilt describes when a person who is involved in the death of another but is absolutely blameless—and could not possibly have prevented that death—literally “mis-takes” the guilt upon himself or herself in spite of the facts. Because of the helplessness induced by this feeling, mistaken guilt can be more difficult to treat than other forms. These patients continue to suffer despite assurances that the death occurred through absolutely no fault of their own.²

‘There is hope to feel forgiven’ can be more helpful than ‘You didn’t do anything bad’

Hickling³ has written extensively about this phenomenon in innocent motor vehicle drivers who cause pedestrian deaths, and he considers this type of guilt one of the most difficult to recover from precisely because of the helplessness factor. He has explained that if patients can find a real reason by which they were culpable for what happened, they can change their ways. But if they were absolutely innocent (as in many incidents in training or combat), they often cannot make sense of what happened in a way that allows them to move on because there is nothing they could have done differently and therefore nothing they can change.⁴

These patients almost certainly need long-term intervention such as cognitive behavioral therapy in order to train their mind away from such destructive thoughts. However, they are also very likely to be helped by a chaplain if they find that the event triggers memories of other past infractions of which they may need to unburden themselves (ie, confess).

COMPOUND-COMPLEX GUILT

As the name implies, compound-complex guilt is a combination of the other types and may have additional layers.

Compound-complex guilt leaves sufferers literally feeling guilty for feeling guilty. Though this may border on a genuine clinical disorder, it is also to some degree normal (eg, due to cultural taboos and norms) for people to feel culpable for not being able to “move on” or “forgive themselves” as quickly as others may want them to. Buddhists call this tendency the “second arrow effect.” The first arrow is the feeling of guilt (or other painful feeling) that strikes the individual, but the second arrow is the one he or she drives in afterward by thinking it is wrong or weak to even have the feeling.

Patients who suffer from this type of guilt blame themselves for the conundrum they are in and feel even worse. This is not unlike the vortex of unresolved and complicated grief.

Those who suffer from compound-complex guilt may layer the primary guilt with additional guilt for feeling weak, for needing help, or for asking for help. Especially in the culture of the military, the fear of stigma when asking for help (especially with mental health) is still quite strong. Therefore, chaplains can serve as a less threatening entry point for the veteran needing multiple professionals involved in his or her care.

NONJUDGMENTAL LISTENING

Nonjudgmental listening is essential to get at the source or sources of guilt, regardless of the type, in order to allow the wounds to air out and begin healing. Many veterans suffering from guilt may need intensive pharmacologic and cognitive therapy to fully recover, and care from a chaplain is not a substitute for psychiatric evaluation and treatment, especially if there is a risk of suicide.

However, chaplains may be able to help with the “deep work” of spiritual healing that is part of veterans’ overall recovery. This is true not only because chaplains are especially trained to do this, but also because they are the team members most likely to have uniquely spiritual language to speak to the condition. The language of confession, absolution, repentance, redemption, atonement, and forgiveness is language of the spiritual realm.

In addition, chaplains’ freedom from hourly billing concerns and their often less formalized interactions with patients may help to build trust. Well-trained chaplains, who are often quite gifted at creating an atmosphere of reverence and safety (sanctuary) in the most unlikely situations, are well suited to help the interdisciplinary team treat this vulnerable patient population.

SUGGESTED READING

For more insights into the role of chaplains on the interdisciplinary healthcare team, we recommend the following book: Cadge W. Paging God: Religion in the Halls of Medicine. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press; 2012.

In their commentary, Kopacz et al¹ propose that collaboration with professionally trained and certified clinical chaplains provides an opportunity for interdisciplinary care with increased benefit to veterans at risk of suicide. They rightly identify the pivotal issue of guilt as one that falls squarely in the domain of spiritual (or pastoral) care.

See related commentary

As professionals involved in the training of board-certifiable chaplains (and one of us is a veteran), we find that guilt in patients with suicidal tendencies is a profoundly spiritual issue that can be addressed effectively through collaboration among chaplains, physicians, and mental health providers.

Guilt is a serious spiritual condition that can easily be undertreated, or treated under the rubric of depression, which is related but not identical. Undertreatment occurs when caregivers, eager to see the guilt-sufferer experience relief, inadvertently short-circuit the necessary process of working through, rather than around, the guilt. Allowing patients to talk about their feelings of guilt without minimizing those feelings can be helpful even if, as Kopacz et al point out, the feelings are often irrational. We believe that people have an innate need to be truly heard and understood before they can become open to a reinterpretation of their feelings. Only then can the seeds of self-forgiveness begin to take root.

