Health care professionals' perceptions of factors influencing the process of identifying patients for serious illness conversations: A qualitative study.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT: Background
The Serious Illness Care Programme enables patients to receive care that is in accordance with their priorities. However, despite clarity about palliative care needs, many barriers to and difficulties in identifying patients for serious illness conversations remain.Aim
To explore healthcare professionals' perceptions about factors influencing the process of identifying patients for serious illness conversations.Design
Qualitative design. A thematic analysis of observations and semi-structured interviews was used.Setting/participants
Twelve observations at team meetings in which physicians and nurses discussed the process of identifying the patients for serious illness conversations were conducted at eight different clinics in two hospitals. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with three physicians and two nurses from five clinics.Results
Identifying the right patient and doing so at the right time were key to identifying patients for serious illness conversations. The continuity of relations and continuity over time could facilitate the identification process, while attitudes towards death and its relation to hope could hinder the process.Conclusions
The process of identifying patients for serious illness conversations is complex and may not be captured only by generic tools such as the surprise question. It is crucial to address existential and ethical obstacles that can hinder the identification of patients for serious illness conversations.
SUBMITTER: Morberg Jamterud S
PROVIDER: S-EPMC9247430 | biostudies-literature |
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:BackgroundConversations about goals, values and priorities with patients that are seriously ill are associated with improved palliative healthcare. The Serious Illness Care Program is a multi-component program that can facilitate more, better, and earlier conversations between clinicians and seriously ill patients. For successful and sustainable implementation of the Serious Illness Care Program, it is important to consider how stakeholders perceive it. The aim of our study was to explore physicians' perceptions and experiences of implementing the Serious Illness Care Program.MethodsData were collected through four focus group discussions with physicians (n = 14) working at a hospital where the Serious Illness Care program was in the process of being implemented. Data were analyzed with inductive thematic analysis.ResultsPhysicians' perceptions of the implementation encompassed three thematic areas: hovering between preparedness and unpreparedness, being impacted and being impactful, and picking pieces or embracing it at all.ConclusionsThis study identified key aspects related to the individual physician, the care team, the impact on the patient, and the organizational support that were perceived to influence the implementation and sustainable integration of the Serious Illness Care Program. Describing these aspects provides insight into how the Serious Illness Care Program is implemented in practice and indicates areas for future training and development.Trial registrationNot applicable.
| S-EPMC10717999 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Background/Objectives: The serious illness conversation (SIC) is an evidence-based framework for conversations with patients about a serious illness diagnosis. The objective of our study was to develop and validate a novel tool, the SIC-evaluation exercise (SIC-Ex), to facilitate assessment of resident-led conversations with oncology patients. Design: We developed the SIC-Ex based on SIC and on the Royal College of Canada Medical Oncology milestones. Seven resident trainees and 10 evaluators were recruited. Each trainee conducted an SIC with a patient, which was videotaped. The evaluators watched the videos and evaluated each trainee by using the novel SIC-Ex and the reference Calgary-Cambridge guide (CCG) at months zero and three. We used Kane's validity framework to assess validity. Results: Intra-class correlation using average SIC-Ex scores showed a moderate level of inter-evaluator agreement (range 0.523-0.822). Most evaluators rated a particular resident similar to the group average, except for one to two evaluator outliers in each domain. Test-retest reliability showed a moderate level of consistency among SIC-Ex scores at months zero and three. Global rating at zero and three months showed fair to good/very good inter-evaluator correlation. Pearson correlation coefficients comparing total SIC-Ex and CCG scores were high for most evaluators. Self-scores by trainees did not correlate well with scores by evaluators. Conclusions: SIC-Ex is the first assessment tool that provides evidence for incorporating the SIG guide framework for evaluation of resident competence. SIC-Ex is conceptually related to, but more specific than, CCG in evaluating serious illness conversation skills.
