Expressions of conflict following postoperative complications in older adults having major surgery

Views of health care professionals on the implementation of preoperative advance care planning in older patients with head and neck cancer: Q methodology

Objective

To investigate the views of health care professionals in a head and neck surgical department toward the implementation of advance care planning prior to surgery for older patients with head and neck cancer.

Method

Q methodology was used to explore and analyze participants' views by combining quantitative and qualitative methods. Participants were asked to rank 35 Q statements generated via semi-structured interviews and a literature review and to explain the reasons for their ranking in subsequent interviews. The data was then analyzed and used to develop a factor series to illustrate participants' views.

Results

This study surveyed 15 health care professionals, including eight doctors and seven nurses. The views of health care professionals toward preoperative implementation of advance care planning discussions were varied and could be categorized into three types: defending the autonomy of patients, patients' knowledge and the Chinese traditional cultural context hinder the implementation of preoperative advance care planning, and lack of confidence in performing preoperative advance care planning.

Conclusions

Although the health care professionals in the head and neck surgical department in this study recognized the benefits of preoperative discussions regarding advance care planning, patients' knowledge level, traditional Chinese values, inadequate capacity among health care professionals, and unsound legal policies have caused these professionals to have misgivings about preoperative counseling and discussing advance care planning with patients. Further studies should be conducted, and strategies to overcome barriers to discussions of preoperative advance care planning should be developed.

Optimizing the design and implementation of question prompt lists to support person-centred care: A scoping review

INTRODUCTION

Question prompt lists (QPLs) are lists of questions that patients may want to discuss with clinicians. QPLs support person-centred care and have been associated with many beneficial outcomes including improved patient question-asking, and the amount and quality of the information provided by clinicians. The purpose of this study was to review published research on QPLs to explore how QPL design and implementation can be optimized.

METHODS

We performed a scoping review by searching MEDLINE, EMBASE, Scopus, CINAHL, Cochrane Library and Joanna Briggs Database from inception to 8 May 2022, for English language studies of any design that evaluated QPLs. We used summary statistics and text to report study characteristics, and QPL design and implementation.

RESULTS

We included 57 studies published from 1988 to 2022 by authors in 12 countries on a range of clinical topics. Of those, 56% provided the QPL, but few described how QPLs were developed. The number of questions varied widely (range 9-191). Most QPLs were single-page handouts (44%) but others ranged from 2 to 33 pages. Most studies implemented a QPL alone with no other accompanying strategy; most often in a print format before consultations by mail (18%) or in the waiting room (66%). Both patients and clinicians identified numerous benefits to patients of QPLs (e.g., increased patient confidence to ask questions, and patient satisfaction with communication or care received; and reduced anxiety about health status or treatment). To support use, patients desired access to QPLs in advance of clinician visits, and clinicians desired information/training on how to use the QPL and answer questions. Most (88%) studies reported at least one beneficial impact of QPLs. This was true even for single-page QPLs with few questions unaccompanied by other implementation strategies. Despite favourable views of QPLs, few studies assessed outcomes amongst clinicians.

CONCLUSION

This review identified QPL characteristics and implementation strategies that may be associated with beneficial outcomes. Future research should confirm these findings via systematic review and explore the benefits of QPLs from the clinician's perspective.

PATIENT/PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION

Following this review, we used the findings to develop a QPL on hypertensive disorders of pregnancy and interviewed women and clinicians about QPL design including content, format, enablers and barriers of use, and potential outcomes including beneficial impacts and possible harms (will be published elsewhere).

Patient Perspectives on Perioperative Supportive Care Needs Surrounding Major Abdominal Operations for Cancer

PURPOSE

The development of supportive care interventions delivered by surgeons for their patients is a major research priority. Designing such interventions requires understanding patients' supportive care needs for major operations. This qualitative analysis aimed to determine the supportive care needs of patients undergoing major abdominal operations for cancer.

