Written Care Summaries Facilitate Communication Between Families and Providers of ICU Patients: A Pilot Study.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT: Design
Qualitative interviews with surrogates of ICU patients who received daily written summaries of care.Setting
Single, urban academic medical center.Patients/subjects
A convenience sample of 30 surrogates of nondecisional, medical ICU patients.Interventions
Daily written summaries detailed each of the patient's main ICU problems, the presumed causes of each of the problems, and the medical team's plan to address each of the problems for each ICU day.Measurements and main results
There were four ways that written summaries affected the participant's experience: 1) providing clarity to participants regarding the patient's condition, 2) facilitating participant understanding of the patient's clinical course, 3) facilitating communication between participants and medical providers, and 4) facilitating communication between participants and other family members. Overarching themes were that summaries were understandable, had appropriate level of detail, and added value to the ICU experience.Conclusions
In this pilot study, family members had positive impressions of receiving daily written summaries of care. Further study is needed to determine the extent to which written communication may affect family and patient outcomes.
SUBMITTER: Bulger JL
PROVIDER: S-EPMC8280084 | biostudies-literature |
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:BackgroundIneffective transitions of care continue to be a source of risk for patients. Although there has been widespread implementation of electronic medical record (EMR) systems, little is currently known about hospitalists' and primary care providers' (PCPs) direct communication preferences at discharge using messaging capabilities in a shared EMR system.ObjectiveWe examined how hospitalists and PCPs with a shared EMR prefer to directly communicate at the time of hospital discharge by identifying preferred modes, information prioritization, challenges, facilitators, and proposed solutions.DesignA sequential, explanatory mixed methods study with surveys and semi-structured interviews.ParticipantsThirty-eight academic hospitalists and 63 PCPs working in outpatient clinics in a single safety net hospital system with a shared EMR.Main approachDescriptive statistics were used to analyze survey responses. Interviews were analyzed using immersion/crystallization and a mixture of inductive and deductive thematic analysis.Key resultsPCPs preferred direct communication at discharge through a message within the EMR while hospitalists preferred a message within the EMR and email. Qualitative results identified key themes related to patient care and direct communication: value of direct communication, safety, social determinants of health, and clinical judgment. Both groups prioritized direct communication for high-risk medications, pending and follow-up studies, and high-risk patients that hospitalists were concerned about. Overall, both hospitalists and PCPs reported that ensuring patient safety, flagging patients with social challenges, and expressing concerns about patients based on clinical judgment were key communication priorities.ConclusionsHospitalists and primary care providers report considerable overlap in preferences for direct communication at the time of hospital discharge through a shared EMR. Specifically, both groups reported similar concerns regarding patient safety and continuity during transitions. Direct messaging within the EMR could enable "closed loop" communication that helps ensure safe transitions of care for high-risk patients.
| S-EPMC7280409 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BACKGROUND:Infertility patients generally see provider-patient communication and relationships as important, but as often insufficient, raising critical questions regarding why these gaps persist, and how they might best be addressed. METHODS:Semi-structured interviews of approximately one hour each were conducted with 37 ART providers and patients (17 physicians, 10 other health providers, and 10 patients) and were thematically analyzed. RESULTS:Patients see clinicians' interactions as ranging widely from good to bad, related to several specific barriers and factors. Patients and providers may differ in their physical and emotional experiences, expectations concerning treatment outcomes and uncertainties, and time frames and finances, generating dynamic processes and tensions. Characteristics of particular providers, clinics and patients can also vary. Infertility patients tend to find only one outcome acceptable - a "take home baby" - rather than partial success, as is the case with many other diseases. Yet most IVF cycles fail. Many patients must pay considerable out-of-pocket expenses for infertility treatment, exacerbating disappointments and frustrations. Providers often work in competitive, entrepreneurial markets, and "hype" their potential success. After treatment failures, providers may feel guilty and withdraw from patients. Yet these behaviors can antagonize patients more than physicians realize, aggravating patient stresses. Several providers described how they understood patients' needs and perceptions more fully only after becoming infertility patients themselves. Interactions with not only physicians, but other providers (e.g., nurses and staff) can play key roles. Patients may be willing to understand these impediments, but providers often communicate these obstacles and reasons poorly or not at all, furthering tensions. CONCLUSIONS:These data, the first to examine several critical aspects of challenges that infertility providers and patients face in communication and relationships, suggest that several key dynamic processes and factors may be involved, and need to be addressed. While prior research has shown that infertility patients value, but often feel disappointed in relationships with clinicians, the present data highlight several specific impediments, and thus have critical implications for future practice, research, guidelines and education.
