Health care professionals' perceptions of factors influencing the process of identifying patients for serious illness conversations: A qualitative study.
Communication
healthcare professionals
palliative care
qualitative research
serious illness conversations
Journal
Palliative medicine
ISSN: 1477-030X
Titre abrégé: Palliat Med
Pays: England
ID NLM: 8704926
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
07 2022
07 2022
Historique:
pubmed:
23
6
2022
medline:
2
7
2022
entrez:
22
6
2022
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
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. To explore healthcare professionals' perceptions about factors influencing the process of identifying patients for serious illness conversations. Qualitative design. A thematic analysis of observations and semi-structured interviews was used. 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. 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. 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.
Sections du résumé
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.
Identifiants
pubmed: 35729752
doi: 10.1177/02692163221102266
pmc: PMC9247430
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
1072-1079Références
JAMA Oncol. 2015 Aug;1(5):601-8
pubmed: 26181909
Am J Hosp Palliat Care. 2021 May;38(5):459-466
pubmed: 32794412
BMJ Support Palliat Care. 2021 Mar 17;:
pubmed: 33731464
Patient Educ Couns. 2013 Mar;90(3):315-22
pubmed: 21555199
BMC Palliat Care. 2020 Jan 15;19(1):9
pubmed: 31941486
JAMA Oncol. 2019 Jun 01;5(6):801-809
pubmed: 30870556
Palliat Med. 2007 Sep;21(6):507-17
pubmed: 17846091
J Palliat Med. 2020 Mar;23(3):337-345
pubmed: 31503520
J Palliat Med. 2018 Mar;21(S2):S17-S27
pubmed: 29091522
Palliat Med. 2012 Dec;26(8):1048-54
pubmed: 22179595
Qual Saf Health Care. 2003 Dec;12 Suppl 2:ii13-6
pubmed: 14645890
J Palliat Med. 2020 Nov;23(11):1500-1506
pubmed: 32589501
BMJ Open. 2015 Oct 06;5(10):e009032
pubmed: 26443662
J Clin Oncol. 2010 Mar 1;28(7):1203-8
pubmed: 20124172
BMJ Support Palliat Care. 2020 Dec;10(4):e31
pubmed: 31253734
J Palliat Med. 2021 Jan;24(1):53-62
pubmed: 32580676
JAMA Intern Med. 2016 Dec 1;176(12):1863-1865
pubmed: 27695853
Lancet Oncol. 2018 Nov;19(11):e588-e653
pubmed: 30344075
Am J Hosp Palliat Care. 2018 Jan;35(1):132-137
pubmed: 28387129
BMC Health Serv Res. 2019 Jun 13;19(1):384
pubmed: 31196072
J Palliat Med. 2019 Jul;22(7):773-781
pubmed: 30724693
JCO Oncol Pract. 2020 Dec;16(12):e1507-e1515
pubmed: 32749931
JAMA Intern Med. 2019 Jun 1;179(6):751-759
pubmed: 30870563
JAMA Intern Med. 2018 Jul 1;178(7):930-940
pubmed: 29802770
Psychooncology. 2013 Oct;22(10):2298-305
pubmed: 23508972
Health Serv Res. 2017 Feb;52(1):113-131
pubmed: 26990009
Ann Intern Med. 2012 Feb 7;156(3):204-10
pubmed: 22312140
J Cancer Educ. 2021 Dec;36(6):1325-1332
pubmed: 32504362
Health Aff (Millwood). 2017 Jul 1;36(7):1258-1264
pubmed: 28679813
J Pain Symptom Manage. 2020 Jul;60(1):101-105
pubmed: 32201309
Acad Med. 2014 Sep;89(9):1245-51
pubmed: 24979285
JAMA Intern Med. 2014 Dec;174(12):1994-2003
pubmed: 25330167
J Palliat Med. 2019 Jul;22(7):751-763
pubmed: 30688549