Oncology nurse perceptions about life expectancy discussions: a cross-sectional study exploring what patients want to know, and why doctors don't disclose.

Background: Sensitive and patient-centred discussion about life expectancy has clear benefits for patients with advanced cancer and their families. The perceptions of oncology nurses about disclosure of life expectancy, and the barriers to disclosure, have rarely been explored. Objectives/Aims/Hypotheses: To examine oncology nurses' perceptions of the: (1) proportion of patients with advanced cancer who want, receive and understand estimates of life expectancy; (2) reasons why doctors may not provide estimates of life expectancy. Design: Cross-sectional survey. Methods: Australian oncology nurses who were members of a professional society or worked at a participating metropolitan cancer centre were emailed a link to an anonymous online survey. Participants provided socio-demographic characteristics and their perceptions about the proportion of patients with advanced cancer who (a) want, (b) are provided with, (c) receive and (d) understand estimates of life expectancy, as well as the reasons estimates of life expectancy may not be provided. Results: A total of 104 nurses participated. While 51% of nurses perceived that most patients (>75%) want to be provided with an estimate of their life expectancy, 63% of nurses reported that <50% of patients were provided with an estimate. Further, 85% of nurses indicated that <50% of patients understand the estimate. The most frequent reason nurses perceived doctors did not provide an estimate of life expectancy was because the doctor didn't have an accurate idea of life expectancy (80.8%). Almost one-fifth of nurses (18.3%) thought that doctors did not provide estimates because they felt it was not their responsibility to do so. Conclusions: Strategies to ensure a patient-centred approach to life expectancy discussions with patients with advanced cancer are urgently needed. Impact statement: Oncology nurses perceive that many patients with advanced cancer are not provided with an accurate estimate of their life expectancy and few understand the information provided to them.

Nurses' perceptions, experiences and involvement in the provision of end-of-life care in acute hospitals: A mapping review of research output, quality and effectiveness.

BACKGROUND: Safe and high-quality end of life care is not always achieved in acute care hospitals. Nurses represent a key source of information about current practice, and active participants in interventions to improve end of life care in these settings. Examining the volume, type and quality of publications in this field can help to determine whether research is following a natural scientific progression to inform best-practice end of life care. AIMS: To systematically review: (i) whether the volume and type of publications (i.e. measurement, descriptive or interventions studies) examining nurses' perceptions of, and involvement in, end-of-life care delivered in acute hospitals changed over time (i.e. since 2000); (ii) the proportion of intervention studies involving nurses that meet Risk of Bias research design criteria; and (iii) the effectiveness of intervention studies that met minimum Risk of Bias criteria. METHODS: MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, and PsychInfo were searched for data-based papers published in English between Jan 2000 and Dec 2020. Studies were included if they focused on nurses' perceptions of, or role in, the provision of end-of-life care in hospitals. Eligible papers were classified as descriptive, measurement or intervention studies. Intervention studies were assessed against the Risk of Bias methodological criteria for research design, and their effectiveness examined. RESULTS: A total of 131 papers met eligibility criteria for inclusion in the review. The number increased by 31% in each time period (p < 0.0001). Most studies were descriptive (n = 70; 53%), 11 were measurement studies (8%), and the remainder were intervention studies (n = 50; 38%). Thirteen intervention studies (26%) met eligibility criteria. Methodological quality of the eligible intervention studies was variable. Randomisation and blinding of outcome assessors were the domains of greatest concern. Results were variable, with larger, system-wide interventions that incorporated the expertise of the multidisciplinary healthcare team showing the most promise. CONCLUSION: There is an increasing number of studies examining nurses' perceptions of, and involvement in, end-of-life care delivered in acute hospitals. The difficulties of conducting intervention research in this field mean that many studies are descriptive in nature. Given the importance of intervention research in establishing causal relationships, larger-scale intervention studies are essential to improving the quality of end-of-life care provided to patients dying in hospital.

Oncology nurses' perceptions of advance directives for patients with cancer.