Hearing the words “There is hope for you to feel forgiven” can be more helpful than hearing “You didn’t really do anything bad,” particularly if the patient is religious. Hearing these words from a chaplain is often more effective than hearing them from a lay person, just as many of us take basic health information more seriously when we hear it from a physician. Even if the veteran is not overtly religious, there may be a unique exchange between that person and a religious authority when it concerns the violation of a millennia­old, widely known teaching from the Bible, such as “Thou shalt not kill.”

Guilt in patients with suicidal tendencies is a profoundly spiritual issue

Kopacz et al also rightly suggest that unless religious prohibitions have been balanced with teachings on forgiveness and grace, the teachings can actually exacerbate feelings of guilt and elevate them to harmful proportions, especially in the potentially vulnerable psyche of a veteran who may have been traumatized. If there is no religious or spiritual guidance for balancing prohibitions with graces, the patient may be left to spiral in an unending loop of guilt with no way out.

We therefore propose the following categories for different types (or “shades”) of guilt that can be effectively addressed by chaplains in concert with other members of the healthcare team. For simplicity, we call these types real guilt, survivor guilt, mistaken guilt, and complex-compound guilt.

REAL GUILT

An important role professional chaplains can play is to allow patients (in this case, veterans) to express their remorse and regret for violations of their own moral codes. In many cases, they have in fact hurt or killed another person, and they need the chance to unburden their hearts and spirits, especially if they were taught that killing people is a sin. Veterans who have harmed or killed others, even if under orders, are often left with bona fide feelings of guilt that need to be aired and released in a safe and confidential environment. This is often most effective when done by someone who not only is trained in nonjudgmental and nondirective listening, but also is a religious authority who can assure the patient of his or her innate worthiness and of the ability to be forgiven.

As Kopacz et al note, guilt is linked to a specific action or behavior and usually entails regret or remorse. Many veterans belong to or have had exposure to faith groups with strong moral codes and prohibitions, and so may see the chaplain as having authority to act as confessor and granter of absolution.

SURVIVOR GUILT

Survivor guilt is commonly understood as the feeling of surviving a terrible event or situation while someone else did not. Those who suffer from survivor guilt judge themselves unworthy of survival and believe the deceased to have been more courageous, virtuous, or somehow a better person than they. They torture themselves with ideas of the deceased person’s virtues—imagined or real—and sometimes go on to believe that “It should have been me who was killed.”

The burden of feeling that the wrong person died can be overwhelming. If these people are not helped to see their own worth and helped to find outlets for their sense of having been spared (by God, by their own wits, or by sheer luck), they are likely to struggle more. This is related but not identical to what we  call mistaken guilt. The two types are similar because they share a sense of randomness and helplessness, but they are different for reasons we will explain below.

Chaplains can be particularly effective partners in the care of veterans with survivor guilt, helping them to make meaning out of a life-changing event, rather than find meaning inherently in that event. Meaning, purpose, and “God’s plan for my life” are common themes in the pastoral conversation that can provide a compass for the disoriented survivor.

MISTAKEN GUILT

Mistaken guilt describes when a person who is involved in the death of another but is absolutely blameless—and could not possibly have prevented that death—literally “mis-takes” the guilt upon himself or herself in spite of the facts. Because of the helplessness induced by this feeling, mistaken guilt can be more difficult to treat than other forms. These patients continue to suffer despite assurances that the death occurred through absolutely no fault of their own.²

‘There is hope to feel forgiven’ can be more helpful than ‘You didn’t do anything bad’

Hickling³ has written extensively about this phenomenon in innocent motor vehicle drivers who cause pedestrian deaths, and he considers this type of guilt one of the most difficult to recover from precisely because of the helplessness factor. He has explained that if patients can find a real reason by which they were culpable for what happened, they can change their ways. But if they were absolutely innocent (as in many incidents in training or combat), they often cannot make sense of what happened in a way that allows them to move on because there is nothing they could have done differently and therefore nothing they can change.⁴

These patients almost certainly need long-term intervention such as cognitive behavioral therapy in order to train their mind away from such destructive thoughts. However, they are also very likely to be helped by a chaplain if they find that the event triggers memories of other past infractions of which they may need to unburden themselves (ie, confess).

COMPOUND-COMPLEX GUILT

As the name implies, compound-complex guilt is a combination of the other types and may have additional layers.

