Dataset Information

A randomized trial to improve communication about end-of-life care among patients with COPD.

ABSTRACT: Patients with COPD consistently express a desire to discuss end-of-life care with clinicians, but these discussions rarely occur. We assessed whether an intervention using patient-specific feedback about preferences for discussing end-of-life care would improve the occurrence and quality of communication between patients with COPD and their clinicians.We performed a cluster-randomized trial of clinicians and patients from the outpatient clinics at the Veterans Affairs Puget Sound Health Care System. Using self-reported questionnaires, we assessed patients' preferences for communication, life-sustaining therapy, and experiences at the end of life. The intervention clinicians and patients received a one-page patient-specific feedback form, based on questionnaire responses, to stimulate conversations. The control group completed questionnaires but did not receive feedback. Patient-reported occurrence and quality of end-of-life communication (QOC) were assessed within 2 weeks of a targeted visit. Intention-to-treat regression analyses were performed with generalized estimating equations to account for clustering of patients within clinicians.Ninety-two clinicians contributed 376 patients. Patients in the intervention arm reported nearly a threefold higher rate of discussions about end-of-life care (unadjusted, 30% vs 11%; P < .001). Baseline end-of-life communication was poor (intervention group QOC score, 23.3; 95% CI, 19.9-26.8; control QOC score, 19.2; 95% CI, 15.9-22.4). Patients in the intervention arm reported higher-quality end-of-life communication that was statistically significant, although the overall improvement was small (Cohen effect size, 0.21).A one-page patient-specific feedback form about preferences for end-of-life care and communication improved the occurrence and quality of communication from patients' perspectives.ClinicalTrials.gov; No.: NCT00106080; URL: www.clinicaltrials.gov.

SUBMITTER: Au DH

PROVIDER: S-EPMC3415164 | biostudies-literature | 2012 Mar

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

A randomized trial to improve communication about end-of-life care among patients with COPD.

Au David H DH Udris Edmunds M EM Engelberg Ruth A RA Diehr Paula H PH Bryson Christopher L CL Reinke Lynn F LF Curtis J Randall JR

Chest 20110922 3

<h4>Objective</h4>Patients with COPD consistently express a desire to discuss end-of-life care with clinicians, but these discussions rarely occur. We assessed whether an intervention using patient-specific feedback about preferences for discussing end-of-life care would improve the occurrence and quality of communication between patients with COPD and their clinicians.<h4>Methods</h4>We performed a cluster-randomized trial of clinicians and patients from the outpatient clinics at the Veterans A ...[more]

PMID: 21940765

Similar Datasets

Project description:RationaleCommunication with family of critically ill patients is often poor and associated with family distress.ObjectivesTo determine if an intensive care unit (ICU) communication facilitator reduces family distress and intensity of end-of-life care.MethodsWe conducted a randomized trial at two hospitals. Eligible patients had a predicted mortality greater than or equal to 30% and a surrogate decision maker. Facilitators supported communication between clinicians and families, adapted communication to family needs, and mediated conflict.Measurements and main resultsOutcomes included depression, anxiety, and post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) among family 3 and 6 months after ICU and resource use. We identified 488 eligible patients and randomized 168. Of 352 eligible family members, 268 participated (76%). Family follow-up at 3 and 6 months ranged from 42 to 47%. The intervention was associated with decreased depressive symptoms at 6 months (P = 0.017), but there were no significant differences in psychological symptoms at 3 months or anxiety or PTSD at 6 months. The intervention was not associated with ICU mortality (25% control vs. 21% intervention; P = 0.615) but decreased ICU costs among all patients (per patient: $75,850 control, $51,060 intervention; P = 0.042) and particularly among decedents ($98,220 control, $22,690 intervention; P = 0.028). Among decedents, the intervention reduced ICU and hospital length of stay (28.5 vs. 7.7 d and 31.8 vs. 8.0 d, respectively; P < 0.001).ConclusionsCommunication facilitators may be associated with decreased family depressive symptoms at 6 months, but we found no significant difference at 3 months or in anxiety or PTSD. The intervention reduced costs and length of stay, especially among decedents. This is the first study to find a reduction in intensity of end-of-life care with similar or improved family distress. Clinical trial registered with www.clinicaltrials.gov (NCT 00720200).

