Dataset Information

Role of allied health care professionals in goals-of-care discussions with hospitalized patients and perceived barriers: a cross-sectional survey.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Allied health care professionals can contribute meaningfully to goals-of-care discussions with seriously ill hospitalized patients and their families. We sought to explore the perspective of hospital-based allied health care professionals on their role in goals-of-care discussions and to identify barriers to their participation.

Methods

We surveyed allied health care professionals (social workers, physiotherapists, occupational therapists, registered dietitians, speech-language pathologists and pharmacists) on internal medicine, hematology-oncology, medical oncology and radiation oncology wards at 2 tertiary care hospitals in Hamilton, Ontario, from April 2013 to May 2014. We modified a validated questionnaire originally designed to assess barriers to discussing goals of care from the perspective of nurses, residents and staff physicians on hospital medical wards. Respondents rated the questionnaire items on a 7-point Likert scale.

Results

Of the 47 allied health care professionals invited, 32 (68%) participated: 9 physiotherapists, 7 social workers, 6 occupational therapists, 4 registered dietitians, 3 pharmacists and 2 speech-language pathologists; in 1 case, the profession was unknown. The greatest perceived barriers to engaging in goals-of-care discussions were lack of patient decision-making capacity (mean rating 5.9 [standard error (SE) 0.3]), lack of awareness of patients' previous discussions with other team members (mean rating 5.7 [SE 0.3]) and family members' difficulty accepting a poor prognosis (mean rating 5.6 [SE 0.2]). Although the respondents felt it was most acceptable for staff physicians, residents and advanced practice nurses to exchange information and reach a final decision during goals-of-care discussions, they felt it was acceptable for a broader range of allied health care professionals to initiate discussions (mean rating 4.7-5.8) and to act as decision coaches (clarifying values, weighing options) with patients and families (mean rating 5.3-6.1).

Interpretation

Allied health care professionals are willing to initiate goals-of-care discussions and to act as a decision coach with seriously ill hospitalized patients and their families. By improving interprofessional collaboration, we can engage the entire health care team in this process.

SUBMITTER: Martin L

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7868088 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundBurnout and distress negatively affect the well-being of health care professionals and the treatment they provide. Our aim was to measure the prevalence of burnout and distress among allied health care staff at a cardiovascular centre of a quaternary hospital network in Canada, and compare outcomes to those for nonphysician employees in the United States.MethodsWe conducted a survey of allied health care staff, including physical, respiratory and occupational therapists, pharmacists, social workers, dietitians and speech-language pathologists, in a cardiovascular centre at 2 quaternary referral hospitals in Toronto, Ontario, between Nov. 27, 2018, and Jan. 31, 2019. The survey tool included the Well-Being Index (WBI), which measures fatigue, depression, burnout, anxiety or stress, quality of life, work-life integration, meaning in work and overall distress; a score of 2 or higher indicated high distress. We carried out standard univariate statistical comparisons using the χ2, Fisher exact or Kruskal-Wallis test as appropriate to perform univariate comparisons in the sample of respondents. We assessed the relation between a WBI score of 2 or higher and demographic characteristics. We compared univariate associations among WBI data for nonphysician employees in the US who completed the WBI to responses from our participants.ResultsThe response rate to the survey was 86% (45/52). Thirty-three respondents (73%) reported experiencing burnout in the previous month, and 31 (69%) reported emotional problems. Compared to respondents who perceived fair treatment in the workplace, those who perceived unfair treatment (20 [44%]) were more likely to report emotional problems (17 [85%] v. 13 [54%], p = 0.05), to worry that work was hardening them emotionally (15 [75%] v. 8 [33%], p = 0.008), and to feel down, depressed or hopeless (12 [60%] v. 4 [17%], p = 0.005). Twenty-five respondents (56%) and 13 respondents (29%) reported WBI scores consistent with high (≥ 2) or severe (≥ 5) distress, respectively. Respondents were more likely to have a high WBI score if they perceived unfair treatment or inadequate staffing levels. Our respondents had a higher prevalence of burnout (73.3% v. 53.6%, p = 0.008) and a higher average WBI score (2.6 [SD 2.8] v. 1.7 [SD 2.6], p = 0.05) than 9096 nonphysician employees in the US.InterpretationThe prevalence of burnout, emotional problems and distress was high among allied health care staff. Fair treatment in the workplace and adequate staffing may lower distress levels and improve the work experience of these health care professionals.

