Crowdsourced Feedback to Improve Resident Physician Error Disclosure Skills: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: Residents must prepare for effective communication with patients after medical errors. The video-based communication assessment (VCA) is software that plays video of a patient scenario, asks the physician to record what they would say, engages crowdsourced laypeople to rate audio recordings of physician responses, and presents feedback to physicians. Objective: To evaluate the effectiveness of VCA feedback in resident error disclosure skill training. Design, Setting, and Participants: This single-blinded, randomized clinical trial was conducted from July 2022 to May 2023 at 7 US internal medicine and family medicine residencies (10 total sites). Participants were second-year residents attending required teaching conferences. Data analysis was performed from July to December 2023. Intervention: Residents completed 2 VCA cases at time 1 and were randomized to the intervention, an individual feedback report provided in the VCA application after 2 weeks, or to control, in which feedback was not provided until after time 2. Residents completed 2 additional VCA cases after 4 weeks (time 2). Main Outcomes and Measures: Panels of crowdsourced laypeople rated recordings of residents disclosing simulated medical errors to create scores on a 5-point scale. Reports included learning points derived from layperson comments. Mean time 2 ratings were compared to test the hypothesis that residents who had access to feedback on their time 1 performance would score higher at time 2 than those without feedback access. Residents were surveyed about demographic characteristics, disclosure experience, and feedback use. The intervention's effect was examined using analysis of covariance. Results: A total of 146 residents (87 [60.0%] aged 25-29 years; 60 female [41.0%]) completed the time 1 VCA, and 103 (70.5%) completed the time 2 VCA (53 randomized to intervention and 50 randomized to control); of those, 28 (54.9%) reported reviewing their feedback. Analysis of covariance found a significant main effect of feedback between intervention and control groups at time 2 (mean [SD] score, 3.26 [0.45] vs 3.14 [0.39]; difference, 0.12; 95% CI, 0.08-0.48; P = .01). In post hoc comparisons restricted to residents without prior disclosure experience, intervention residents scored higher than those in the control group at time 2 (mean [SD] score, 3.33 [0.43] vs 3.09 [0.44]; difference, 0.24; 95% CI, 0.01-0.48; P = .007). Worse performance at time 1 was associated with increased likelihood of dropping out before time 2 (odds ratio, 2.89; 95% CI, 1.06-7.84; P = .04). Conclusions and Relevance: In this randomized clinical trial, self-directed review of crowdsourced feedback was associated with higher ratings of internal medicine and family medicine residents' error disclosure skill, particularly for those without real-life error disclosure experience, suggesting that such feedback may be an effective way for residency programs to address their requirement to prepare trainees for communicating with patients after medical harm. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT06234085.

The effect of confession evidence on jurors' verdict decisions: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVE: Over the past 4 decades, discrepant research findings have emerged in the juror-confession literature, prompting the need for a systematic review and meta-analysis that assesses the effect of confession evidence (coerced or noncoerced) on conviction rates and the efficacy of trial safeguards. HYPOTHESES: We did not predict any directional hypotheses. Some studies show increased convictions when a confession is present (vs. not), regardless of whether that confession was coerced; other studies demonstrate that jurors are able to discount coerced confessions. Studies have also demonstrated sensitivity effects (safeguards aided jurors in making appropriate decisions), skepticism effects (safeguards led jurors to indiscriminately disregard confession evidence), or null effects with regard to expert testimony and jury instructions. METHOD: We identified 83 independent samples (N = 24,860) that met our meta-analytic inclusion criteria. Using extracted Hedges' g effect sizes, we conducted both network meta-analysis and metaregression to address key research questions. RESULTS: Coerced and noncoerced confessions (vs. no confession) increased convictions (network gs = 0.34 and 0.70, respectively), yet coerced (vs. noncoerced) confessions reduced convictions (network g = -0.36). When jury instructions were employed (vs. not), convictions in coerced confession cases were reduced (this difference did not emerge for noncoerced confessions; a sensitivity effect). Expert testimony, however, reduced conviction likelihood regardless of whether a confession was coerced (a skepticism effect). CONCLUSION: Confession evidence is persuasive, and although jurors appear to recognize the detrimental effect of coercive interrogation methods on confession reliability, they do not fully discount unreliable confessions. Educational safeguards are therefore needed, but more research is encouraged to identify the most effective forms of jury instructions and expert testimony. One potential reform could be in the interrogation room itself, as science-based interviewing approaches could provide jurors with more reliable defendant statement evidence that assists them in reaching appropriate verdict decisions. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).

