BACKGROUND: Early provider-patient communication about future care is critical for patients with heart failure (HF); however, advance care planning (ACP) discussions are often avoided or occur too late to usefully inform care over the course of the disease. OBJECTIVE: To identify opportunities for physicians to engage in ACP discussions and to characterize physicians' responses to these opportunities. DESIGN: Qualitative study of audio-recorded outpatient clinic visits. PARTICIPANTS: Fifty-two patients ≥ 65 years recently hospitalized for HF with one or more post-discharge follow-up outpatient visits, and their physicians (n = 44), at two Veterans Affairs Medical Centers. APPROACH: Using content analysis methods, we analyzed and coded transcripts of outpatient follow-up visits for 1) patient statements pertaining to their future health or their future physical, psychosocial and spiritual/existential care needs, and 2) subsequent physician responses to patient statements, using an iterative consensus-based coding process. RESULTS: In 13 of 71 consultations, patients expressed concerns, questions, and thoughts regarding their future care that gave providers opportunities to engage in an ACP discussion. The majority of these opportunities (84%) were missed by physicians. Instead, physicians responded by terminating the conversation, hedging their responses, denying the patient's expressed emotion, or inadequately acknowledging the sentiment underlying the patient's statement. CONCLUSIONS: Physicians often missed the opportunity to engage in ACP despite openers patients provided that could have prompted such discussions. Communication training efforts should focus on helping physicians identify patient openers and providing a toolbox to encourage appropriate physician responses; in order to successfully leverage opportunities to engage in ACP discussions.
BACKGROUND: Early provider-patient communication about future care is critical for patients with heart failure (HF); however, advance care planning (ACP) discussions are often avoided or occur too late to usefully inform care over the course of the disease. OBJECTIVE: To identify opportunities for physicians to engage in ACP discussions and to characterize physicians' responses to these opportunities. DESIGN: Qualitative study of audio-recorded outpatient clinic visits. PARTICIPANTS: Fifty-two patients ≥ 65 years recently hospitalized for HF with one or more post-discharge follow-up outpatient visits, and their physicians (n = 44), at two Veterans Affairs Medical Centers. APPROACH: Using content analysis methods, we analyzed and coded transcripts of outpatient follow-up visits for 1) patient statements pertaining to their future health or their future physical, psychosocial and spiritual/existential care needs, and 2) subsequent physician responses to patient statements, using an iterative consensus-based coding process. RESULTS: In 13 of 71 consultations, patients expressed concerns, questions, and thoughts regarding their future care that gave providers opportunities to engage in an ACP discussion. The majority of these opportunities (84%) were missed by physicians. Instead, physicians responded by terminating the conversation, hedging their responses, denying the patient's expressed emotion, or inadequately acknowledging the sentiment underlying the patient's statement. CONCLUSIONS: Physicians often missed the opportunity to engage in ACP despite openers patients provided that could have prompted such discussions. Communication training efforts should focus on helping physicians identify patient openers and providing a toolbox to encourage appropriate physician responses; in order to successfully leverage opportunities to engage in ACP discussions.
Authors: Mariell Jessup; William T Abraham; Donald E Casey; Arthur M Feldman; Gary S Francis; Theodore G Ganiats; Marvin A Konstam; Donna M Mancini; Peter S Rahko; Marc A Silver; Lynne Warner Stevenson; Clyde W Yancy Journal: Circulation Date: 2009-03-26 Impact factor: 29.690
Authors: Keri L Rodriguez; Cathleen J Appelt; Galen E Switzer; Ali F Sonel; Robert M Arnold Journal: Heart Lung Date: 2008 Jul-Aug Impact factor: 2.210
Authors: Karen Hancock; Josephine M Clayton; Sharon M Parker; Sharon Wal der; Phyllis N Butow; Sue Carrick; David Currow; Davina Ghersi; Paul Glare; Rebecca Hagerty; Martin H N Tattersall Journal: Palliat Med Date: 2007-09 Impact factor: 4.762
Authors: Merryn Gott; Sarah Barnes; Chris Parker; Sheila Payne; David Seamark; Salah Gariballa; Neil Small Journal: Palliat Med Date: 2007-03 Impact factor: 4.762
Authors: Hillary D Lum; Sarah R Jordan; Adreanne Brungardt; Roman Ayele; Maya Katz; Janis M Miyasaki; Anne Hall; Jacqueline Jones; Benzi Kluger Journal: Neurology Date: 2019-04-26 Impact factor: 9.910
Authors: Kei Ouchi; Naomi George; Jeremiah D Schuur; Emily L Aaronson; Charlotta Lindvall; Edward Bernstein; Rebecca L Sudore; Mara A Schonberg; Susan D Block; James A Tulsky Journal: Ann Emerg Med Date: 2019-02-13 Impact factor: 5.721
Authors: Ann M O'Hare; Jackie Szarka; Lynne V McFarland; Janelle S Taylor; Rebecca L Sudore; Ranak Trivedi; Lynn F Reinke; Elizabeth K Vig Journal: Clin J Am Soc Nephrol Date: 2016-04-15 Impact factor: 8.237
Authors: Frances R Nedjat-Haiem; Iraida V Carrion; Krystyna Gonzalez; Alejandra Quintana; Kathleen Ell; Mary O'Connell; Beti Thompson; Shiraz I Mishra Journal: J Palliat Med Date: 2017-05-03 Impact factor: 2.947
Authors: Kristin E Knutzen; Olivia A Sacks; Olivia C Brody-Bizar; Genevra F Murray; Raina H Jain; Lindsay A Holdcroft; Shama S Alam; Matthew A Liu; Kathryn I Pollak; James A Tulsky; Amber E Barnato Journal: JAMA Netw Open Date: 2021-06-01