Pediatric clinician perspectives on communicating diagnostic uncertainty

Improving communication of diagnostic uncertainty to families of hospitalized children

OBJECTIVES

Diagnostic uncertainty is not reliably communicated to patients and caregivers. This study aims to identify barriers and facilitators to effective communication of diagnostic uncertainty, including development of potential tools and strategies for improvement, as perceived by healthcare professionals and caregivers.

METHODS

We completed structured interviews with providers and caregivers of hospitalized children with uncertain diagnoses (UD). The interview guides addressed barriers to communication, key components for communication of uncertainty, and qualities of effective communication. The interviews concluded with respondents prioritizing potential interventions to improve communication of uncertainty. Interviews were audio recorded, transcribed, and independently analyzed by two team members to identify common themes.

RESULTS

Ten provider and five caregiver interviews were conducted. Common barriers to communication of uncertainty included time constraints, language barriers, and lack of clear definition of UD. Caregiver suggestions for improvement included sharing expectations of the diagnostic process and use of both written and visual communication tools. Interview respondents favored interventions of a sign summarizing the key components of diagnostic uncertainty for display in patient rooms and a structured diagnostic pause during daily rounds.

CONCLUSIONS

We identified several potential interventions that may enhance communication of diagnostic uncertainty and better engage patients and caregivers in the diagnostic process.

Communication of Diagnostic Uncertainty in Primary Care and Its Impact on Patient Experience: an Integrative Systematic Review

BACKGROUND

Diagnostic uncertainty is a pervasive issue in primary care where patients often present with non-specific symptoms early in the disease process. Knowledge about how clinicians communicate diagnostic uncertainty to patients is crucial to prevent associated diagnostic errors. Yet, in-depth research on the interpersonal communication of diagnostic uncertainty has been limited. We conducted an integrative systematic literature review (PROSPERO CRD42020197624, unfunded) to investigate how primary care doctors communicate diagnostic uncertainty in interactions with patients and how patients experience their care in the face of uncertainty.

METHODS

We searched MEDLINE, PsycINFO, and Linguistics and Language Behaviour Abstracts (LLBA) from inception to December 2021 for MeSH and keywords related to 'communication', 'diagnosis', 'uncertainty' and 'primary care' environments and stakeholders (patients and doctors), and conducted additional handsearching. We included empirical primary care studies published in English on spoken communication of diagnostic uncertainty by doctors to patients. We assessed risk of bias with the QATSDD quality assessment tool and conducted thematic and content analysis to synthesise the results.

RESULTS

Inclusion criteria were met for 19 out of 1281 studies. Doctors used two main communication strategies to manage diagnostic uncertainty: (1) patient-centred communication strategies (e.g. use of empathy), and (2) diagnostic reasoning strategies (e.g. excluding serious diagnoses). Linguistically, diagnostic uncertainty was either disclosed explicitly or implicitly through diverse lexical and syntactical constructions, or not communicated (omission). Patients' experiences of care in response to the diverse communicative and linguistic strategies were mixed. Patient-centred approaches were generally regarded positively by patients.

DISCUSSION

Despite a small number of included studies, this is the first review to systematically catalogue the diverse communication and linguistic strategies to express diagnostic uncertainty in primary care. Health professionals should be aware of the diverse strategies used to express diagnostic uncertainty in practice and the value of combining patient-centred approaches with diagnostic reasoning strategies.

"Unfortunately, I don't have an answer for you": How resident physicians communicate diagnostic uncertainty to patients during emergency department discharge

OBJECTIVE

To describe how emergency medicine resident physicians discuss diagnostic uncertainty during a simulated ED discharge discussion.

METHODS

A secondary content analysis of simulated clinical encounter audiotapes completed by emergency medicine residents across two sites.

RESULTS

When discussing lack of diagnosis, residents explained the evaluation revealed no cause for symptoms, noted concerning diagnoses that were excluded, and acknowledged both symptoms and patients' feelings. Residents used explicit and implicit language to discuss diagnostic uncertainty with similar frequency. Almost half of the residents discussed the ED role as focused on emergent illness to give patients context for their uncertain diagnoses. However, 28% of residents in this study did not discuss diagnostic uncertainty in any form. All residents provided reassurance.

CONCLUSION

Residents use a range of approaches to discuss diagnostic uncertainty with patients at the time of a simulated ED discharge, with some residents omitting discussion of uncertainty entirely.

PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS

These findings represent the current state of communication, which needs improvement. These findings do not immediately transfer to clinical practice recommendations, but rather support a need for both further study and development of formal communication training on this topic.