This study examined oncology nurses' perceptions of the impact of advance directives on oncology patients' end-of-life care. Nurses (n = 104), who were members of an oncology nursing society or worked in a large metropolitan cancer center, completed a cross-sectional survey assessing perceptions of advance directives. There was high agreement that advance directives (i) make decisions easier for family (87%) and providers (82%); (ii) are doctors' responsibility to implement (80%); (iii) reduce unwanted aggressive treatment in the last weeks of life (80%); (iv) protect patient autonomy (77%); and (v) increase the likelihood of dying in a preferred location (76%). There was moderate or low agreement that advance directives (i) are accessible when needed (60%); (ii) are oncology nurses' responsibility to implement (46%); (iii) are always followed (41%); (iv) reduce the likelihood of pain in the last weeks of life (31%); (v) contain difficult to follow statements (30%); and (vi) have no impact on comfort in the last weeks of life (15%). Most nurses perceive benefits for advance directives, however, there remains uncertainty around accessibility and implementation. Guidelines and education about advance directive processes in oncology could improve person-centered end-of-life care.

Where would acute care nurses prefer to receive end-of-life care? a cross-sectional survey.

BACKGROUND: Hospital-based nurses can offer a unique perspective about factors that can contribute to a good end-of-life experience, including the location in which end-of-life care is delivered. OBJECTIVES: To examine in a sample of hospital-based nurses, the location in which they personally would most and least prefer to be cared for at the end of life, and the reasons for these preferences. DESIGN: Questionnaire-based, cross-sectional study. SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: 170 registered and enrolled nurses employed in acute care wards of three metropolitan hospitals in Australia between April 2016 and February 2017. RESULTS: Nurses would most prefer to be cared for at home (53%) or in a hospice/palliative care unit (41%) at the end-of-life. Being in a familiar environment and feeling like dying is a more normal process were the main reasons reported for choosing these settings. The main reasons given by nurses for choosing a hospice/palliative care unit were that being cared for at home may place a burden on family/friends and hinder appropriate symptom management. Nurses would least prefer being cared for in an emergency department (49%) due to a perceived lack of privacy and adverse impact on the family; and residential aged care facilities (25%) due to perceived suboptimal symptom management and reduced likelihood of wishes being respected. CONCLUSION: Nurses in this study value familiarity of environment and normalising the dying process. The majority do not wish to burden their family and friends at the end of their lives. Important next steps in providing services that meet the needs of people facing the end of their lives include understanding how nurses' personal views may influence decision-making conversations with patients and families about location of care at the end-of-life, as well as determining the capacity of available services to meet patient and family needs.

Nurses perspectives on healthcare errors in oncology care: A cross-sectional study.

PURPOSE: Recognition and responses of the health system to healthcare errors are key areas for improvement in oncology. Despite their role in direct patient care, nurses' perceptions of errors have rarely been explored. The aim of this study was to determine oncology nurses' direct experience of healthcare errors in the previous six months; the circumstances surrounding the error; and ensuing actions by the healthcare system. METHODS: Cross-sectional survey of nurses who were members of an oncology nursing society and/or registered or enrolled nurses employed in an oncology setting. Participants indicated whether they had direct experience (i.e. direct involvement or witnessing) of error(s) in the previous six months. Those who experienced an error indicated their perceptions of the: cause; location and phase of care; how the error was identified, who was responsible, level of harm and action(s) taken. RESULTS: 67% (n = 65/97) of nurses who completed the survey had direct experience with at least one error in the previous six months. According to these nurses, most occurred during treatment (n = 48, 74%), happened in outpatient clinics (n = 28, 43%) and were related to chemotherapy (n = 15, 23%). Nurses perceived errors were primarily caused by nurses (n = 36, 55%) and doctors (n = 27, 42%); and 54% (n = 35) were deemed 'near-miss'. Nurses perceived errors were recorded (n = 40, 62%), explained to patients (n = 33, 51%) and an apology provided (n = 32, 49%). CONCLUSION: Two-thirds of oncology nurses in this study had direct experience with an error in the previous six months. Nurses perceived response to errors as inconsistent with open disclosure standards. Strategies to improve accuracy of measures of error and response of the health system, including adherence to open disclosure processes, are required.

Correction to: Interactional skills training in undergraduate medical education: ten principles for guiding future research.

Following publication of the original article [1], the authors reported a referencing error under the heading 2. Use methodologically rigorous research to demonstrate that interactional skills can be acquired in the Background section of the published article.

Interactional skills training in undergraduate medical education: ten principles for guiding future research.