Project description:BackgroundThe COVID-19 pandemic has highlighted the growing relevance of telehealth in health care. Assessing health care and nursing students' telehealth competencies is crucial for its successful integration into education and practice.ObjectiveWe aimed to assess students' perceived telehealth knowledge, skills, attitudes, and experiences. In addition, we aimed to examine students' preferences for telehealth content and teaching methods within their curricula.MethodsWe conducted a cross-sectional web-based study in May 2022. A project-specific questionnaire, developed and refined through iterative feedback and face-validity testing, addressed topics such as demographics, personal perceptions, and professional experience with telehealth and solicited input on potential telehealth course content. Statistical analyses were conducted on surveys with at least a 50% completion rate, including descriptive statistics of categorical variables, graphical representation of results, and Kruskal Wallis tests for central tendencies in subgroup analyses.ResultsA total of 261 students from 7 bachelor's and 4 master's health care and nursing programs participated in the study. Most students expressed interest in telehealth (180/261, 69% very or rather interested) and recognized its importance in their education (215/261, 82.4% very or rather important). However, most participants reported limited knowledge of telehealth applications concerning their profession (only 7/261, 2.7% stated profound knowledge) and limited active telehealth experience with various telehealth applications (between 18/261, 6.9% and 63/261, 24.1%). Statistically significant differences were found between study programs regarding telehealth interest (P=.005), knowledge (P<.001), perceived importance in education (P<.001), and perceived relevance after the pandemic (P=.004). Practical training with devices, software, and apps and telehealth case examples with various patient groups were perceived as most important for integration in future curricula. Most students preferred both interdisciplinary and program-specific courses.ConclusionsThis study emphasizes the need to integrate telehealth into health care education curricula, as students state positive telehealth attitudes but seem to be not adequately prepared for its implementation. To optimally prepare future health professionals for the increasing role of telehealth in practice, the results of this study can be considered when designing telehealth curricula.

Project description:ImportanceHigh-quality goals-of-care communication is critical to delivering goal-concordant, patient-centered care to hospitalized patients with chronic life-limiting illness. However, implementation and documentation of goals-of-care discussions remain important shortcomings in many health systems.ObjectiveTo evaluate the efficacy, feasibility, and acceptability of a patient-facing and clinician-facing communication-priming intervention to promote goals-of-care communication for patients hospitalized with serious illness.Design, setting, and participantsThis randomized clinical trial enrolled patients from November 6, 2018, to February 18, 2020. The setting was 2 hospitals in an academic health care system in Seattle, Washington. Participants included hospitalized adults with chronic life-limiting illness, aged 65 years or older and with markers of frailty, or aged 80 years or older. Data analysis was performed from August 2020 to August 2021.InterventionPatients were randomized to usual care with baseline questionnaires (control) vs the Jumpstart communication-priming intervention. Patients or surrogates in the intervention group and their clinicians received patient-specific Jumpstart Guides populated with data from questionnaires and the electronic health records (EHRs) that were designed to prompt and guide a goals-of-care discussion.Main outcomes and measuresThe primary outcome was EHR documentation of a goals-of-care discussion between randomization and hospital discharge. Additional outcomes included patient-reported or surrogate-reported goals-of-care discussions, patient-reported or surrogate-reported quality of communication, and intervention feasibility and acceptability.ResultsOf 428 eligible patients, this study enrolled 150 patients (35% enrollment rate; mean [SD] age, 59.2 [13.6] years; 66 women [44%]; 132 [88%] by patient consent and 18 [12%] by surrogate consent). Seventy-five patients each were randomized to the intervention and control groups. Compared with the control group, the cumulative incidence of EHR-documented goals-of-care discussions between randomization and hospital discharge was higher in the intervention group (16 of 75 patients [21%] vs 6 of 75 patients [8%]; risk difference, 13% [95% CI, 2%-24%]; risk ratio, 2.67 [95% CI, 1.10-6.44]; P = .04). Patient-reported or surrogate-reported goals-of-care discussions did not differ significantly between groups (30 of 66 patients [45%] vs 36 of 66 patients [55%]), although the intrarater consistency of patient and surrogate reports was poor. Patient-rated or surrogate-rated quality of communication did not differ significantly between groups. The intervention was feasible and acceptable to patients, surrogates, and clinicians.Conclusions and relevanceIn this randomized clinical trial, a patient-facing and clinician-facing communication priming intervention for seriously ill, hospitalized patients promoted EHR-documented goals-of-care discussions before discharge with good feasibility and acceptability. Communication-priming interventions should be reexamined in a larger randomized clinical trial to better understand their effectiveness in the inpatient setting.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03746392.