| S-EPMC8241377 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundAdvance care planning (ACP) conversations are associated with improved end-of-life healthcare outcomes and patients want to engage in ACP with their healthcare providers. Despite this, ACP conversations rarely occur in primary care settings. The objective of this study was to implement ACP through adapted Serious Illness Care Program (SICP) training sessions, and to understand primary care provider (PCP) perceptions of implementing ACP into practice.MethodsWe conducted a quality improvement project guided by the Normalization Process Theory (NPT), in an interprofessional academic family medicine group in Hamilton, Ontario, Canada. NPT is an explanatory model that delineates the processes by which organizations implement and integrate new work. PCPs (physicians, family medicine residents, and allied health care providers), completed pre- and post-SICP self-assessments evaluating training effectiveness, a survey evaluating program implementability and sustainability, and semi-structured qualitative interviews to elaborate on barriers, facilitators, and suggestions for successful implementation. Descriptive statistics and pre-post differences (Wilcoxon Sign-Rank test) were used to analyze surveys and thematic analysis was used to analyze qualitative interviews.Results30 PCPs participated in SICP training and completed self-assessments, 14 completed NoMAD surveys, and 7 were interviewed. There were reported improvements in ACP confidence and skills. NoMAD surveys reported mixed opinions towards ACP implementation, specifically concerning colleagues' abilities to conduct ACP and patients' abilities to participate in ACP. Physicians discussed busy clinical schedules, lack of patient preparedness, and continued discomfort or lack of confidence in having ACP conversations. Allied health professionals discussed difficulty sharing patient prognosis and identification of appropriate patients as barriers.ConclusionsTraining in ACP conversations improved PCPs' individual perceived abilities, but discomfort and other barriers were identified. Future iterations will require a more systematic process to support the implementation of ACP into regular practice, in addition to addressing knowledge and skill gaps.
| S-EPMC8325252 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Health and social care professionals (HCPs) who work in nursing homes (NHs) are increasingly required to sustain serious illness conversations about care goals and preferences. Although these conversations may also be challenging for experienced HCPs and the literature recognizes high-quality communication as key to providing patient-centered care, so far, no specific educational program has been developed for the NH setting to improve HCPs' communication skills. Our study aims to test the feasibility and potential effectiveness of an innovative, blended communication skills training program (Teach-to-Communicate) targeting the HCPs who work in NHs. This program includes classroom-based theory, experiential learning, and e-learning, and relies on interdisciplinary contexts and several didactic methods. The study consists of two phases: phase I is the development of written resources that employ focus group discussion involving field experts and external feedback from key stakeholders. Phase II consists of a multicenter, pilot, pre-post study with nested qualitative study. The Teach-to-Communicate training program is expected to enhance the quality of communication in NH and HCPs' confidence in sustaining serious illness conversations, reduce family carers' psycho-emotional burden and improve their satisfaction with the care received, and increase advance care planning documentation. Our protocol will provide insight for future researchers, healthcare providers, and policymakers and pave the way for blended educational approaches in the field of communication skills training.
| S-EPMC9819581 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Background: Early serious illness conversations (SICs) about goals of care and prognosis improve mood, quality of life, and end-of-life care quality. Algorithm-based behavioral nudges to oncologists increase the frequency and timeliness of such conversations. However, clinicians' perspectives on such nudges are unknown. Design: Qualitative study consisting of semistructured interviews among medical oncology clinicians who participated in a stepped-wedge cluster randomized trial of Conversation Connect, an algorithm-based intervention consisting of behavioral nudges to promote early SICs in the outpatient oncology setting. Results: Of 79 eligible oncology clinicians, 56 (71%) were approached to participate in interviews and 25 (45%) accepted. Key facilitators to algorithm-based nudges included prompting documentation of conversations, peer comparisons, performance reports, and validating norms around early conversations. Barriers included cancer-specific heterogeneity in algorithm performance and the frequency and tone of text messages. Areas of improvement included utilizing different information channels, identifying patients earlier in the disease trajectory, and incorporating patient-targeted messaging that emphasizes the value of early conversations. Conclusions: Oncology clinicians identified key facilitators and barriers to Conversation Connect. These insights inform future algorithm-based supportive care interventions in oncology. Controlled trial (NCT03984773).
