General practitioners' perceptions on the feasibility and acceptability of implementing a risk prediction checklist to support their end-of-life discussions in routine care: a qualitative study

How family physicians introduce palliative care to patients with chronic illnesses

OBJECTIVE

Increasing numbers of Canadians living with complex, life-limiting conditions demand high-quality palliative care. Timely access to palliative care can help to reduce stress, improve quality of life, and provide relief for patients and their families. The purpose of this study is to explore the experiences of family physicians (FPs) regarding the decision and process of introducing palliative care to patients with chronic diseases.

METHODS

Interpretive description methodology was used to guide the investigation of the research question. Thirteen Calgary Zone FPs participated in individual interviews. Data was collected iteratively and analyzed using constant comparative analysis.

RESULTS

Analysis of interviews identified the overarching themes of dignity and empowerment, which describe the experience of FPs introducing palliative care to chronically ill patients. Four subthemes were woven throughout, including the art of conversation, therapeutic relationships, timing, and preparation of the patient and family.

DISCUSSION

While the benefits of palliative conversations are widely accepted, a deeper understanding of how FPs can be supported in developing this aspect of their practice is needed. Understanding their experience provides knowledge that can serve as a framework for future education, mentorship, and competency development.

Development and preliminary usability testing of an electronic conversation guide incorporating patient values and prognostic information in preparation for older people's decision-making near the end of life

Initiating end-of-life conversations can be daunting for clinicians and overwhelming for patients and families. This leads to delays in communicating prognosis and preparing for the inevitable in old age, often generating potentially harmful overtreatment and poor-quality deaths. We aimed to develop an electronic resource, called Communicating Health Alternatives Tool (CHAT) that was compatible with hospital medical records software to facilitate preparation for shared decision-making across health settings with older adults deemed to be in the last year of life. The project used mixed methods including: literature review, user-directed specifications, web-based interface development with authentication and authorization; clinician and consumer co-design, iterative consultation for user testing; and ongoing developer integration of user feedback. An internet-based conversation guide to facilitate clinician-led advance care planning was co-developed covering screening for short-term risk of death, patient values and preferences, and treatment choices for chronic kidney disease and dementia. Printed summary of such discussion could be used to begin the process in hospital or community health services. Clinicians, patients, and caregivers agreed with its ease of use and were generally accepting of its contents and format. CHAT is available to health services for implementation in effectiveness trials to determine whether the interaction and documentation leads to formal decision-making, goal-concordant care, and subsequent reduction of unwanted treatments at the end of life.

Triggering palliative care referrals through the identification of poor prognosis in older patients presented to emergency departments in rural Australia

Background: Without objective screening for risk of death, the palliative care needs of older patients near the end of life may be unrecognised and unmet. Aim: This study aimed to estimate the usefulness of the Criteria for Screening and Triaging to Appropriate aLternative care (CriSTAL) tool in determining older patients' risk of death within 3-months after initial hospital admission. Methods: A prospective cohort study of 235 patients aged 70+ years, who presented to two rural emergency departments in two adjacent Australian states, was utilised. The 'risk of death' of each patient was screened with the CriSTAL prognostic tool. Their 3-month follow-up outcomes were assessed through telephone interviews and a clinical record review. Findings: A CriSTAL cut-off score of more than 7 yielded a sensitivity of 80.7% and specificity of 70.81% for a 3-month risk of death. Palliative care services were only used by 31% of the deceased in their last trimester of life. Conclusion: Prognostic tools provide a viable means of identifying individuals with a poor prognosis. Identification can trigger an earlier referral to palliative care, which will benefit the patient's wellbeing and quality of life.

Communicating uncertainty: contrasting the communication experiences of patients with advanced COPD and incurable lung cancer

BACKGROUND

Due to the uncertain disease trajectory and variable rate of progression in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), health care professionals (HCPs) are challenged in explaining what the future may hold for patients compared to those with lung cancer (LC). Support and communication of timely information can significantly improve health outcomes.

OBJECTIVE

This study sought to identify factors that impact communication and support and recommend ways to improve patients' understanding of living with life-threatening illness.

METHODS

Semi-structured interviews with patients with LC (n = 22) and advanced COPD (n = 18), their informal carers (21 LC and 18 COPD) and HCPs (n = 51). Patients were recruited from primary and secondary care in the East of England, UK, during 2010-12.

RESULTS

Directness and clarity characterized communication in LC, whereas uncertainty and limited explanations predominated in COPD. Discussions on how the disease might impact on decisions and preferences to be made in the future were less common in COPD. Information for LC patients was mainly from hospital clinicians and any information for COPD patients mainly from primary care clinicians.

CONCLUSIONS

The experience of COPD patients could be improved by professionals soon after diagnosis explaining to them the typical pattern of decline in COPD, highlighting the inherent uncertainties about when exacerbations and death may occur. This conversation should lead to planning for the different challenges that the patient and informal carer recognize as most important to them. This contrasts with the 'breaking bad news' conversation that oncologists are highly trained to deliver.

Implementation of a calculator to predict cesarean delivery during labor induction: a qualitative evaluation of the clinician perspective

BACKGROUND

We previously conducted a prospective cohort study (n=1610) demonstrating that the implementation of a validated calculator to predict likelihood of cesarean delivery during labor induction was associated with reduced maternal morbidity, reduced cesarean delivery rate, and improved birth satisfaction.

OBJECTIVE

To optimize future implementation, we used qualitative interviews to understand the clinician perspective on: (1) the cesarean delivery risk calculator implementation and (2) the mechanisms by which the use of the calculator resulted in the observed improved outcomes.

STUDY DESIGN

After completion of the prospective study (June 30, 2019), 20 trainees and attending clinicians (including nurse-midwives, obstetrical physicians, and family medicine physicians) at the study site participated in a single, brief semistructured interview from March 1, 2020, to June 30, 2020. Transcriptions were coded using a systematic approach.

RESULTS

Overall, clinicians had favorable perspectives regarding the cesarean delivery risk calculator. Clinicians described the calculator as offering "objective data" and a "standardized snapshot of the labor trajectory." Concerns were raised regarding "overreliance" on calculator output. Barriers to use included time for patient counseling and "awkwardness" around the interactions and perceived patient misunderstanding of the calculator result. Although most senior clinicians (n=8) reported that the calculator did not impact patient management, trainee clinicians (n=12) more often felt that the calculator influenced care at the extremes of cesarean delivery risk. Furthermore, more senior clinicians felt "neutral" regarding any impact of counseling patients on cesarean delivery risk compared with trainee clinicians, who felt that the counseling "built [patient-clinician] trust."

CONCLUSION

This qualitative evaluation characterized the generally positive clinician perspective around the cesarean delivery risk calculator, while identifying specific facilitators and barriers to implementation. In addition, we elucidated potential mechanisms by which the calculator may have been related to clinician decision making and patient-clinician interactions, leading to reduced maternal morbidity and improved patient birth satisfaction. This information is important as widespread implementation of the cesarean delivery risk calculator begins.