How to break the news in amyotrophic lateral sclerosis/motor neuron disease: practical guidelines from experts.

In amyotrophic lateral sclerosis/motor neuron disease (ALS/MND), it is necessary to communicate difficult news during the initial diagnosis and throughout the disease trajectory as the condition progresses. However, delivering difficult news to people with ALS/MND is an emotionally demanding task for healthcare and allied health professionals-one for which many feel ill-prepared because of limited training in this area. Ineffective communication of difficult news damages the patient-provider relationship and negatively impacts patient quality of life (QoL). To address this issue, we developed the A-L S-PIKES protocol based on available literature and our extensive clinical experience. It provides easy-to-follow, stepwise guidelines to effectively deliver difficult news to people with ALS/MND (PALS) that includes: Advance Preparation (preparing for the discussion logistically and emotionally); Location & Setting (creating a comfortable setting that fosters rapport); Patient's Perceptions (assessing PALS' understanding and perception of their condition); Invitation (seeking PALS' permission to share information); Knowledge (sharing information in a clear, understandable manner); Emotion/Empathy (addressing emotions with empathy and providing emotional support); and Strategy & Summary (summarizing the discussion and collaboratively developing a plan of action). A-L S-PIKES provides practical guidelines on how to prepare for and conduct these challenging conversations. It emphasizes effective communication tailored to the individual needs of PALS and their families, empathy, sensitivity, and support for PALS' emotional well-being and autonomy. The aim of A-L S-PIKES is to both enhance skills and confidence in delivering difficult news and to improve the QoL of PALS and their families. Future studies should systematically evaluate the feasibility and effectiveness of A-L S-PIKES to establish its utility in clinical practice.

Transforming Communication on Serious Illness and Frailty: A Comprehensive Approach to Empowering Informed Decision-Making.

Health care professionals can enhance conversations about serious illness and medical decision-making by adopting a transparent, standardized approach. This article critiques established communication strategies, which often emphasize patient values and goals without providing the necessary medical information to align these goals with a shared understanding of prognosis. We propose an alternate strategy that (1) provides detailed explanations of medical conditions at the beginning of the conversation, (2) includes support persons in discussions, (3) considers capacity, and (4) offers tailored advice by clinicians. The proposed framework aims to provide patients (or their delegates) with the information they need to integrate their values in pursuit of well-informed medical decisions. This strategy builds trust by providing honest information about medical conditions and their trajectories. It empowers decision makers to consider realistic outcomes, allowing them to accept or reject treatments in accordance with their preferences. This article presents a thorough step-by-step guide on how to conduct a serious illness conversation and facilitate medical decision-making, including a supplement that provides example phrases for use in clinical practice.

Navigating obstetric bad news: Insights from tertiary care medical teams.

OBJECTIVES: To analyze the self-reported perception of obstetric medical teams regarding the practice of delivering bad news in public and private hospitals. METHODS: Cross-sectional study considering physicians delivering obstetric care at the Municipal Hospital Vila Santa Catarina, Municipal Hospital Dr. Moysés Deutsch, and Albert Einstein Israelite Hospital, in São Paulo, Brazil. The applied questionnaire reflected the steps of the SPIKES protocol for delivering difficult news, with the questions adapted to obstetric and fetal medicine practice context. RESULTS: Specialists self-reported higher levels of knowledge, better emotional management, and superior strategy planning and summarization skills than residents. Participants with more than five years of experience reported higher knowledge levels, better emotional management, and superior strategy development skills. When comparing professionals from private and public hospitals, no significant differences emerged in self-reported communication aspects. CONCLUSIONS: Experience duration significantly influences professionals' impressions in their ability to provide information, manage emotions, and plan post-diagnosis. Specialists and those with more years of experience self-report enhanced readiness in executing communication steps effectively. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: Our findings underscore the importance of tailored training and experience in navigating sensitive medical conversations in the field of Obstetrics.

Breaking bad news: Comparing the perception of the role, barriers and experiences of neonatal intensive care and well-baby nursery nurses.