| S-EPMC9836678 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ImportanceDiscussions about goals of care with patients who are seriously ill typically occur infrequently and late in the illness trajectory, are of low quality, and focus narrowly on the patient's resuscitation preferences (ie, code status), risking provision of care that is inconsistent with patients' values. The Serious Illness Care Program (SICP) is a multifaceted communication intervention that builds capacity for clinicians to have earlier, more frequent, and more person-centered conversations.ObjectiveTo explore clinicians' experiences with the SICP 1 year after implementation.Design, setting, and participantsThis qualitative study was conducted at 2 tertiary care hospitals in Canada. The SICP was implemented at Hamilton General Hospital (Hamilton, Ontario) from March 1, 2017, to January 19, 2018, and at Foothills Medical Centre (Calgary, Alberta) from March 1, 2018, to December 31, 2020. A total of 45 clinicians were invited to participate in the study, and 23 clinicians (51.1%) were enrolled and interviewed. Semistructured interviews of clinicians were conducted between August 2018 and May 2019. Content analysis was used to evaluate information obtained from these interviews between May 2019 and May 2020.ExposuresThe SICP includes clinician training, communication tools, and processes for system change.Main outcomes and measuresClinicians' experiences with and perceptions of the SICP.ResultsAmong 23 clinicians interviewed, 15 (65.2%) were women. The mean (SD) number of years in practice was 14.6 (9.1) at the Hamilton site and 12.0 (6.9) at the Calgary site. Participants included 19 general internists, 3 nurse practitioners, and 1 social worker. The 3 main themes were the ways in which the SICP (1) supported changes in clinician behavior, (2) shifted the focus of goals-of-care conversations beyond discussion of code status, and (3) influenced clinicians personally and professionally. Changes in clinician behavior were supported by having a unit champion, interprofessional engagement, access to copies of the Serious Illness Conversation Guide, and documentation in the electronic medical record. Elements of the program, especially the Serious Illness Conversation Guide, shifted the focus of goals-of-care conversations beyond discussion of code status and influenced clinicians on personal and professional levels. Concerns with the program included finding time to have conversations, building transient relationships, and limiting conversation fluidity.Conclusions and relevanceIn this qualitative study, hospital clinicians described components of the SICP as supporting changes in their behavior and facilitating meaningful patient interactions that shifted the focus of goals-of-care conversations beyond discussion of code status. The perceived benefits of SICP implementation stimulated uptake within the medical units. These findings suggest that the SICP may prompt hospital culture changes in goals-of-care dialogue with patients and the care of hospitalized patients with serious illness.
| S-EPMC8374609 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Incentive-based pay-for-performance (P4P) models have been introduced during the last 2 decades as a mechanism to improve the delivery of evidence-based care that ensures clinical quality and improves health outcomes. There is mixed evidence that P4P has a positive effect on health outcomes and researchers cite lack of engagement from health care professionals as a limiting factor. This qualitative metasynthesis of existing qualitative research was conducted to integrate health care professionals' perceptions of P4P in clinical practice. Four themes emerged during the research process: positive perceptions of the value of performance measurement and associated financial incentives; negative perceptions of the performance measurement and associated financial incentives; perceptions of how P4P programs influence the quality/appropriateness of care; and perceptions of the influence of P4P program on professional roles and workplace dynamics. Identifying factors that influence health care professionals' perceptions about this type of value-based payment model will guide future research.