Compound-complex guilt leaves sufferers literally feeling guilty for feeling guilty. Though this may border on a genuine clinical disorder, it is also to some degree normal (eg, due to cultural taboos and norms) for people to feel culpable for not being able to “move on” or “forgive themselves” as quickly as others may want them to. Buddhists call this tendency the “second arrow effect.” The first arrow is the feeling of guilt (or other painful feeling) that strikes the individual, but the second arrow is the one he or she drives in afterward by thinking it is wrong or weak to even have the feeling.

Patients who suffer from this type of guilt blame themselves for the conundrum they are in and feel even worse. This is not unlike the vortex of unresolved and complicated grief.

Those who suffer from compound-complex guilt may layer the primary guilt with additional guilt for feeling weak, for needing help, or for asking for help. Especially in the culture of the military, the fear of stigma when asking for help (especially with mental health) is still quite strong. Therefore, chaplains can serve as a less threatening entry point for the veteran needing multiple professionals involved in his or her care.

NONJUDGMENTAL LISTENING

Nonjudgmental listening is essential to get at the source or sources of guilt, regardless of the type, in order to allow the wounds to air out and begin healing. Many veterans suffering from guilt may need intensive pharmacologic and cognitive therapy to fully recover, and care from a chaplain is not a substitute for psychiatric evaluation and treatment, especially if there is a risk of suicide.

However, chaplains may be able to help with the “deep work” of spiritual healing that is part of veterans’ overall recovery. This is true not only because chaplains are especially trained to do this, but also because they are the team members most likely to have uniquely spiritual language to speak to the condition. The language of confession, absolution, repentance, redemption, atonement, and forgiveness is language of the spiritual realm.

In addition, chaplains’ freedom from hourly billing concerns and their often less formalized interactions with patients may help to build trust. Well-trained chaplains, who are often quite gifted at creating an atmosphere of reverence and safety (sanctuary) in the most unlikely situations, are well suited to help the interdisciplinary team treat this vulnerable patient population.

SUGGESTED READING

For more insights into the role of chaplains on the interdisciplinary healthcare team, we recommend the following book: Cadge W. Paging God: Religion in the Halls of Medicine. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press; 2012.

Yes. Although implantable cardioverter-defibrillators (ICDs) prevent sudden cardiac death in patients with advanced heart failure, their benefit in terminally ill patients is small.¹ Furthermore, the shocks they deliver at the end of life can cause distress. Therefore, it is reasonable to consider ICD deactivation if the patient or family wishes.

See related commentary

A DIFFICULT DECISION

End-of-life decisions place significant emotional burdens on patients, their families, and their healthcare providers and can have social and legal consequences.

Turning off an ICD is an especially difficult decision, considering that these devices protect against sudden cardiac death and fatal arrhythmias. Also, patients and their representatives may find it more difficult to withdraw from active care than to forgo further interventions (more on this below), and they may misunderstand discussions about ICD deactivation, perceiving them as the beginning of abandonment.

ICD DEACTIVATION IS OFTEN DONE HAPHAZARDLY OR NOT AT ALL

Many healthcare providers are not trained in or comfortable with discussing end-of-life issues, and many hospitals and hospice programs lack policies and protocols for managing implanted devices at the end of life. Consequently, ICD management at the end of life varies among providers and tends to be suboptimal.²

In a report of a survey in 414 hospice facilities, 97% of facilities reported that they admitted patients with ICDs, but only 10% had a policy on device deactivation.³

In a survey of 47 European medical centers, only 4% said they addressed ICD deactivation with their patients.⁴

A study of 125 patients with ICDs who had died found that 52% had do-not-resuscitate orders. Nevertheless, in 100 patients the ICD had remained active in the last 24 hours of their life, and 31 of these patients had received shocks during their last 24 hours.⁵

In a survey of next of kin of patients with ICDs who had died of any cause,⁶ in only 27 of 100 cases had the clinician discussed ICD deactivation, and about three-fourths of these discussions had occurred during the last few days of life. Twenty-seven patients had received ICD discharges in the last month of life, and 8% had received a discharge during the final minutes.

TRAINING AND PROTOCOLS ARE NEEDED

Healthcare professionals need education about device deactivation at the end of life so that they are comfortable communicating with patients and families about this critical issue. To this end, several cardiac and palliative care societies have jointly released an expert statement on managing ICDs and other implantable devices in end-of-life situations.⁷

Many providers harbor a misunderstanding of the difference between withholding a device and withdrawing (or turning off) a device that is already implanted.² Some mistakenly believe they would be committing a crime by deactivating an implanted life-sustaining device. Legally and ethically, there is no difference between withholding a device and withdrawing a device. Legally, carrying out a request to withdraw life-sustaining treatment is neither physician-assisted suicide nor euthanasia.