BACKGROUND: Nurses accompany patients throughout the breaking bad news process. AIM: The aim of the research was to compare neonatal intensive care unit (NICU) nurses and well-baby nursery (WBN) nurses on their role, barriers and experiences in breaking bad news to parents/relatives during hospitalization. STUDY DESIGN: A cross-sectional comparative study. RESULTS: Two medical centres in Israel were employed. A 39-item questionnaire was distributed with 140 nurses participating in the study. STROBE Checklist was used. A total of 140 nurses participated in this study. There was no significant overall difference (p ≤ .45) between NICU and WBN nurses in their perception of their role in breaking bad news. Differences were found in barriers to the role which included a lack of information, lack of time and communication issues. No differences were found in the nurses' experiences in breaking bad news. NICU and WBN nurses reported that they received no support (n = 40, 58.8%; n = 45, 64.3%, respectively). No breaking bad news specialty team existed in either unit (NICU: n = 64, 91.4%; n = 60, 87.0%). CONCLUSIONS: Nurses in the WBN and NICU are involved in breaking bad news. The role of the nurse has not been fully acknowledged making it difficult to perform. Nurses' experiences in breaking bad news were varied. Nurses facing challenges should be provided guidance and support. This needs to be implemented. RELEVANCE TO CLINICAL PRACTICE: The role played by nurses in breaking bad news has not been fully acknowledged making it difficult to perform. Nurses need to receive formal training and support in order to improve this practice.

Stop Asking How Much Information Your Patient Wants Before Discussing Serious News.

Discussing serious news is a fundamental communication skill, and many clinicians have been taught to ask their patients how much detail they want to hear before sharing difficult information. Over the past decade, we have taught hundreds of medical students how to discuss serious news and reviewed hundreds of their recorded conversations. We've found that asking how much detail a patient wants to hear often results in confusion and is not an effective way to understand their communication preferences. Instead of asking how much detail your patient wants to hear, we propose an alternative way to tailor information to their needs when discussing serious news. By asking permission to share, presenting the news in a succinct, jargon-free headline, and providing emotional support and expert guidance at the right times, you can give the correct amount of detail while avoiding unnecessary confusion resulting in high-quality, patient centered communication every time you discuss serious news.

The impact of an adapted SPIKES protocol vs routine care in the delivery of bad news to IVF patients: an exploratory pilot multicenter randomized controlled trial.

PURPOSE: Determine if the SPIKES method was associated with less distress and more compassion than current modes of delivering negative pregnancy test results to patients undergoing in vitro fertilization. METHODS: Twenty-seven nurses from two centers were randomized to use the modified SPIKES script or continue their standard of care; 136 patients with a negative hCG following embryo transfer were included. SPIKES nurses received 1 h of training by a study psychologist; nurses in the control group were instructed to deliver the news as done previously. Patients who underwent embryo transfer and received a call by a participating nurse with a negative test result received an email invitation on the following day. RESULTS: Control patients reported significantly less distress than SPIKES patients; 33% of SPIKES patients reported that they had felt "extremely sad," compared to 15.2% of the control patients (p = 0.01). Perceived compassion did not differ between the groups (all p ≥ 0.22). CONCLUSION: Patients who received a negative pregnancy test result from the nurses who received a brief training and a script on how to deliver bad news via the modified SPIKES protocol reported significantly more distress than patients receiving negative results from nurses utilizing their standard of care. It is unclear whether a modified SPIKES method to deliver negative pregnancy test results will benefit patients undergoing in vitro fertilization. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinical trials.gov NCT04917445.

Oral cancer diagnosis communication: Impact of an educational intervention using the SPIKES protocol.

OBJECTIVE: This study evaluated the influence of a single educational intervention on the perception and knowledge of strategies for communicating oral cancer diagnoses. METHODS: A educational intervention, 72 dentists and 41 dental undergraduates participated in the 'Maio Vermelho Project', a continuing education activity. Participants completed a 14-question online questionnaire concerning their experiences and perceptions of delivering difficult news. The educational intervention featured an interview illustrating the SPIKES protocol, broadcast on YouTube. RESULTS: Participants had a mean age of 40 years. A minority (21.2%) had encountered or experienced communicating an oral cancer diagnosis. Exposure to lectures on this topic during their education was uncommon (22.1%) but more prevalent among students. After the intervention, confidence in communicating a cancer diagnosis (29.2%) and addressing the patient's family (30.1%) in line with the SPIKES protocol increased. CONCLUSION: A training deficit persists in delivering cancer diagnoses, highlighting the need for educational interventions to empower students and professionals in this critical procedure. Integration of this topic into the dental undergraduate curriculum is imperative. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Effectively communicating a cancer diagnosis poses challenges to healthcare professionals, impacting treatment outcomes. Implementing educational interventions ensures that professionals are well prepared to navigate this complex task, ultimately improving patient care.