The role of truth in victim-offender mediation: Victims of crime who feel they know the "whole" truth are more receptive to apologies.

OBJECTIVE: We conducted three preregistered studies to examine whether victims of crime are more receptive to apologies in victim-offender mediation if they feel they know the "whole" truth about a crime. HYPOTHESES: We predicted that making salient the completeness (vs. incompleteness) of knowledge about a crime would lead victims to (a) have a greater sense of truth knowing and (b) view an apology more favorably. METHOD: Participants in Study 1 (N = 380; Mage = 41.2 years; 51% men; 78% White) and Study 2 (N = 550; Mage = 41.0 years; 65% women; 72% White) imagined being the victim of cybercrime. Participants in Study 3 (N = 670; Mage = 42.7 years; 52% men; 72% White) were real crime victims. Participants imagined taking part in victim-offender mediation during which the offender apologized, and then they evaluated the apology after answering questions that made salient what they either knew or did not know about the crime (complete knowledge salience vs. incomplete knowledge salience). Participants in Study 2 received additional information about the crime from either the offender or the police to test whether truth source acts as a moderator. RESULTS: Participants in the complete (vs. incomplete) knowledge salience condition reported greater truth knowing (Study 1 d = 1.40, Study 2 d = 1.26, Study 3 d = 0.58), readiness for an apology (Study 1 d = 0.25; Study 2 d = 0.23; Study 3 d = 0.09, nonsignificant), perceived completeness of an apology (Study 1 d = 0.26, Study 2 d = 0.31, Study 3 d = 0.19), and acceptance of an apology (Study 1 d = 0.22; Study 2 d = 0.21; Study 3 d = 0.10, nonsignificant). In Study 2, truth source moderated the effect only on apology acceptance (η2 = .009). Across the three studies, complete (vs. incomplete) knowledge salience was indirectly positively related to apology readiness, apology completeness, and apology acceptance (nonsignificant in Study 3), via truth knowing. CONCLUSIONS: Instances of victim-offender mediation should ensure that victims' need for truth is satisfied because this may increase the effectiveness of apologies. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).

Disclosure of Adverse Events and Medical Errors: A Framework for Anesthesiologists.

Ethical disclosure of adverse events (AE) presents opportunities and challenges for physicians and has unique ramifications for anesthesiologists. AE disclosure is supported by patients, regulatory organizations, and physicians. Disclosure is part of a physician's ethical duty toward patients, supports fully informed patient decision making, and is a critical component of root cause analysis. Barriers to AE disclosure include disruption of the doctor-patient relationship, fear of litigation, and inadequate training. Apology laws intended to support disclosure and mitigate concern for adverse legal consequences have not fulfilled that initial promise. Training and institutional communication programs support physicians in providing competent, ethical AE disclosure.

[The lie: Hiding to tell, telling to hide]. / Le mensonge : cacher pour dire, dire pour cacher.

We all lie. Some more than others, and others still have made it a way of life in relationships. There is a fine line between the normal and the pathological. It is certainly more psychologically comfortable to side with the truth than with lies. So what is it that drives the liar to stick to his guns?

["Revealing in the gerund": secrecy and stigma in practices of care for children and adolescents living with HIV/Aids]. / "Revelando", no gerúndio: segredo e estigma nas práticas de cuidado às crianças e adolescentes vivendo com HIV/Aids.

This article analyzes practices of care and the HIV diagnosis disclosure process to children and adolescents living with HIV/AIDS. A case study was conducted in an outpatient clinic located in a public hospital in Rio de Janeiro through participant observation, semi-structured interviews with health professionals, and the consultation of documents produced by the professionals. The analysis, based on the sociology of Simmel and Goffman, points to the revelation of the diagnosis as a hallmark that accompanies all the care established with users and sheds light on issues such as secrecy, stigma and the possible understandings about the health condition established. As a result, institutionalized relationships contribute to a progressive contact with the condition of bearing a stigma and enable phases of a patient's life protected by information to exist.