| S-EPMC7249558 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ContextEmergency department (ED) visits provide opportunities to empower patients to discuss advance care planning with their outpatient clinicians, but systematically developed, feasible interventions do not currently exist. Brief negotiated interview (BNI) interventions, which allow ED clinicians to efficiently motivate patients, have potential to meet this need.ObjectivesWe developed a BNI ED intervention to empower older adults with life-limiting illness to formulate and communicate medical care goals to their primary outpatient clinicians. This study assessed the fidelity and feasibility of this intervention in a high-volume ED.MethodsWe enrolled adult patients with serious illnesses (advanced cancer, congestive heart failure, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, chronic kidney disease on dialysis, predicted survival <12 months) in an urban, tertiary care academic medical center ED. All participants received the BNI intervention. We video-recorded the encounters. Two reviewers assessed the recordings for intervention fidelity based on adherence to the BNI steps (Part I) and communication skills (Part II).ResultsWe reviewed 46 video recordings. The mean total adherence score was 21.07/27 (SD 3.68) or 78.04%. The Part I mean adherence score was 12.07/15 (SD 2.07) or 80.47%. The Part II mean adherence score was 9.0/12 (SD 2.51) or 75%. The majority (75.6%) of recordings met the prespecified threshold for high intervention fidelity.ConclusionED clinicians can deliver a BNI intervention to increase advance care planning conversations with high fidelity. Future research is needed to study the intervention's efficacy in a wider patient population.
| S-EPMC6289886 | biostudies-literature
Project description:OBJECTIVE:To gain insight into how communication vulnerable people and health-care professionals experience the communication in dialogue conversations, and how they adjust their conversation using augmentative and alternative communication (AAC) or other communication strategies. METHODS:Communication vulnerable clients and health-care professionals in a long-term care institution were observed during a dialogue conversation (n = 11) and subsequently interviewed (n = 22) about their experiences with the conversation. The clients had various communication difficulties due to different underlying aetiologies, such as acquired brain injury or learning disorder. Results from the observations and interviews were analysed using conventional content analysis. RESULTS:Seven key themes emerged regarding the experiences of clients and professionals: clients blame themselves for miscommunications; the relevance of both parties preparing the conversation; a quiet and familiar environment benefitting communication; giving clients enough time; the importance and complexity of nonverbal communication; the need to tailor communication to the client; prejudices and inexperience regarding AAC. The observations showed that some professionals had difficulties using appropriate communication strategies and all professionals relied mostly on verbal or nonverbal communication strategies. CONCLUSION:Professionals were aware of the importance of preparation, sufficient time, a suitable environment and considering nonverbal communication in dialogue conversations. However, they struggled with adequate use of communication strategies, such as verbal communication and AAC. There is a lack of knowledge about AAC, and professionals and clients need to be informed about the potential of AAC and how this can help them achieve equal participation in dialogue conversations in addition to other communication strategies.
| S-EPMC6186534 | biostudies-other
Project description:ObjectiveTo create and test three prospective, increasingly restrictive definitions of serious illness.Data sourcesHealth and Retirement Study, 2000-2012.Study designWe evaluated subjects' 1-year outcomes from the interview date when they first met each definition: (A) one or more severe medical conditions (Condition) and/or receiving assistance with activities of daily living (Functional Limitation); (B) Condition and/or Functional Limitation and hospital admission in the last 12 months and/or residing in a nursing home (Utilization); and (C) Condition and Functional Limitation and Utilization. Definitions are increasingly restrictive, but not mutually exclusive.Data collectionOf 11,577 eligible subjects, 5,297 met definition A; 3,151 definition B; and 1,447 definition C.Principal findingsOne-year outcomes were as follows: hospitalization 33 percent (A), 44 percent (B), 47 percent (C); total average Medicare costs $20,566 (A), $26,349 (B), and $30,828 (C); and mortality 13 percent (A), 19 percent (B), 28 percent (C). In comparison, among those meeting no definition, 12 percent had hospitalizations, total Medicare costs averaged $7,789, and 2 percent died.ConclusionsProspective identification of older adults with serious illness is feasible using clinically accessible criteria and may be a critical step toward improving health care value. These definitions may aid clinicians and health systems in targeting patients who could benefit from additional services.
| S-EPMC5264106 | biostudies-literature