| S-EPMC5989459 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Patients admitted to general medicine inpatient services are increasingly cared for by hospital-based physicians rather than their primary care providers (PCPs). This separation of hospital and ambulatory care may result in important care discontinuities after discharge. We sought to determine whether communication between hospital-based physicians and PCPs influences patient outcomes.We approached consecutive patients admitted to general medicine services at six US academic centers from July 2001 to June 2003. A random sample of the PCPs for consented patients was contacted 2 weeks after patient discharge and surveyed about communication with the hospital medical team. Responses were linked with the 30-day composite patient outcomes of mortality, hospital readmission, and emergency department (ED) visits obtained through follow-up telephone survey and National Death Index search. We used hierarchical multi-variable logistic regression to model whether communication with the patient's PCP was associated with the 30-day composite outcome.A total of 1,772 PCPs for 2,336 patients were surveyed with 908 PCPs responses and complete patient follow-up available for 1,078 patients. The PCPs for 834 patients (77%) were aware that their patient had been admitted to the hospital. Of these, direct communication between PCPs and inpatient physicians took place for 194 patients (23%), and a discharge summary was available within 2 weeks of discharge for 347 patients (42%). Within 30 days of discharge, 233 (22%) patients died, were readmitted to the hospital, or visited an ED. In adjusted analyses, no relationship was seen between the composite outcome and direct physician communication (adjusted odds ratio 0.87, 95% confidence interval 0.56 - 1.34), the presence of a discharge summary (0.84, 95% CI 0.57-1.22), or PCP awareness of the index hospitalization (1.08, 95% CI 0.73-1.59).Analysis of communication between PCPs and inpatient medical teams revealed much room for improvement. Although communication during handoffs of care is important, we were not able to find a relationship between several aspects of communication and associated adverse clinical outcomes in this multi-center patient sample.
| S-EPMC2642573 | biostudies-other
Project description:Purpose/Objectives: Family caregivers of individuals living with cancer are often highly involved in communication with healthcare teams, yet little is known about their experiences, needs, and preferences in this role. To address this gap in the knowledge base, researchers sought to explore family caregivers' perspectives on communication with oncology care providers. Design and Methods: Researchers conducted a secondary inductive thematic analysis of qualitative interviews originally collected as part of a randomized clinical trial of a supportive intervention for family caregivers of patients with cancer (N?=?63). Participants: Participants were family caregivers of adult patients with cancer. Most were patients' spouses/long-term partners (52.3%) or adult children/grandchildren (29.2%). Caregivers of patients with all cancer types and stages of disease progression were eligible for study enrollment. Findings: Caregivers valued communication with healthcare providers who were attentive, genuine, broadly focused on patients and caregivers' experiences, sensitive to unmet information needs, and responsive to the potentially different communication preferences of patients and caregivers. Interpretation: Family caregivers expressed a strong preference for person-centered communication, conceptualized as communication that helps healthcare providers meet the needs of patients and caregivers both as individuals and as an interdependent unit of care, and that acknowledges individuals' experiences beyond their prescribed roles of "cancer patient" and "caregiver." Implications for Psychosocial Oncology Practice: Psychosocial oncology providers' strong orientation to the biopsychosocial and spiritual aspects of cancer care delivery make them uniquely positioned to support family caregivers. Findings suggest that providers should explicitly communicate their commitment to both patient and family care, involve family caregivers in psychosocial assessment activities and subsequent intervention, and strive to honor patients and caregivers' potentially different communication preferences.