The kitchen assessment: an interactional analysis of assessment and feedback between an occupational therapist and a patient with aphasia post stroke.

PURPOSE: After stroke, patients undergo frequent multidisciplinary assessments. Little is known about patients' experiences of being assessed and the impact of assessment interactions and feedback for ongoing engagement in rehabilitation. This research aims to stimulate reflection on clinical interactions, even during routine clinical assessments, and the provision of assessment feedback. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This study involved a detailed analysis of an authentic kitchen assessment interaction between an occupational therapist and a patient with aphasia following stroke. It used a speech function analysis based on systemic functional linguistics resulting in both dynamic and synoptic data, and a consideration of interactive framing, to explore assessment explanation and feedback. RESULTS: The analysis revealed the clinician's interactive dominance in terms of number and type of moves, and misalignment of interactional framing at different points in the exchange. The session appeared to result in patient disengagement related both to the clinician's misjudged response to the patient's aphasia, and the context of assessment itself, characterised by reliance on question-and-answer exchanges, and a tendency to highlight deficit. CONCLUSIONS: Assessment sessions may be emotionally challenging for patients after stroke and feedback may be interpreted as bad news. Sensitive communication is required to support psychological wellbeing and engagement in rehabilitation.IMPLICATIONS FOR REHABILITATIONAfter stroke, patients are assessed by the multidisciplinary team to inform intervention and discharge planning.Little is known about the feedback patients receive or their views of this feedback, including when it is perceived as bad news.The presence of aphasia can complicate how assessments are conducted and how feedback is delivered and received.Greater awareness is needed of how feedback following assessment might impact patients' psychological wellbeing and engagement in rehabilitation.

Breaking bad news: A mix methods study reporting the need for improving communication skills among doctors in Pakistan.

BACKGROUND: Effective skills and training for physicians are essential for communicating difficult or distressing information, also known as breaking bad news (BBN). This study aimed to assess both the capacity and the practices of clinicians in Pakistan regarding BBN. METHODS: A cross-sectional study was conducted involving 151 clinicians. Quantitative component used a structured questionnaire, while qualitative data were obtained through in-depth interviews with 13 medical educationists. The responses were analyzed using descriptive statistics and thematic analysis. RESULTS: While most clinicians acknowledged their responsibility of delivering difficult news, only a small percentage had received formal training in BBN. Areas for improvement include time and interruption management, rapport building, and understanding the patients' point of view. Prognosis and treatment options were not consistently discussed. Limited importance is given to BBN in medical education. DISCUSSION: Training in BBN will lead to improved patient and attendants' satisfaction, and empathetic support during difficult times.

The experiences of Indonesian parents receiving bad news about their children's diseases: A qualitative descriptive study.

PURPOSE: Breaking bad news about children's chronic diseases is challenging and is often not performed according to the needs of parents. The aim of the study was to explore the experiences of Indonesian parents receiving bad news about their chronically ill child. DESIGN AND METHOD: This is a qualitative descriptive study that used semi-structured interviews. Twenty one parents who met the inclusion criteria were face-to-face interviewed between August 2021 and September 2022. Interviews were audio-recorded and transcribed. The data were analyzed using content analysis. The trustworthiness of the study was established through member checking, triangulation, and detailed transcriptions. The COREQ checklist was followed in this study. FINDINGS: Findings revealed four categories: 1) reactions when receiving bad news; 2) expectations while receiving bad news; 3) conflicting feelings and situations; and 4) perceived roles of nurses in delivering the news. CONCLUSION: Parents reacted in different ways when receiving bad news about their children's disease, mostly experiencing negative thoughts and being unable to bear the news. Despite those reactions, parents highlighted their right to receive the news with an understandable explanation through the roles of nurses as educators, advocates, and empathizers. PRACTICE IMPLICATION: Nurses are encouraged to strengthen their roles in breaking bad news. Nurses and healthcare professionals are also suggested to use understandable language and explain medical terms that are used in delivering the information to parents.