'Diagnostic downshift': clinical and system consequences of extrapolating secondary care testing tactics to primary care

Numerous drivers push specialist diagnostic approaches down to primary care ('diagnostic downshift'), intuitively welcomed by clinicians and patients. However, primary care's different population and processes result in under-recognised, unintended consequences. Testing performs poorer in primary care, with indication creep due to earlier, more undifferentiated presentation and reduced accuracy due to spectrum bias and the 'false-positive paradox'. In low-prevalence settings, tests without near-100% specificity have their useful yield eclipsed by greater incidental or false-positive findings. Ensuing cascades and multiplier effects can generate clinician workload, patient anxiety, further low-value tests, referrals, treatments and a potentially nocebic population 'disease' burden of unclear benefit. Increased diagnostics earlier in pathways can burden patients and stretch general practice (GP) workloads, inducing downstream service utilisation and unintended 'market failure' effects. Evidence is tenuous for reducing secondary care referrals, providing patient reassurance or meaningfully improving clinical outcomes. Subsequently, inflated investment in per capita testing, at a lower level in a healthcare system, may deliver diminishing or even negative economic returns. Test cost poorly represents 'value', neglecting under-recognised downstream consequences, which must be balanced against therapeutic yield. With lower positive predictive values, more tests are required per true diagnosis and cost-effectiveness is rarely robust. With fixed secondary care capacity, novel primary care testing is an added cost pressure, rarely reducing hospital activity. GP testing strategies require real-world evaluation, in primary care populations, of all downstream consequences. Test formularies should be scrutinised in view of the setting of care, with interventions to focus rational testing towards those with higher pretest probabilities, while improving interpretation and communication of results.

Family-Centered Care for Children and Families Impacted by Neonatal Seizures: Advice From Parents

BACKGROUND

Parents of neonates with seizures are at risk of mental health symptoms due to the impact of illness on family life, prognostic uncertainty, and the emotional toll of hospitalization. A family-centered approach is the preferred model to mitigate these challenges. We aimed to identify strategies to promote family-centered care through an analysis of parent-offered advice to clinicians caring for neonates with seizures.

METHODS

This prospective, observational, and multicenter (Neonatal Seizure Registry) study enrolled parents of neonates with acute symptomatic seizures. Parents completed surveys about family well-being at 12, 18, and 24 months corrected gestational age. Parents were asked open-ended questions eliciting their advice to clinicians caring for neonates with seizures. Responses were analyzed using a conventional content analysis approach.

RESULTS

Among the 310 parents who completed surveys, 118 (38%) shared advice for clinicians. These parents were predominantly mothers (n = 103, 87%). Three overarching themes were identified. (1) Communicate information effectively: parents appreciate when clinicians offer transparent and balanced information in an accessible way. (2) Understand and validate parent experience: parents value clinicians who display empathy, compassion, and a commitment to parent-partnered clinical care. (3) Providesupportand resources: parents benefit from emotional support, education, connection with peers, and help navigating the health care system.

CONCLUSIONS

Parents caring for neonates with seizures appreciate a family-centered approach in health care encounters, including skilled communication, understanding and validation of the parent experience, and provision of support and resources. Future interventions should focus on building structures to reinforce these priorities.

Something Else Going On? Diagnostic Uncertainty in Children with Chronic Pain and Their Parents

Diagnostic uncertainty, the perceived lack of an accurate explanation of the patient's health problem, remains relatively unstudied in children. This study examined the prevalence, familial concordance, and correlates of diagnostic uncertainty in children and their parents presenting to a multidisciplinary pain clinic in the United States. One hundred and twenty-six parents and 91 of their children (Mage = 13.93 years, range = 8-18 years) completed a brief three-item measure of diagnostic uncertainty, as well as measures of pain-related distress and functioning. Forty-eight percent of children and 37% of parents believed something else was going on with the child's pain that doctors had not found out about yet. Across the three items, 66%-77% of children and their parents agreed in their endorsement of diagnostic uncertainty. Parents who believed that something else was going on with their child's pain had children with higher avoidance of pain-related activities (F = 5.601, p = 0.020) and lower pain willingness (F = 4.782, p = 0.032). Neither parent nor child diagnostic uncertainty was significantly related to the child's pain-related functioning. Diagnostic uncertainty, particularly in parents, is relevant in the experience of pediatric chronic pain and warrants further investigation as both a risk factor and therapeutic target.