O artigo analisa as práticas de cuidado e o processo de revelação do diagnóstico a crianças e adolescentes vivendo com HIV/Aids. Foi realizado um estudo de caso em um ambulatório localizado em um hospital público do Rio de Janeiro (RJ), através de observação participante, entrevistas semiestruturadas com profissionais de saúde e consulta a documentos produzidos pelos profissionais. A análise, baseada na sociologia de Simmel e Goffman, aponta a revelação do diagnóstico como uma marca que acompanha todo o cuidado estabelecido com os usuários e dá luz a questões como o segredo, o estigma e as possíveis compreensões acerca da condição de saúde estabelecidas. Com isso, as relações institucionalizadas contribuem para um progressivo contato com a condição de portador de um estigma e fazem existir fases de uma carreira de doente protegido pela informação.

When Bad News Comes Through the Portal: Strengthening Trust and Guiding Patients When They Receive Bad Results Before Their Clinicians.

Communication in oncology was challenging long before the emergence of the US 21st Century Cures Act. Before 2021, a growing body of evidence had demonstrated the benefits of patients' access to and review of the clinical notes in their charts (open notes); however, studies examining the benefits of immediate access to test results were scarce until the implementation of the Cures Act's Information Blocking Rule. Individuals grappling with cancer today now possess immediate access to their laboratory results, imaging scans, diagnostic tests, and progress notes as mandated by law. To many clinicians, the implementation of the Cures Act felt sudden and presented new challenges and concerns for oncologists surrounding patients' potential emotional reactions to medical notes or lack of control over the careful delivery of potentially life-changing information. Despite data that show most patients want immediate access to information in their records before it is communicated directly by a health care professional, surveys of oncologists showed trepidation. In this chapter, perspectives from a patient with cancer, an oncologist, and a cancer psychiatrist (in that order) are shared to illuminate the adjustments made in clinician-patient communication amid the era of nearly instantaneous results within the electronic health record.

Unrealistic expectations and disclosure of incurability in patients with non-small cell lung cancer.

PURPOSE: Determining whether patients' unrealistic expectations of chemotherapy as a cure were associated with their perception of the disclosure of incurability. METHODS: This prospective study included consecutive patients with pretreated non-small cell lung cancer from four study sites. Patients and their oncologists were asked whether they perceived the disclosure of cancer incurability. Patients were also asked if they thought that chemotherapy was curative. We followed up on whether the deceased patients received specialized palliative care 14 months after their last enrollment. Multiple regression analyses were conducted to examine the association between the expectation of chemotherapy as a cure and patient/oncologist-reported perceptions of the disclosure of incurability. RESULTS: We analyzed 200 patients, 77 (38.5%) of whom had unrealistic expectations of a cure. Based on patients' perceptions, incurability was disclosed to 138 (69.0%) patients, and based on their oncologists' perceptions, incurability was disclosed to 185 (92.5%) patients (patient/oncologist agreements, κ = 0.19). Patients without a perception of the oncologist's disclosure of incurability-regardless of their oncologist's perception-were more likely to have unrealistic expectations of a cure than patients for whom both patient and oncologist perceptions were present. Patients who had unrealistic expectations of chemotherapy as a cure were shown to be significantly less likely to have received specialized palliative care, after adjusting for covariates (adjusted OR, 0.45; 95% CI, 0.23-0.91; p = .027). CONCLUSION: Oncologists' disclosure of incurability was not fully recognized by patients, and expectations of chemotherapy as a cure were associated with patients' perception of the disclosure of incurability.

Telling the truth to patients before hip fracture surgery.