Breaking Bad News During Prenatal Screening: The Role of Professional Obstetricians and Midwives in Greece.

INTRODUCTION: Breaking bad news is one of the most difficult responsibilities in medical practice. Although medical staff in clinical practice often encounter situations that necessitate the announcement of unpleasant news, there is a lack of training regarding their communication with patients and their families. Effective interaction between medical staff and pregnant women constitutes a crucial component of breaking down unpleasant news. This research aimed to investigate the knowledge and attitude of health professionals, particularly obstetricians, and midwives, regarding the announcement of bad news during prenatal screening. METHODS: The study was conducted between September 2017 and April 2018. One hundred professional obstetricians and midwives involved in fetal and prenatal medicine in Greece were part of the study. The study consisted of two parts: the first covered the emotional state of healthcare professionals during the announcement of unpleasant news, and the second covered the appropriate way to inform unpleasant results during prenatal testing. RESULTS: In this study, only 41% of the participants considered that they felt comfortable discussing issues related to the diagnosis of an unpleasant result during prenatal testing with the pregnant woman/patient, or her relatives, and 85% accepted that they had experienced feelings of sadness, anxiety, or guilt when announcing unpleasant results. Furthermore, 87% of the participants believed that the non-verbal communication component (eye contact, body language) plays an important role in breaking bad news. Finally, 65% considered that prolonged monitoring of the ultrasound screen during prenatal screening does not increase the anxiety of pregnant women when carried out for a better medical opinion. CONCLUSIONS: Delivering bad news during prenatal screening creates stress for the parents. As far as the ethical, cultural, psychological, and legal complicity of healthcare professionals is concerned, communicating unpleasant news has been a subject of discussion by many experts. It is important to understand the concerns of women regarding the risks of counseling.

Development of an integrated milestone assessment tool across multiple early-adopter programs for breaking bad news: a pilot project.

BACKGROUND: The transition of the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) to milestone assessment creates opportunities for collaboration and shared assessments across graduate medical programs. Breaking bad news is an essential communication skill that is a common milestone across almost every medical specialty. The purpose of this study was to develop and pilot an integrated milestone assessment (IMA) tool for breaking bad news using ACGME milestone criteria and to compare the IMA tool with the existing SPIKES protocol. METHODS: The IMA tool was created using sub-anchors in professionalism and interpersonal communication skills that are applicable to every specialty and to the ability to break bad news. Two cases of breaking bad news, designed to be "easy" and "intermediate" in difficulty, were used to assess basic skills in breaking bad news in first-year medical residents from six residency specialties. Eight standardized patients were trained to portray the cases in sessions held in November 2013 and May 2014. Standardized patients completed an assessment checklist to evaluate each resident's performance in breaking bad news based on their use of the SPIKES protocol and IMA tool. Residents answered post-encounter questions about their training and comfort in breaking bad news. The association between SPIKES and IMA scores was investigated by simple linear regression models and Spearman rank correlations. RESULTS: There were 136 eligible medical residents: 108 (79.4%) participated in the first session and 97 (71.3%) participated in the second session, with 96 (70.6%) residents participating in both sessions. Overall, we were able to identify residents that performed at both extremes of the assessment criteria using the integrated milestone assessment (IMA) and the SPIKES protocol. Interestingly, residents rated themselves below "comfortable" on average. CONCLUSION: We developed an integrated milestone assessment (IMA) that was better than the SPIKES protocol at assessing the skill of breaking bad news. This collaborative assessment tool can be used as supplement tool in the era of milestone transformation. We aim assess our tool in other specialties and institutions, as well as assess other shared milestones across specialties.

EMBRACE (Empowering Medical students' skills in BReaking bAd news with Compassion and Empathy) module improves the skills of undergraduate medical students in effectively breaking the bad news: a case-control study.