METHODS

We conducted semi-structured interviews with a subset of participants in a randomized, controlled trial of a specialist palliative care intervention for patients undergoing abdominal resections for cancer (NCT03436290). Sampling was designed to balance the population by sex, age (older vs. younger than 65 years), and treatment group assignment (intervention vs. control). The interview guide was developed to elicit patient perceptions of their supportive care needs from diagnosis to the time of interview, about 1 month after their operation. Two coders used an iterative, inductive method to identify recurring themes in the interviews.

RESULTS

Analysis of interview transcripts revealed five primary themes: preoperative preparation, postoperative recovery, expectation setting, coordination of care, and provider characteristics. Cutting across these themes were patients' focus on time, timeliness, and timelines, as well as their desires for information both from their surgeons and other sources. Surgeons inspired trust through the quality of their communication and their responsiveness to questions. Patients were sensitive to perceived deviations from their expectations and spoke of the need to develop patience and to expect the unexpected.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients expressed several needs for supportive care that surgical teams can potentially address to improve the experience of major cancer surgery.

Patient prompts in surgical consultations: A systematic review

BACKGROUND

Quality communication has been found to improve patient outcomes. Despite good communication, information may still be forgotten or misunderstood by patients. A question prompt list is a document to help patients ask questions. Question prompt lists are well perceived by various stakeholders and have been found of benefit to patients. This systematic review evaluated the effectiveness of patient question prompting documents in surgical outpatient consultations.

METHODS

MEDLINE, EMBASE, and PsychINFO were searched on September 13, 2021. Study selection, data extraction, and risk of bias assessment were performed in duplicate. We included English studies that investigated the use of question prompt lists and their influence on patient outcomes. We excluded studies that did not have a comparator group. Because of heterogeneity of outcome measures, meta-analysis was precluded. This study was registered with PROSPERO (identification number: CRD42021279058).

RESULTS

Searches identified 107 suitable studies; however, only 7 studies met eligibility criteria. All included studies were randomized controlled trials, but the designs of studies were heterogenous. Three out of 7 included studies were at a high risk of bias. The included studies investigated different outcomes that could be broadly categorized into 5 themes: consultation characteristics, patient engagement, patient well-being, information exchange, and patient satisfaction. None of the studies looked at patient recall of information. Aside from length of consultation, the overall results for each category were mixed.

CONCLUSION

Current literature has suggested that question prompt lists are a low-risk intervention that could improve patient engagement and patient-doctor communication; however, there is limited evidence at present to conclusively promote their usage in perioperative surgical consultations.

Interpersonal Conflict between Clinicians in the Delivery of Palliative and End-of-Life Care for Critically Ill Patients: A Secondary Qualitative Analysis

Background: Conflict between clinicians is prevalent within intensive care units (ICUs) and may hinder optimal delivery of care. However, little is known about the sources of interpersonal conflict and how it manifests within the context of palliative and end-of-life care delivery in ICUs. Objective: To characterize interpersonal conflict in the delivery of palliative care within ICUs. Design: Secondary thematic analysis using a deductive-inductive approach. We analyzed existing qualitative data that conducted semistructured interviews to examine factors associated with variable adoption of specialty palliative care in ICUs. Settings/Subjects: In the parent study, 36 participants were recruited from two urban academic medical centers in the United States, including ICU attendings (n = 17), ICU nurses (n = 11), ICU social workers (n = 1), and palliative care providers (n = 7). Measurements: Coders applied an existing framework of interpersonal conflict to guide initial coding and analysis, combined with a flexible inductive approach allowing new codes to emerge. Results: We characterized three properties of interpersonal conflict: disagreement, interference, and negative emotion. In the context of delivering palliative and end-of-life care for critically ill patients, "disagreement" centered around whether patients were appropriate for palliative care, which care plans should be prioritized, and how care should be delivered. "Interference" involved preventing palliative care consultation or goals-of-care discussions and hindering patient care. "Negative emotion" included occurrences of silencing or scolding, rudeness, anger, regret, ethical conflict, and grief. Conclusions: Our findings provide an in-depth understanding of interpersonal conflict within palliative and end-of-life care for critically ill patients. Further study is needed to understand how to prevent and resolve such conflicts.