BACKGROUND: Hip fracture repair surgery carries a certain mortality risk, yet evidence suggests that orthopedic surgeons often refrain from discussing this issue with patients prior to surgery. AIM: This study aims to examine whether orthopedic surgeons raise the issue of one-year post-surgery mortality before hip fracture repair surgery and to explore factors influencing this decision. METHOD: The study employs a cross-sectional design, administering validated digital questionnaires to 150 orthopedic surgeons. RESULTS: A minority of orthopedic surgeons reported always informing patients about the risk of mortality in the year following hip fracture surgery. The main reasons for not discussing this risk were a desire to avoid frightening patients, time constraints, and concerns about undermining patient hope. Orthopedic surgeons reported a medium-high level of perceived self-efficacy, with higher self-efficacy associated with a reduced likelihood of discussing one-year mortality risk. Conversely, older age and holding a specialist status in orthopedic surgery were associated with an increased likelihood of discussing this risk with patients. CONCLUSIONS: These findings suggest a need for interventions to address communication barriers and ensure consistent provision of essential information to patients undergoing hip fracture surgery. Additionally, they highlight the importance of considering individual factors such as self-efficacy, age, and expertise in designing strategies to improve patient-provider communication in orthopedic care settings. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The study doesn`t report the results of a health care intervention.

Study protocol OKRA: orientation compass for the preparing, delivering and following up on breaking bad news conversations in paediatric oncology.

INTRODUCTION: In paediatric oncology, 'breaking bad news'-BBN-like cancer diagnosis is perceived as particularly challenging. Enabling a trialogue between children with their relatives and health professionals requires profound communication skills. Lacking the skills, experience or adequate support tools might result in negative consequences for both paediatric oncologists as BBN transmitters and BBN receivers as children with cancer and their relatives.In contrast to oncology for adults, multiperspective studies that explore BBN experience and specific support needs are rare, especially in Germany. Systematically developed and practically piloted support instruments, which address the specific needs of paediatric oncology, are missing. OBJECTIVE: To systematically design and mature in practice an orientation compass for preparing, delivering and following up on BBN conversations in paediatric oncology-so-called Orientierungskompass zur Übermittlung schwerwiegender Nachrichten in der Kinderonkologie (OKRA). METHODS AND ANALYSIS: OKRA is based on a QUAL-quant mixed study design, comprising two phases. Four groups will contribute (1) experts through personal experience (representatives for children receiving BBN and their parents), (2) medical care providers and representatives of national medical societies, (3) ambulant psychosocial/psychological support providers and (4) researchers. In phase 1, multiperspective knowledge is generated through a participatory group Delphi that involves in-depth interviews, focus group discussions and questionnaires. This process culminates in formulating theses for a high-quality BBN process (output phase 1). In phase 2, based on the theses, a pilot orientation compass is designed. Through iterative cycles with the participatory action research method, this instrument will be piloted in three paediatric oncological settings and consequently optimised. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: OKRA was approved on 19 September 2023 by the ethics committee of the Medical Faculty of the University of Cologne (No. 23-1187). After project completion, the OKRA compass will be distributed to multidisciplinary paediatric oncology teams throughout Germany. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: DRKS00031691.

Teenage Development and Parental Authority: applying consensus recommendations to adolescent care.

The consensus recommendations by Salter and colleagues (2023) regarding pediatric decision-making intentionally omitted adolescents due to the additional complexity their evolving autonomy presented. Using two case studies, one focused on truth-telling and disclosure and one focused on treatment refusal, this article examines medical decision-making with and for adolescents in the context of the six consensus recommendations. It concludes that the consensus recommendations could reasonably apply to older children.

Patient Experiences of Patient-Clinician Communication Among Cancer Multidisciplinary Healthcare Professionals During "Breaking Bad News": A Qualitative Systematic Review.

PURPOSE: To explore patient experiences of patient-clinician communication during the critical moments of "breaking bad news" in cancer care. METHODS: A qualitative systematic review followed the Joanna Briggs Institute methodology and has been reported according to PRISMA guidelines. Databases, including APA PsycINFO, CINAHL, MEDLINE, and Scopus, were searched from the beginning of their date range coverage to April 2023. Data extraction and quality assessment were performed, and a meta-aggregation approach was used for data synthesis. RESULTS: Twenty-eight studies were included and represented 976 patients. Key themes included (1) sensing something is wrong (prior to diagnosis), (2) reaction to the diagnosis, (3) information (during breaking bad news), (4) communication with health care professionals, (5) specialist versus nonspecialist centers, (6) decision-making, and (7) feeling supported. The review underscores the need for health care professionals to adeptly navigate and respond to individual patient needs during confronting and distressing times. CONCLUSIONS: The complexity and individuality of patient-clinician communication suggest that further education is needed among the cancer multidisciplinary team to develop personalized, empathetic communication strategies in clinical practice, catering to diverse patient preferences. The findings call for more inclusive research across different cultures and languages, and a need to understand evolving communication needs, especially in the context of increasing digital communication modalities in health care. IMPLICATIONS FOR CANCER SURVIVORSHIP: This review provides valuable new insights into developing effective communication strategies that are responsive to the diverse needs of patients undergoing cancer treatment. Its findings emphasize the importance of empathy, flexibility, and a personalized approach in delivering bad news and supporting patients throughout survivorship.