Effective communication skills are pivotal in health care, particularly when conveying distressing information to patients and their families. However, medical education still lacks the adoption of a universal model that can be incorporated into the curricula to train and assess students in effectively communicating with patients. This study aims to assess the impact of training undergraduate medical students to deliver bad news effectively using the Empowering Medical students' skills in BReaking bAd news with Compassion and Empathy (EMBRACE) module. This randomized case-control study involved medical students from the first, second, and third professional years (study group, n = 75; control group, n = 75). For the study group, the EMBRACE modules were distributed. Then, a 1-hour training session on effectively delivering bad news was followed by a multiple-choice question test and objective structured clinical examination with response, interpretation, and communication skills stations. Participants' feedback was obtained on a five-point Likert scale. There was a highly significant improvement in knowledge and skills among the study group compared to controls with a P value less than 0.0001. Of the participants, 98.76% perceived that the training equipped them with practical skills, and 98.77% felt that the facilitator had demonstrated the steps of delivering bad news clearly and effectively. Only 4.44% of participants were confident in effectively interacting with patients before the session, and an overwhelming 81.11% gained confidence in their communication skills after the training. With demonstrated significant improvement in knowledge and skills, this study supports the adoption of EMBRACE modules in undergraduate medical education, ultimately improving patient experiences, doctor-patient relationships, and health outcomes.NEW & NOTEWORTHY The Empowering Medical students' skills in BReaking bAd news with Compassion and Empathy (EMBRACE) module is noteworthy for its holistic approach to training medical students in the delicate art of delivering distressing news to patients. It not only incorporates the evidence-based setting, perception, invitation, knowledge, emotions, and strategy (SPIKES) method but also distinguishes itself by providing real-life conversation examples and self-assessment cases, which make the training highly relatable and practical for students to actively engage in their learning and personal development.

Difficulties experienced by dentists and orthodontists regarding ethical issues when announcing the diagnosis of a rare oral disease: a qualitative study in Marseille, France.

PURPOSE: It is traditionally considered that breaking bad news to patients does not represent a cause for concern for dental professionals. However, there are situations where they will be confronted with this task, as in the case of rare dental diseases. Little information is available regarding the feelings of healthcare professionals on this subject. There are no qualitative studies that explore how a diagnosis of oligodontia is announced to patients by dentists and orthodontists. The aim of our study is to explore the difficulties and ethical issues experienced by dental health professionals when they have to announce a diagnosis of oligodontia to a patient and their family. METHODS: This study relied on a qualitative research method using focus groups of dentists and orthodontists and a thematic analysis procedure. RESULTS: The difficulties experienced could be summarised within five topics: organisational difficulties, difficulties with the management of dental treatment and with the administrative management associated with this anomaly, difficulties with the content of the announcement, and relational difficulties. These could be grouped in two categories: practical difficulties and ethical difficulties. CONCLUSION: This survey allowed us to understand the difficulties encountered by dentists and orthodontists when announcing oligodontia. The participants felt uncomfortable with this task and were under stress. They reported difficulties in delivering the medical information and in adapting to the message. It is essential that dental professionals develop skills in medical communication.

Rethinking parameters of "success" in breaking bad news conversations from patient's perspective: the successful delivery process model.

PURPOSE: Studies that focus on improving the difficult process of breaking bad news in oncology should include the patient perspective and be guided by appropriate outcome measures. Endpoints such as "patient satisfaction" fall short to capture the complex nature of breaking bad news (BBN) conversations. However, this is true of many studies. The present study attempts to develop a framework model from a new, patient-centered perspective, which can be applied equally in clinical practice and in education. METHODS: Semi-structured in-depth interviews with twelve cancer patients were conducted. Transcripts were analyzed by "qualitative content analysis" following Mayring. Outcomes were further extrapolated in interpretational steps, and a model of "success" from patients view in BBN was developed. RESULTS: Two central needs of the patients could be identified: understanding and feelings. Their fulfillment depends on two groups of variables: first, structural characteristics, such as the inevitable shock, individuality, and processability; second, strongly influenceable variables, such as relationship, transfer of knowledge, and atmosphere. From these results, a framework model for successful breaking of bad news from the patient's perspective was developed: The successful delivery process model (SDP model). CONCLUSION: As a basic model for the framework for breaking bad news from the patient's perspective, the SDP model can be applied to many different situations in oncology and help to frame the difficult conversations by tailoring the BBN conversations on determinants that favorably influence the process in a patient centered manner. In this sense, the model can be useful in clinical practice as well as in education.

Teaching breaking bad news in a gyneco-oncological setting: a feasibility study implementing the SPIKES framework for undergraduate medical students.