DISCUSSION SHOULD BEGIN EARLY AND SHOULD BE ONGOING

The discussion of ICD deactivation should begin before the device is implanted and should continue as the patient’s health status changes. In a survey, 40% of patients said they felt that ICD deactivation should be discussed before the device is implanted, and only 5% felt that this discussion should be undertaken in the last days of life.⁸

At the least, it is important to identify patients with ICDs on admission to hospice and to have policies in place that ensure adequate patient education to make an informed decision about ICD deactivation at the end of life.

The topic should be discussed when goals of care change and when do-not-resuscitate status is addressed, and also when advanced directives are being acknowledged. If the patient or his or her legal representative wishes to keep the ICD turned on, that wish should be respected. The essence of a discussion is not to impose the providers’ choice on the patient, but to help the patient make the right decision for himself or herself. Of note, patients entering hospice do not have to have do-not-resuscitate status.

We believe that device management in end-of-life circumstances should be part of the discussion of the goals of care. Accordingly, healthcare providers need to be familiar with device management and to have a higher comfort level in addressing such sensitive topics with patients facing the end of life, as well as with their families.

It is also advisable to apply protocols within hospice services to address ICD management options for the patient and the legal representative. An early decision regarding end-of-life deactivation will help patients avoid distressing ICD discharges and the related emotional distress in their last moments.

Yes. Although implantable cardioverter-defibrillators (ICDs) prevent sudden cardiac death in patients with advanced heart failure, their benefit in terminally ill patients is small.¹ Furthermore, the shocks they deliver at the end of life can cause distress. Therefore, it is reasonable to consider ICD deactivation if the patient or family wishes.

See related commentary

A DIFFICULT DECISION

End-of-life decisions place significant emotional burdens on patients, their families, and their healthcare providers and can have social and legal consequences.

Turning off an ICD is an especially difficult decision, considering that these devices protect against sudden cardiac death and fatal arrhythmias. Also, patients and their representatives may find it more difficult to withdraw from active care than to forgo further interventions (more on this below), and they may misunderstand discussions about ICD deactivation, perceiving them as the beginning of abandonment.

ICD DEACTIVATION IS OFTEN DONE HAPHAZARDLY OR NOT AT ALL

Many healthcare providers are not trained in or comfortable with discussing end-of-life issues, and many hospitals and hospice programs lack policies and protocols for managing implanted devices at the end of life. Consequently, ICD management at the end of life varies among providers and tends to be suboptimal.²

In a report of a survey in 414 hospice facilities, 97% of facilities reported that they admitted patients with ICDs, but only 10% had a policy on device deactivation.³

In a survey of 47 European medical centers, only 4% said they addressed ICD deactivation with their patients.⁴

A study of 125 patients with ICDs who had died found that 52% had do-not-resuscitate orders. Nevertheless, in 100 patients the ICD had remained active in the last 24 hours of their life, and 31 of these patients had received shocks during their last 24 hours.⁵

In a survey of next of kin of patients with ICDs who had died of any cause,⁶ in only 27 of 100 cases had the clinician discussed ICD deactivation, and about three-fourths of these discussions had occurred during the last few days of life. Twenty-seven patients had received ICD discharges in the last month of life, and 8% had received a discharge during the final minutes.

TRAINING AND PROTOCOLS ARE NEEDED

Healthcare professionals need education about device deactivation at the end of life so that they are comfortable communicating with patients and families about this critical issue. To this end, several cardiac and palliative care societies have jointly released an expert statement on managing ICDs and other implantable devices in end-of-life situations.⁷

Many providers harbor a misunderstanding of the difference between withholding a device and withdrawing (or turning off) a device that is already implanted.² Some mistakenly believe they would be committing a crime by deactivating an implanted life-sustaining device. Legally and ethically, there is no difference between withholding a device and withdrawing a device. Legally, carrying out a request to withdraw life-sustaining treatment is neither physician-assisted suicide nor euthanasia.

DISCUSSION SHOULD BEGIN EARLY AND SHOULD BE ONGOING

The discussion of ICD deactivation should begin before the device is implanted and should continue as the patient’s health status changes. In a survey, 40% of patients said they felt that ICD deactivation should be discussed before the device is implanted, and only 5% felt that this discussion should be undertaken in the last days of life.⁸

At the least, it is important to identify patients with ICDs on admission to hospice and to have policies in place that ensure adequate patient education to make an informed decision about ICD deactivation at the end of life.