| S-EPMC7350905 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The purpose of this study was to gain a better understanding of parents' preferences regarding the sharing of information between their children's primary care and mental health providers.Fifty-five parents with a child who was actively engaged in mental health treatment completed an anonymous survey while accompanying their child to either a primary care or mental health clinic appointment. This brief measure elicited parents' experiences with and preferences for treatment coordination across their children's primary care and mental health providers, with a focus on communication practices.Parents consistently described communication among their children's primary care and mental health providers as important, yet frequently reported that such communication was not currently taking place. Further, parents reported that they were often called upon to act as "communication bridges" between professionals caring for their children.Implications for the collaborative pediatric and mental health care of children as well as recommendations for improving communication between mental health and pediatric providers are discussed.
| S-EPMC4461524 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Formal family meetings have been recommended as a useful approach to assist in goal setting, facilitate decision making, and reduce use of ineffective resources in the ICU. We examined patient outcomes before and after implementation of an intensive communication system (ICS) to test the effect of regular, structured formal family meetings on patient outcomes among long-stay ICU patients.One hundred thirty-five patients receiving usual care and communication were enrolled as the control group, followed by enrollment of intervention patients (n = 346), from five ICUs. The ICS included a family meeting within 5 days of ICU admission and weekly thereafter. Each meeting discussed medical update, values and preferences, and goals of care; treatment plan; and milestones for judging effectiveness of treatment.Using multivariate analysis, there were no significant differences between control and intervention patients in length of stay (LOS), the primary end point. Similarly, there were no significant differences in indicators of aggressiveness of care or treatment limitation decisions (ICU mortality, LOS, duration of ventilation, treatment limitation orders, or use of tracheostomy or percutaneous gastrostomy). Exploratory analysis suggested that in the medical ICUs, the intervention was associated with a lower prevalence of tracheostomy among patients who died or had do-not-attempt-resuscitation orders in place.The negative findings of the main analysis, in combination with preliminary evidence of differences among types of unit, suggest that further examination of the influence of patient, family, and unit characteristics on the effects of a system of regular family meetings may be warranted. Despite the lack of influence on patient outcomes, structured family meetings may be an effective approach to meeting information and support needs.ClinicalTrials.gov; No.: NCT01057238 ; URL: www.clinicaltrials.gov.
| S-EPMC2998207 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundAlthough growing, the prevalence of the use of health information technology (HIT) by patients to communicate with their providers is not well understood on the population level, nor whether patients are communicating with their providers about their use of HIT.ObjectiveTo understand whether patients are communicating with their providers about HIT use and the patient characteristics associated with the communication.DesignCross-sectional, self-administered survey of a sample of patients across the state of Indiana.ParticipantsNine hundred seventy adult participants from across Indiana, 54% female and 79.5% white.Main measuresThe survey included sections assessing health information-seeking behavior, use of health information technology, and discussions with doctors about the use of HIT.Key resultsThe survey had a 12% response rate. Sixty-three percent of respondent reported going to the Internet as the first source when seeking health information, while only 19% of respondent reported their doctor was their first source. When communicating with doctors electronically, 31% reported using an electronic health record messaging system, 24% used email, and 18% used text messaging. Only 39% of respondents reported having had any conversation about HIT use with their providers.ConclusionsThere remain many unmet opportunities for patients and providers to communicate about HIT use. More guidance for patients and care teams may both help facilitate these conversations and promote optimal use, such as recommendations to ask simple clarification questions and minimize inefficient, synchronous communication when unnecessary.