Project description:BackgroundEnd-stage renal disease carries a prognosis similar to cancer yet only 20 % of end-stage renal disease patients are referred to hospice. Furthermore, conversations between dialysis team members and patients about end-of-life planning are uncommon. Lack of provider training about how to communicate prognostic data may contribute to the limited number of end-of-life care discussions that take place with this chronically ill population. In this study, we will test the Shared Decision-Making Renal Supportive Care communication intervention to systematically elicit patient and caretaker preferences for end-of-life care so that care concordant with patients' goals can be provided.Methods/designThis multi-center study will deploy an intervention to improve end-of-life communication for hemodialysis patients who are at high risk of death in the ensuing six months. The intervention will be carried out as a prospective cohort with a retrospective cohort serving as the comparison group. Patients will be recruited from 16 dialysis units associated with two large academic centers in Springfield, Massachusetts and Albuquerque, New Mexico. Critical input from patient advisory boards, a stakeholder panel, and initial qualitative analysis of patient and caretaker experiences with advance care planning have informed the communication intervention. Rigorous communication training for hemodialysis social workers and providers will ensure that standardized study procedures are performed at each dialysis unit. Nephrologists and social workers will communicate prognosis and provide advance care planning in face-to-face encounters with patients and families using a social work-centered algorithm. Study outcomes including frequency and timing of hospice referrals, patient and caretaker satisfaction, quality of end-of-life discussions, and quality of death will be assessed over an 18 month period.DiscussionThe Shared Decision-Making Renal Supportive Care Communication intervention intends to improve discussions about prognosis and end-of-life care with end-stage renal disease patients. We anticipate that the intervention will help guide hemodialysis staff and providers to effectively participate in advance care planning for patients and caretakers to establish preferences and goals at the end of life.Trial registrationNCT02405312.

Project description:BackgroundEffective type 2 diabetes care remains a challenge for patients including those receiving primary care in safety net settings.ObjectiveThe Partnership to Improve Diabetes Education (PRIDE) trial team and leaders from a regional department of health evaluated approaches to improve care for vulnerable patients.DesignCluster randomized controlled trial.PatientsAdults with uncontrolled type 2 diabetes seeking care across 10 unblinded, randomly assigned safety net clinics in Middle TN.InterventionsA literacy-sensitive, provider-focused, health communication intervention (PRIDE; 5 clinics) vs. standard diabetes education (5 clinics).Main measuresParticipant-level primary outcome was glycemic control [A1c] at 12 months. Secondary outcomes included select health behaviors and psychosocial aspects of care at 12 and 24 months. Adjusted mixed effects regression models were used to examine the comparative effectiveness of each approach to care.Key resultsOf 410 patients enrolled, 364 (89%) were included in analyses. Median age was 51 years; Black and Hispanic patients represented 18% and 25%; 96% were uninsured, and 82% had low annual income level (< $20,000); adequate health literacy was seen in 83%, but numeracy deficits were common. At 12 months, significant within-group treatment effects occurred from baseline for both PRIDE and control sites: adjusted A1c (- 0.76 [95% CI, - 1.08 to - 0.44]; P < .001 vs - 0.54 [95% CI, - 0.86 to - 0.21]; P = .001), odds of poor eating (0.53 [95% CI, 0.33-0.83]; P = .01 vs 0.42 [95% CI, 0.26-0.68]; P < .001), treatment satisfaction (3.93 [95% CI, 2.48-6.21]; P < .001 vs 3.04 [95% CI, 1.93-4.77]; P < .001), and self-efficacy (2.97 [95% CI, 1.89-4.67]; P < .001 vs 1.81 [95% CI, 1.1-2.84]; P = .01). No significant difference was observed between study arms in adjusted analyses.ConclusionsBoth interventions improved the participant's A1c and behavioral outcomes. PRIDE was not more effective than standard education. Further research may elucidate the added value of a focused health communication program in this setting.

Project description:Communication among doctors, nurses, and families contributes to high-quality end-of-life care, but is difficult to improve.Our objective was to identify aspects of communication appropriate for interventions to improve quality of dying in the intensive care unit (ICU).This observational study used data from a cluster-randomized trial of an interdisciplinary intervention to improve end-of-life care at 15 Seattle/Tacoma area hospitals (2003-2008). Nurses completed surveys for patients dying in the ICU. We examined associations between nurse-assessed predictors (physician-nurse communication, physician-family communication) and nurse ratings of patients' quality of dying (nurse-QODD-1).Based on 1173 nurse surveys, four of six physician-nurse communication topics were positively associated with nurse-QODD-1: family questions, family dynamics, spiritual/religious issues, and cultural issues. Discussions between nurses and physicians about nurses' concerns for patients or families were negatively associated. All physician-family communication ratings, as assessed by nurses, were positively associated with nurse-QODD-1: answering family's questions, listening to family, asking about treatments patient would want, helping family decide patient's treatment wishes, and overall communication. Path analysis suggested overall physician-family communication and helping family incorporate patient's wishes were directly associated with nurse-QODD-1.Several topics of physician-nurse communication, as rated by nurses, were associated with higher nurse-rated quality of dying, whereas one topic, nurses' concerns for patient or family, was associated with poorer ratings. Higher nurse ratings of physician-family communication were uniformly associated with higher quality of dying, highlighting the importance of this communication. Physician support of family decision making was particularly important, suggesting a potential target for interventions to improve end-of-life care.

Dataset Information

A randomized trial to improve communication about end-of-life care among patients with COPD.

Publications

A randomized trial to improve communication about end-of-life care among patients with COPD.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets