Tyler Chesney1, Karen Devon1. 1. From the Division of General Surgery, Department of Surgery, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ont. (Chesney, Devon); Women's College Hospital, Toronto, Ont. (Devon); and the Joint Centre for Bioethics, Dalla Lana School of Public Health, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ont. (Devon).
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Patients with poor underlying prognosis experiencing surgical emergencies face challenging treatment decisions. The Best Case/Worst Case (BC/WC) framework has improved shared decision-making by surgeons, but it is unclear whether residents can be similarly trained. We evaluated senior general surgical residents' acceptance of the BC/WC tool and their attitudes, confidence and actions before and after training. METHODS: Two-hour training included a didactic session, live demonstration, small-group practice and debriefing. We developed questionnaires to evaluate residents' attitudes, confidence and actions at 3 time points: before the intervention, after the intervention and 6 months after the intervention. We used the Ottawa Decision Support Framework Acceptability questionnaire to evaluate acceptability and a structured observation form to evaluate performance. RESULTS: Eighteen (50%) of 36 invited residents participated. Most residents (83%) felt that a new communication tool would be useful. Almost all (94%) used BC/WC in practice. Residents found the tool acceptable and useful to enhance preference-sensitive communications. They felt that the training was valuable and that role play was its greatest strength but that these situations were challenging to simulate. Barriers to BC/WC use included time constraints and difficulty defining the best and worst cases precisely. Summative attitudes and confidence scores were not different before and after the intervention; however, actions scores were higher after the intervention (p = 0.04). Residents performed a median of 15 (interquartile range 13-17) of the 19 elements on the formative performance evaluation. Commonly missed items were narrating outcomes of palliative approaches, prompting deliberation and providing treatment recommendations. CONCLUSION: Senior residents found the BC/WC tool to be acceptable and useful, and are amenable to training in this type of communication. After training, self-reported actions scores increased, and observed performance was accurate.
BACKGROUND:Patients with poor underlying prognosis experiencing surgical emergencies face challenging treatment decisions. The Best Case/Worst Case (BC/WC) framework has improved shared decision-making by surgeons, but it is unclear whether residents can be similarly trained. We evaluated senior general surgical residents' acceptance of the BC/WC tool and their attitudes, confidence and actions before and after training. METHODS: Two-hour training included a didactic session, live demonstration, small-group practice and debriefing. We developed questionnaires to evaluate residents' attitudes, confidence and actions at 3 time points: before the intervention, after the intervention and 6 months after the intervention. We used the Ottawa Decision Support Framework Acceptability questionnaire to evaluate acceptability and a structured observation form to evaluate performance. RESULTS: Eighteen (50%) of 36 invited residents participated. Most residents (83%) felt that a new communication tool would be useful. Almost all (94%) used BC/WC in practice. Residents found the tool acceptable and useful to enhance preference-sensitive communications. They felt that the training was valuable and that role play was its greatest strength but that these situations were challenging to simulate. Barriers to BC/WC use included time constraints and difficulty defining the best and worst cases precisely. Summative attitudes and confidence scores were not different before and after the intervention; however, actions scores were higher after the intervention (p = 0.04). Residents performed a median of 15 (interquartile range 13-17) of the 19 elements on the formative performance evaluation. Commonly missed items were narrating outcomes of palliative approaches, prompting deliberation and providing treatment recommendations. CONCLUSION: Senior residents found the BC/WC tool to be acceptable and useful, and are amenable to training in this type of communication. After training, self-reported actions scores increased, and observed performance was accurate.
Authors: Lauren J Taylor; Michael J Nabozny; Nicole M Steffens; Jennifer L Tucholka; Karen J Brasel; Sara K Johnson; Amy Zelenski; Paul J Rathouz; Qianqian Zhao; Kristine L Kwekkeboom; Toby C Campbell; Margaret L Schwarze Journal: JAMA Surg Date: 2017-06-01 Impact factor: 14.766
Authors: Karen E A Burns; Mark Duffett; Michelle E Kho; Maureen O Meade; Neill K J Adhikari; Tasnim Sinuff; Deborah J Cook Journal: CMAJ Date: 2008-07-29 Impact factor: 8.262
Authors: Michael J Nabozny; Jacqueline M Kruser; Nicole M Steffens; Karen J Brasel; Toby C Campbell; Martha E Gaines; Margaret L Schwarze Journal: Ann Surg Date: 2016-01 Impact factor: 12.969
Authors: Kuldeep N Yadav; Nicole B Gabler; Elizabeth Cooney; Saida Kent; Jennifer Kim; Nicole Herbst; Adjoa Mante; Scott D Halpern; Katherine R Courtright Journal: Health Aff (Millwood) Date: 2017-07-01 Impact factor: 6.301
Authors: Terri R Fried; Peter H Van Ness; Amy L Byers; Virginia R Towle; John R O'Leary; Joel A Dubin Journal: J Gen Intern Med Date: 2007-04 Impact factor: 5.128
Authors: Mary Simons; Frances Rapport; Yvonne Zurynski; Marcus Stoodley; Jeremy Cullis; Andrew S Davidson Journal: BMJ Open Date: 2022-04-25 Impact factor: 3.006
Authors: Maria Helene Jacobsen; Cecilie Sommer; Siw Anna Wernberg; Helga Schultz; Sofie Charlotte Fage Hjortø; Maria Kristiansen Journal: BMC Health Serv Res Date: 2022-02-23 Impact factor: 2.655