Project description:BACKGROUND:Noninvasive telemonitoring (TM) can be used in heart failure (HF) patients to perform early detection of decompensation at home, prevent unnecessary health care utilization, and decrease health care costs. However, the evidence is not sufficient to be part of HF guidelines for follow-up care, and we have no knowledge of how TM is used in the Nordic Baltic region. OBJECTIVE:The aim of this study was to describe health care professionals' (HCPs) perception of and presumed experience with noninvasive TM in daily HF patient care, perspectives of the relevance of and reasons for applying noninvasive TM, and barriers to the use of noninvasive TM. METHODS:A cross-sectional survey was performed between September and December 2016 in Norway and Lithuania with physicians and nurses treating HF patients at either a hospital ward or an outpatient clinic. A total of 784 questionnaires were sent nationwide by postal mail to 107 hospitals. The questionnaire consisted of 43 items with close- and open-ended questions. In Norway, the response rate was 68.7% (226/329), with 57 of 60 hospitals participating, whereas the response rate was 68.1% (310/455) in Lithuania, with 41 of 47 hospitals participating. Responses to the closed questions were analyzed using descriptive statistics, and the open-ended questions were analyzed using summative content analysis. RESULTS:This study showed that noninvasive TM is not part of the current daily clinical practice in Norway or Lithuania. A minority of HCPs responded to be familiar with noninvasive TM in HF care in Norway (48/226, 21.2%) and Lithuania (64/310, 20.6%). Approximately half of the HCPs in both countries perceived noninvasive TM to be relevant in follow-up of HF patients in Norway (131/226, 58.0%) and Lithuania (172/310, 55.5%). For physicians in both countries and nurses in Norway, the 3 most mentioned reasons for introducing noninvasive TM were to improve self-care, to reduce hospitalizations, and to provide high-quality care, whereas the Lithuanian nurses described ability to treat more patients and to reduce their workload as reasons for introducing noninvasive TM. The main barriers to implement noninvasive TM were lack of funding from health care authorities or the Territorial Patient Fund. Moreover, HCPs perceive that HF patients themselves could represent barriers because of their physical or mental condition in addition to a lack of internet access. CONCLUSIONS:HCPs in Norway and Lithuania are currently nonusers of TM in daily HF care. However, they perceive a future with TM to improve the quality of care for HF patients. Financial barriers and HF patients' condition may have an impact on the use of TM, whereas sufficient funding from health care authorities and improved knowledge may encourage the more widespread use of TM in the Nordic Baltic region and beyond.

Project description:BackgroundDementia has become a major public health issue worldwide due to its rapidly increasing prevalence and an increasing number of dementia-related deaths in long-term care facilities. The aim of this study was to examine health professionals' experiences of potential barriers and facilitators in providing palliative care for people with severe dementia in long-term care facilities.MethodsThis was a qualitative descriptive study. The data were collected from four focus groups and 20 individual in-depth interviews with healthcare professionals from four Norwegian nursing homes. The data were analysed by thematic text analysis, as described by Braun and Clarke.ResultsThe major findings indicate that healthcare professionals experience a lack of continuity as the main barrier to facilitating palliative care. Time pressure and increased efficiency requirements especially affect the weakest and bedridden residents with dementia. The healthcare professionals feel conflicted between wanting to spend more time caring for each individual resident and feeling pressure to help everyone. Although resources are scarce, dying residents are always given priority by healthcare professionals, either by the hiring of extra personnel or the reorganization of tasks in a way that facilitates someone staying with the terminal resident. Advanced care planning was highlighted as a facilitator in providing palliative care, but the extensive use of temporary staff among nurses and doctors and the relocation between the sheltered and long-term wards threaten the continuity in planning and providing palliative care.ConclusionsThe findings indicate that healthcare professionals experienced several structural barriers that prevented the provision of palliative care to people with severe dementia in long-term care facilities. Increasing demands for economic rationality lead to a lack of continuity of care. Organizational changes, such as measures to increase the competence and the proportion of permanent employees and the prevention of burdensome end-of-life transitions, should be implemented to improve continuity and quality of care.