| S-EPMC7459004 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectivesTo explore family members' perceptions of an electronic communication application, VidaTalk™, their communication experience, and emotional reactions to communication with mechanically ventilated patients in the intensive care units.Research methodology/designQualitative phase of a mixed-methods study nested within a randomised controlled trial. Family members in the intervention group received the VidaTalk™ app as a communication aid during their intensive care stay. Seven family members participated in 18 semi-structured email interviews after discharge between May and December 2018. Interviews were analysed using qualitative content analysis.SettingFamilies were recruited in multiple intensive care units located in one university hospital.Main outcome measuresCommunication experience with the VidaTalk™ and emotions while communicating with the patient. Basic qualitative description and constant comparative techniques were used to code and analyse the text using ATLAS_ti (Version 7.5.18).FindingsThe VidaTalk™ opened up family-patient communication by allowing clear communication and expanding communication content. Family members felt happy and thankful to communicate with the patient. They also expressed feelings of relief and less frustration and less stress while communicating with the patient. On the other hand, the patient's ability to express their worries or anxiety sometimes made families feel sad or distressed.ConclusionThe VidaTalk™ was helpful for family-patient communication. The VidaTalk™ may help families reduce psychological distress. However, expanded communication with critically ill patients may cause other negative feelings.
| S-EPMC10833611 | biostudies-literature
Project description:OBJECTIVE:To examine the effects of providing recordings or summaries of consultations to people with cancer and their families. DESIGN:Systematic review. DATA SOURCES:MEDLINE, CINAHL, Cancerlit, EMBASE and other electronic bibliographic databases. Bibliographies of relevant papers. SELECTION CRITERIA:Randomized and non-randomized controlled trials of the provision of taped recordings or written summaries of consultations to people with cancer and/or their families. MAIN RESULTS:Eight randomized controlled trials were found, all involving adult participants. No non-randomized controlled trials were found. The quality of the studies was generally poor. Between 83% and 96% of people who received recordings or summaries found them useful to remind them of what was said and/or to inform family members and friends about their illness and treatment. Of seven studies that assessed recall of information given during the consultation, four reported better recall among the groups that received recordings or summaries than among control groups. Receiving a recording or summary had no significant effect on anxiety or depression between the groups. None of the included studies assessed survival or health outcomes other than psychological outcomes. CONCLUSIONS:Wider use of consultation tapes and summary letters could benefit many adults with cancer, without causing additional anxiety or depression, but consideration should be given to individuals' circumstances and preferences.
| S-EPMC5060066 | biostudies-literature
Project description:One in fi ve deaths in the United States occurs in the ICU, and many of these deaths are experienced as less than optimal by families of dying people. The current study investigated the relationship between family satisfaction with ICU care and overall ratings of the quality of dying as a means of identifying targets for improving end-of-life experiences for patients and families.This multisite cross-sectional study surveyed families of patients who died in the ICU in one of 15 hospitals in western Washington State. Measures included the Family Satisfaction in the ICU (FS-ICU) and the Single-Item Quality of Dying (QOD-1) questionnaires. Associations between FS-ICU items and the QOD-1 were examined using multivariate linear regression controlling for patient and family demographics and hospital site.Questionnaires were returned for 1,290 of 2,850 decedents (45%). Higher QOD-1 scores were significantly associated (all P < .05) with (1) perceived nursing skill and competence (?= 0.15), (2) support for family as decision-makers ( ?= 0.10), (3) family control over the patient’s care( ?= 0.18), and (4) ICU atmosphere (?= 0.12). FS-ICU items that received low ratings and correlated with higher QOD-1 scores (ie, important items with room for improvement) were (1) support of family as decision-maker, (2) family control over patient’s care, and (3) ICU atmosphere.Increased support for families as decision-makers and for their desired level of control over patient care along with improvements in the ICU atmosphere were identified as aspects of the ICU experience that may be important targets for quality improvement.ClinicalTrials.gov; No.: NCT00685893; URL: www.clinicaltrials.gov.
| S-EPMC3494471 | biostudies-literature