Prognostic Communication Between Parents and Clinicians in Pediatric Oncology: An Integrative Review.

Background: Prognostic communication between clinicians and parents in pediatric oncology is complex. However, no review has exclusively examined research on prognostic communication in pediatric oncology. In this review, we synthesize the evidence on prognostic communication in pediatric oncology and provide recommendations for future research. Methods: We conducted an integrative review searching six databases for studies on prognostic communication in pediatric oncology as of August 2022. We applied descriptive and narrative approaches to data analysis. Results: Fourteen quantitative and five qualitative studies were included. All studies were conducted in Western developed countries. In total, 804 parents of 770 children with cancer were included. Across studies, parents were predominately female, Non-Hispanic White, and had high school or higher levels of education. Most parents reported that prognostic communication was initiated in the first year after their children's diagnosis. High-quality prognostic communication was positively associated with trust and hope and negatively associated with parental distress and decisional regret. In qualitative studies, parents suggested that prognostic communication should be open, ongoing, and delivered with sensitivity. Most studies were of moderate quality. The main gaps included inconsistent definitions of prognostic communication, and a lack of comprehensive and validated measurements, high-quality longitudinal studies, and diverse settings and participants. Conclusions: Clinicians should initiate high-quality prognostic communication early on in clinical practice. Future research should consider conducting high-quality longitudinal studies, developing prognostic communication definitions and measurements, and conducting studies across settings with diverse populations.

A Qualitative Study of Risks Related to Interhospital Transfer of Patients with Nontraumatic Intracranial Hemorrhage.

GOAL: Interhospital transfer (IHT) facilitates access to specialized neurocritical care but may also introduce unique risk. Our goal was to describe providers' perceptions of safety threats during IHT for patients with nontraumatic intracranial hemorrhage. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We employed qualitative, semi-structured interviews at an academic medical center receiving critically-ill neurologic transfers, and 5 referring hospitals. Interviewees included physicians, nurses, and allied health professionals with experience caring for patients transferred between hospitals for nontraumatic intracranial hemorrhage. Interviews continued until data saturation was reached. Coding occurred concurrently with interviews. Analysis was inductive, using the constant comparative method. FINDINGS: The predominant impediments to safe, high-quality neurocritical care transitions between hospitals are insufficient communication, gaps in clinical practice, and lack of IHT structure. Insufficient communication highlights the unique communication challenges specific to IHT, which overlay and compound known intrahospital communication barriers. Gaps in clinical practice revolve primarily around the provision of neurocritical care for this patient population, often subject to resource availability, by receiving hospital emergency medicine providers. Lack of structure outlines providers' questions that emerge when institutions fail to identify process channels, expectations, and accountability during complex neurocritical care transitions. CONCLUSIONS: The predominant impediments to safe, high-quality neurocritical care transitions between hospitals are insufficient communication, gaps in clinical practice, and lack of IHT structure. These themes serve as fundamental targets for quality improvement initiatives. To our knowledge, this is the first description of challenges to quality and safety in high-risk neurocritical care transitions through clinicians' voices.