BACKGROUND: High-quality healthcare requires practitioners who have technical competence and communication skills. Medical practitioners need interpersonal skills for gathering and transferring information to their patients, in addition to general consultation skills. Appropriate information gathering increases the likelihood of an accurate diagnosis. Transferring information should be performed in a way that promotes patient understanding and increases the probability of adherence to physician recommendations. This applies to: (i) primary prevention such as smoking cessation; (ii) secondary prevention including preparation for potentially threatening interventions; and (iii) tertiary care, including breaking bad news regarding treatment and prognosis. DISCUSSION: This debate paper delineates factors associated with undergraduate medical communication skills training where robust research is needed. Ten key principles are presented and discussed, which are intended to guide future research in this field and ensure high quality studies with methodological rigour are conducted. The literature on communication skills training for medical school undergraduates continues to grow. A considerable portion of this output is represented by commentaries, descriptive studies or poorly designed interventions. As with any field of healthcare, quality research interventions are required to ensure practice is grounded in high-level evidence.

Knowledge of, and participation in, advance care planning: A cross-sectional study of acute and critical care nurses' perceptions.

BACKGROUND: Nurses have a core role in facilitating discussions and enacting decisions about end-of-life issues for patients in hospitals. Nurses' own knowledge and attitudes may influence whether they engage in meaningful end-of-life conversations with patients. AIMS: To determine in a sample of nurses working in acute and critical care hospital wards: 1) their knowledge of advance care planning, including the authority of substitute decision-makers and legal validity of advance directives; 2) their own participation in advance care planning decision-making practices; and 3) associations between nurses' socio-demographic characteristics; clinical expertise; and knowledge and behaviour in relation to advance care planning practices. DESIGN: Questionnaire-based, cross-sectional study. SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: The study was conducted with 181 registered and enrolled nurses employed in acute and critical care wards of three metropolitan hospitals in Australia. RESULTS: Nurses were least knowledgeable about items relating to the authority of medical (56%) and financial (42%) substitute decision-makers. Few nurses had prepared advance directives (10%) or appointed medical (23%) or financial (27%) decision-makers, when compared to discussing end-of-life wishes (53%) or organ donation (75%). Overall, 15% of nurses had not engaged in any advance care planning practices. Nurses who had cared for 11-30 dying patients in the last six months were more likely to have an increased knowledge score. Older nurses were more likely to participate in a greater number of advance care planning practices and an increase in shifts worked per week led to a significant decrease in nurses' participation. CONCLUSION: Nurses have a key role in providing advice and engaging dying patients and their families in advance care planning practices. Nurses' own knowledge and rates of participation are low. Further education and support is needed to ensure that nurses have an accurate knowledge of advance care planning practices, including how, when and with whom wishes should be discussed and can be enacted.

Can models of self-management support be adapted across cancer types? A comparison of unmet self-management needs for patients with breast or colorectal cancer.

PURPOSE: There is an increased focus on supporting patients with cancer to actively participate in their healthcare, an approach commonly termed 'self-management'. Comparing unmet self-management needs across cancer types may reveal opportunities to adapt effective self-management support strategies from one cancer type to another. Given that breast and colorectal cancers are prevalent, and have high survival rates, we compared these patients' recent need for help with self-management. METHOD: Data on multiple aspects of self-management were collected from 717 patients with breast cancer and 336 patients with colorectal cancer attending one of 13 Australian medical oncology treatment centres. RESULTS: There was no significant difference between the proportion of patients with breast or colorectal cancer who reported a need for help with at least one aspect of self-management. Patients with breast cancer were significantly more likely to report needing help with exercising more, while patients with colorectal cancer were more likely to report needing help with reducing alcohol consumption. When controlling for treatment centre, patients who were younger, experiencing distress or had not received chemotherapy were more likely to report needing help with at least one aspect of self-management. CONCLUSIONS: A substantial minority of patients reported an unmet need for self-management support. This indicates that high-quality intervention research is needed to identify effective self-management support strategies, as well as implementation trials to identify approaches to translating these strategies into practice. Future research should continue to explore whether self-management support strategies could be adapted across cancer types.

Progressive compression versus graduated compression for the management of venous insufficiency.

Venous leg ulceration (VLU) is a chronic condition associated with chronic venous insufficiency (CVI), where the most frequent complication is recurrence of ulceration after healing. Traditionally, graduated compression therapy has been shown to increase healing rates and also to reduce recurrence of VLU. Graduated compression occurs because the circumference of the limb is narrower at the ankle, thereby producing a higher pressure than at the calf, which is wider, creating a lower pressure. This phenomenon is explained by the principle known as Laplace's Law. Recently, the view that compression therapy must provide a graduated pressure gradient has been challenged. However, few studies so far have focused on the potential benefits of progressive compression where the pressure profile is inverted. This article will examine the contemporary concept that progressive compression may be as effective as traditional graduated compression therapy for the management of CVI.