BACKGROUND: It is a crucial task for physicians to deliver life threatening information to patients (breaking bad news; BBN). Many aspects influence these conversations on both sides, patients, and doctors. BBN affects the patient-physician relationship, patients' outcome, and physicians' health. Many physicians are still untrained for this multi-facetted task and feel unprepared and overburdened when facing situations of BBN. Therefore, any faculties should aim to integrate communication skills into their medical curricula as early as possible. The SPIKES protocol is an effective framework to deliver BBN. Aim of this study is to evaluate the feasibility and obstacles of a BBN seminar and its acceptance and learning curve among undergraduate medical students. METHODS: 158 2nd year undergraduate medical students attended a compulsory BBN seminar. The task was to deliver a cancer diagnosis to the patient within a patient - physician role-play in a gyneco-oncological setting before and after a presentation of the SPIKES protocol by the lecturer. The students evaluated important communication skills during these role-plays respectively. Self-assessment questionnaires were obtained at the beginning and end of the seminar. RESULTS: Most students indicated that their confidence in BBN improved after the seminar (p < 0.001). They like the topic BBN to be part of lectures (76%) and electives (90%). Communication skills improved. Lecturer and seminar were positively evaluated (4.57/5). CONCLUSION: The seminar significantly increased confidence and self-awareness in delivering life-threatening news to patients among undergraduate medical students. Important learning aspects of BBN and communication skills could be delivered successfully to the participants within a short time at low costs. The integration of communication skills should be implemented longitudinally into medical curricula starting before clinical education to increase the awareness of the importance of communication skills, to decrease anxiety, stress, and workload for future doctors and- most importantly- to the benefit of our patients.

Communicating difficult news in pediatric radiology.

Effective communication is an important aspect of providing quality healthcare. Radiology staff may be called upon to communicate results, even when it is difficult. Simple, efficient communication models can be learned to reduce clinician distress and support patients and families through stressful times. These practical tips ensure essential communication elements are met, including assessing patient and family perspectives, clearly delivering medical information, responding with empathy, and collaborating around next steps. Models such as "Ask-Tell-Ask," "SPIKES," and "NURSE" can be used to disclose results, communicate serious news, and respond to emotion. Lastly, clinicians can also utilize "I wish… I worry… I wonder" statements to align with a patient's hopes and acknowledge a family's concerns, ultimately allowing healthcare professionals to support and guide families through challenging situations.

Breaking Bad News in Breast Imaging: Keys to Success.

The radiologist's ability to effectively communicate with patients is crucial in breast imaging. Having to tell a patient that she or he requires a biopsy procedure or has a new diagnosis of breast cancer is both a challenging task and a daily reality for many practicing breast radiologists. Despite this, communication in breast imaging is often not formally taught in most training programs, leading many breast radiologists to obtain their skills through on-the-job experience. We discuss the importance of effective communication with patients and a breast imaging-specific method for delivering bad news, adapted from approaches used in medical oncology. A conversation "script" or guide is provided along with the rationale for how to best handle these difficult conversations. Lastly, we review how to teach effective communication to those in training using our breast imaging fellowship program and recent survey results as an example.

The influence of "bad news" and "neutral/good news" on patients' perception of physician empathy during oncology consultations.

OBJECTIVES: Being met with empathy increases information sharing, treatment coherence, and helps patients to recover faster. However, we do not know how the content of the conversation about disease progression, new treatments, or other issues concerning serious illness affects patients' perceptions of the physician's empathy, and thus, the quality of the conversation. This study aimed to test the hypothesis that patients will rate their physician lower following a "bad news" consultation using the consultation and relational empathy (CARE) measure. METHODS: A total of 186 outpatients from the Department of Oncology were recruited for this study. After meeting with a patient, the physician filled out a form, placing the patient in either the "bad news" group, or the "neutral/good news" group along with information about the patient and the consultation. The patient was given the CARE measure after the visit. RESULTS: The patients who had received bad news rated their physicians a significantly lower score on the CARE measure, even though the effect size was small, than those who had neutral/good news. On average, bad news consultations were 11 min longer. CONCLUSIONS: Physicians need to be aware of the patients' need to be known and understood, in addition to having skills to attend to emotional cues and concerns, since the current study's finding could be a sign either of the content being projected onto the physician or that the physician is focused on the message rather than on the patient.