Parent and oncologist perspectives on prognostic disclosure in advanced childhood cancer: communication pearls and pitfalls.

PURPOSE: For children with advanced cancer and their families, communication about prognosis is critical. Unfortunately, data demonstrate that prognostic communication occurs infrequently and inconsistently across advancing illness. Prior to developing an intervention to improve prognostic communication, we aimed to (1) characterize parent and oncologist perspectives on "best" approaches for prognostic communication, and (2) explore similarities and differences between parent and oncologist perspectives. METHODS: Children with poor-prognosis solid tumors, their parents, and oncologists were followed prospectively for 24 months or until death. Matched semi-structured interviews were conducted with parents and oncologists 0-7 days after medical encounters at timepoints of disease progression or relapse. Reflexive thematic analysis was conducted to describe parent and oncologist impressions of communication quality. RESULTS: A total of 68 interviews were conducted following serial disease reevaluation encounters involving 13 parents and five oncologists. Nine main themes were identified as "best" approaches: (1) speaking with honesty and clarity, (2) leaving room for hope, (3) leaning into a long-standing relationship, (4) personalizing language, (5) empowering the patient and family, (6) collaborating with the multidisciplinary team, (7) providing anticipatory guidance, (8) setting the scene, and (9) creating a therapeutic space. Parents and oncologists generally agreed on themes related to helpful communication approaches, while parents more explicitly described communication pitfalls. CONCLUSION: Parents and oncologists described clear recommendations for helpful communication strategies and pitfalls to avoid during difficult prognostic disclosure. Future work should integrate patient perspectives in the design and testing of an intervention to improve prognostic communication in advanced childhood cancer.

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 in oncology practice: experience and challenges of oncology health professionals in Ethiopia - an exploratory qualitative study.

OBJECTIVE: To explore the experience and challenges health professionals face during breaking bad news (BBN) to patients with cancer in the oncology centre of Black Lion Specialized Hospital (BLSH), Addis Ababa, Ethiopia 2019. DESIGN: An exploratory qualitative phenominological study using in-depth interviews was carried out in the only radiotherapy integrated oncology centre in Ethiopia during March 2019. Purposeful maximum variation sampling was used to select participants. OpenCode (V.4.02) assisted thematic analysis approach was employed to analyse the data. PARTICIPANTS: Eleven oncology health practitioners (oncologists, residents and nurses) working at the oncology centre were interviewed. Repeated interviews and analysis were done until theoretical saturation. RESULTS: All participants were cognisant of the positive outcome of proper and effective practice of BBN. However, they were practicing it empirically, no standardised protocols or guidelines were in place. Four dimensions of challenges were mentioned: (1) setup centric: unconducive environment, lack of protocols or guidelines, inaccessible treatment, and psychotherapy or counselling services; (2) health care centric, such as inadequate expertise, inadequate time due to patient load,treatment backlog, and referral system; (3) patients/family centric: poor medical literacy level, poor compliance, and family interference; and (4) sociocultural: wrong perception of families on BBN and treatment modalities, and opposition from religious leaders. CONCLUSION: BBN is challenging for professionals caring for patients in the oncology centre of BLSH. Hence, there is a critical need to improve practices. Change efforts may focus on the development of contextualised, content and context specific practice oriented training programmes and curriculum interventions. Raising awareness of the community and religious leaders regarding the nature and treatment of cancer may also be a helpful adjunct.

Erratum: 'I am afraid the news is not good' - Breaking bad news in the time of COVID: Experiences from a field hospital.

No abstract available.