Jonathan Bergman1, Eric Ballon-Landa2, Karl A Lorenz3, Josemanuel Saucedo4, Christopher S Saigal5, Carol J Bennett6, Mark S Litwin7. 1. Department of Urology, David Geffen School of Medicine at UCLA, Los Angeles, CA, USA Department of Family Medicine, David Geffen School of Medicine at UCLA, Los Angeles, CA, USA VA Greater Los Angeles Healthcare System, Los Angeles, CA, USA jbergman@mednet.ucla.edu. 2. Department of Community Health Sciences, UCLA Fielding School of Public Health, Los Angeles, CA, USA UC Irvine School of Medicine, Irvine, CA, USA. 3. VA Greater Los Angeles Healthcare System, Los Angeles, CA, USA RAND Corporation, Santa Monica, CA, USA. 4. Department of Urology, David Geffen School of Medicine at UCLA, Los Angeles, CA, USA. 5. Department of Urology, David Geffen School of Medicine at UCLA, Los Angeles, CA, USA VA Greater Los Angeles Healthcare System, Los Angeles, CA, USA RAND Corporation, Santa Monica, CA, USA. 6. Department of Urology, David Geffen School of Medicine at UCLA, Los Angeles, CA, USA VA Greater Los Angeles Healthcare System, Los Angeles, CA, USA. 7. Department of Urology, David Geffen School of Medicine at UCLA, Los Angeles, CA, USA Department of Health Policy and Management, UCLA Fielding School of Public Health, Los Angeles, CA, USA.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: We partnered with patients, families, and palliative care clinicians to develop an integrated urology-palliative care clinic for patients with metastatic cancer. We assessed clinician satisfaction with a multidisciplinary palliative care clinic model. METHODS: We conducted semi-structured interviews with 18 clinicians who practice in our integrated clinic. We analyzed transcripts using a multistage, cutting-and-sorting technique in an inductive approach based on grounded theory analysis. Finally, we administered a validated physician job satisfaction survey. RESULTS: Clinicians found that referring a patient to palliative care in the urology clinic was feasible and appropriate. Patients were receptive to supportive care, and clinicians perceived that quality of care improved following the intervention. CONCLUSION: An integrated, patient-centered model for individuals with advanced urologic malignancies is feasible and well received by practitioners.
BACKGROUND: We partnered with patients, families, and palliative care clinicians to develop an integrated urology-palliative care clinic for patients with metastatic cancer. We assessed clinician satisfaction with a multidisciplinary palliative care clinic model. METHODS: We conducted semi-structured interviews with 18 clinicians who practice in our integrated clinic. We analyzed transcripts using a multistage, cutting-and-sorting technique in an inductive approach based on grounded theory analysis. Finally, we administered a validated physician job satisfaction survey. RESULTS: Clinicians found that referring a patient to palliative care in the urology clinic was feasible and appropriate. Patients were receptive to supportive care, and clinicians perceived that quality of care improved following the intervention. CONCLUSION: An integrated, patient-centered model for individuals with advanced urologic malignancies is feasible and well received by practitioners.
Keywords:
adult; attitude of health personnel; delivery of health care; integrated; interviews as topic; palliative care; patient care team; patient preference; physicians/psychology; physician’s role; quality improvement; quality of health care; terminal care; urology
Authors: Lee A Hugar; Elizabeth M Wulff-Burchfield; Gary S Winzelberg; Bruce L Jacobs; Benjamin J Davies Journal: Nat Rev Urol Date: 2021-07-26 Impact factor: 14.432