Jayaji M Moré1, Sean Lang-Brown2,3, Rafael D Romo4, Sei J Lee2,3, Rebecca Sudore2,3, Alexander K Smith2,3. 1. New York Medical College, Valhalla, New York. 2. Division of Geriatrics, Department of Medicine, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, California. 3. San Francisco Veterans Affairs Medical Center, San Francisco, California. 4. School of Nursing, University of Virginia, Charlottesville, Virginia.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To characterize the goals and approaches of clinicians with experience discussing long-term prognostic information with older adults. DESIGN: We used a semistructured interview guide containing 2 domains of perceived benefits and strategies to explore why and how clinicians choose to discuss long-term prognosis, defined as life expectancy on the scale of years, with patients. SETTING: Clinicians from home-based primary care practices, community-based clinics, and academic medical centers across San Francisco. PARTICIPANTS: Fourteen physicians, including 11 geriatricians and 1 geriatric nurse practitioner, with a mean age of 40 and a mean 9 years in practice. MEASUREMENTS: Clinician responses were analyzed qualitatively using the constant comparisons approach. RESULTS: Perceived benefits of discussing long-term prognosis included establishing realistic expectations for patients, encouraging conversations about future planning, and promoting shared decision-making through understanding of patient goals of care. Communication strategies included adapting discussions to individual patient preferences and engaging in multiple conversations over time. Clinicians preferred to communicate prognosis in words and with a visual aid, although most did not know of a suitable visual aid. CONCLUSION: Engaging in customized longitudinal discussions of long-term prognosis aids clinicians in anchoring conversations about future planning and preparing patients for the end of life. J Am Geriatr Soc 66:2367-2371, 2018. Published 2018. This article is a U.S. Government work and is in the public domain in the USA.
OBJECTIVES: To characterize the goals and approaches of clinicians with experience discussing long-term prognostic information with older adults. DESIGN: We used a semistructured interview guide containing 2 domains of perceived benefits and strategies to explore why and how clinicians choose to discuss long-term prognosis, defined as life expectancy on the scale of years, with patients. SETTING: Clinicians from home-based primary care practices, community-based clinics, and academic medical centers across San Francisco. PARTICIPANTS: Fourteen physicians, including 11 geriatricians and 1 geriatric nurse practitioner, with a mean age of 40 and a mean 9 years in practice. MEASUREMENTS: Clinician responses were analyzed qualitatively using the constant comparisons approach. RESULTS: Perceived benefits of discussing long-term prognosis included establishing realistic expectations for patients, encouraging conversations about future planning, and promoting shared decision-making through understanding of patient goals of care. Communication strategies included adapting discussions to individual patient preferences and engaging in multiple conversations over time. Clinicians preferred to communicate prognosis in words and with a visual aid, although most did not know of a suitable visual aid. CONCLUSION: Engaging in customized longitudinal discussions of long-term prognosis aids clinicians in anchoring conversations about future planning and preparing patients for the end of life. J Am Geriatr Soc 66:2367-2371, 2018. Published 2018. This article is a U.S. Government work and is in the public domain in the USA.
Entities:
Keywords:
communication; goals; life expectancy; prognosis; strategies
Authors: Theresa W Wong; Sean Lang-Brown; Rafael D Romo; Alvin Au-Yeung; Sei J Lee; Patricia J Moran; Jason Karlawish; Rebecca Sudore; Josephine Clayton; Alexander K Smith Journal: J Am Geriatr Soc Date: 2017-09-14 Impact factor: 5.562
Authors: Krista L Harrison; Christine S Ritchie; Lauren J Hunt; Kanan Patel; W John Boscardin; Kristine Yaffe; Alexander K Smith Journal: J Am Geriatr Soc Date: 2022-03-31 Impact factor: 7.538
Authors: Shivani K Jindal; Maria Karamourtopoulos; Alicia R Jacobson; Adlin Pinheiro; Alexander K Smith; Mary Beth Hamel; Mara A Schonberg Journal: J Am Geriatr Soc Date: 2022-02-28 Impact factor: 7.538
Authors: Mara A Schonberg; Maria Karamourtopoulos; Alicia R Jacobson; Gianna M Aliberti; Adlin Pinheiro; Alexander K Smith; Roger B Davis; Linnaea C Schuttner; Mary Beth Hamel Journal: Innov Aging Date: 2020-07-07
Authors: Rachel A Freedman; Christina A Minami; Eric P Winer; Monica Morrow; Alexander K Smith; Louise C Walter; Mina S Sedrak; Haley Gagnon; Adriana Perilla-Glen; Hans Wildiers; Tanya M Wildes; Stuart M Lichtman; Kah Poh Loh; Etienne G C Brain; Pamela S Ganschow; Kelly K Hunt; Deborah K Mayer; Kathryn J Ruddy; Reshma Jagsi; Nancy U Lin; Beverly Canin; Barbara K LeStage; Anna C Revette; Mara A Schonberg; Nancy L Keating Journal: JAMA Oncol Date: 2021-04-01 Impact factor: 33.006
Authors: Agnetha D Fruijtier; Leonie N C Visser; Femke H Bouwman; Rogier Lutz; Niki Schoonenboom; Kees Kalisvaart; Liesbeth Hempenius; Gerwin Roks; Leo Boelaarts; Jules J Claus; Mariska Kleijer; Marlijn de Beer; Wiesje M van der Flier; Ellen M A Smets Journal: Alzheimers Dement (N Y) Date: 2020-12-16
Authors: Ebony T Lewis; Kathrine A Hammill; Maree Ticehurst; Robin M Turner; Sally Greenaway; Ken Hillman; Joan Carlini; Magnolia Cardona Journal: Healthcare (Basel) Date: 2021-06-22