The topic should be discussed when goals of care change and when do-not-resuscitate status is addressed, and also when advanced directives are being acknowledged. If the patient or his or her legal representative wishes to keep the ICD turned on, that wish should be respected. The essence of a discussion is not to impose the providers’ choice on the patient, but to help the patient make the right decision for himself or herself. Of note, patients entering hospice do not have to have do-not-resuscitate status.

We believe that device management in end-of-life circumstances should be part of the discussion of the goals of care. Accordingly, healthcare providers need to be familiar with device management and to have a higher comfort level in addressing such sensitive topics with patients facing the end of life, as well as with their families.

It is also advisable to apply protocols within hospice services to address ICD management options for the patient and the legal representative. An early decision regarding end-of-life deactivation will help patients avoid distressing ICD discharges and the related emotional distress in their last moments.

Yes. Although implantable cardioverter-defibrillators (ICDs) prevent sudden cardiac death in patients with advanced heart failure, their benefit in terminally ill patients is small.¹ Furthermore, the shocks they deliver at the end of life can cause distress. Therefore, it is reasonable to consider ICD deactivation if the patient or family wishes.

See related commentary

A DIFFICULT DECISION

End-of-life decisions place significant emotional burdens on patients, their families, and their healthcare providers and can have social and legal consequences.

Turning off an ICD is an especially difficult decision, considering that these devices protect against sudden cardiac death and fatal arrhythmias. Also, patients and their representatives may find it more difficult to withdraw from active care than to forgo further interventions (more on this below), and they may misunderstand discussions about ICD deactivation, perceiving them as the beginning of abandonment.

ICD DEACTIVATION IS OFTEN DONE HAPHAZARDLY OR NOT AT ALL

Many healthcare providers are not trained in or comfortable with discussing end-of-life issues, and many hospitals and hospice programs lack policies and protocols for managing implanted devices at the end of life. Consequently, ICD management at the end of life varies among providers and tends to be suboptimal.²

In a report of a survey in 414 hospice facilities, 97% of facilities reported that they admitted patients with ICDs, but only 10% had a policy on device deactivation.³

In a survey of 47 European medical centers, only 4% said they addressed ICD deactivation with their patients.⁴

A study of 125 patients with ICDs who had died found that 52% had do-not-resuscitate orders. Nevertheless, in 100 patients the ICD had remained active in the last 24 hours of their life, and 31 of these patients had received shocks during their last 24 hours.⁵

In a survey of next of kin of patients with ICDs who had died of any cause,⁶ in only 27 of 100 cases had the clinician discussed ICD deactivation, and about three-fourths of these discussions had occurred during the last few days of life. Twenty-seven patients had received ICD discharges in the last month of life, and 8% had received a discharge during the final minutes.

TRAINING AND PROTOCOLS ARE NEEDED

Healthcare professionals need education about device deactivation at the end of life so that they are comfortable communicating with patients and families about this critical issue. To this end, several cardiac and palliative care societies have jointly released an expert statement on managing ICDs and other implantable devices in end-of-life situations.⁷

Many providers harbor a misunderstanding of the difference between withholding a device and withdrawing (or turning off) a device that is already implanted.² Some mistakenly believe they would be committing a crime by deactivating an implanted life-sustaining device. Legally and ethically, there is no difference between withholding a device and withdrawing a device. Legally, carrying out a request to withdraw life-sustaining treatment is neither physician-assisted suicide nor euthanasia.

DISCUSSION SHOULD BEGIN EARLY AND SHOULD BE ONGOING

The discussion of ICD deactivation should begin before the device is implanted and should continue as the patient’s health status changes. In a survey, 40% of patients said they felt that ICD deactivation should be discussed before the device is implanted, and only 5% felt that this discussion should be undertaken in the last days of life.⁸

At the least, it is important to identify patients with ICDs on admission to hospice and to have policies in place that ensure adequate patient education to make an informed decision about ICD deactivation at the end of life.

The topic should be discussed when goals of care change and when do-not-resuscitate status is addressed, and also when advanced directives are being acknowledged. If the patient or his or her legal representative wishes to keep the ICD turned on, that wish should be respected. The essence of a discussion is not to impose the providers’ choice on the patient, but to help the patient make the right decision for himself or herself. Of note, patients entering hospice do not have to have do-not-resuscitate status.

We believe that device management in end-of-life circumstances should be part of the discussion of the goals of care. Accordingly, healthcare providers need to be familiar with device management and to have a higher comfort level in addressing such sensitive topics with patients facing the end of life, as well as with their families.

It is also advisable to apply protocols within hospice services to address ICD management options for the patient and the legal representative. An early decision regarding end-of-life deactivation will help patients avoid distressing ICD discharges and the related emotional distress in their last moments.