Curricular Reform in Serious Illness Communication and Palliative Care: Using Medical Students' Voices to Guide Change.

PURPOSE: To gather and leverage the voices of students to drive creation of required, integrated palliative care curricula within undergraduate medical education in Massachusetts, which is lacking in a majority of U.S. medical schools. METHOD: The study was conducted by the Massachusetts Medical Schools' Collaborative, a working group committed to ensuring all medical students in Massachusetts receive foundational training in serious illness communication (SIC) and palliative care. Eight focus groups (2 per participating medical school) were conducted during January-May 2021 and included a total of 50 students from Boston University Chobanian & Avedisian School of Medicine, Harvard Medical School, Tufts University School of Medicine, and the UMass Chan Medical School. Data collected from focus groups were discussed and coded. Themes were identified using the immersion/crystallization qualitative data analysis approach. RESULTS: Six key themes emerged. Students viewed SIC as essential to high-quality medical practice regardless of specialty, and believed training in SIC skills and palliative care should be required in medical school curricula. Students preferred to learn and practice these skills using frameworks, particularly in real-world situations. Students recognized the expertise of palliative care specialists and described them as a scarce, often misunderstood resource in health care. Students reported it was mostly "luck" if they were included in family meetings and observed good role models. Finally, students desired practice in debriefing after difficult and emotional situations. CONCLUSIONS: This study confirms long-standing themes on students' experiences with SIC and palliative care topics, including feeling inadequately prepared to care for seriously ill patients as future physicians. Our study collected students' perspectives as actionable data to develop recommendations for curricular change. Collaborative faculty also created recommendations based on the focus group data for immediate and ongoing SIC and palliative care curricular change in Massachusetts, which can apply to medical schools nationwide.

A Call to Action: Using Curriculum Mapping at Four Medical Schools in Massachusetts to Advance Serious Illness Communication Training in Undergraduate Medical Education.

Background: Practicing physicians require serious illness communication (SIC) skills to ensure high-quality, humanistic care for patients and families as they face life-changing medical decisions. However, a majority of U.S. medical schools do not require formal training in SIC and fail to provide students deliberate practice before graduation. The Massachusetts Medical Schools' Collaborative was created to ensure that students receive foundational SIC training in undergraduate medical education. This Collaborative developed a curriculum-mapping tool to assess SIC at four medical schools. Objective: We aimed to understand existing educational activities across four medical schools and identify opportunities to build longitudinal, developmentally based curricular threads in SIC. Design: From July 2019 to April 2021, faculty, staff, and medical students assessed current educational activities related to five core competencies in SIC, adapted for students from national competencies for palliative medicine fellows, using a curriculum mapping tool. Measurements: The group selected 23 keywords and collected metrics to describe the timing, instruction and assessment for each school's educational activities. Results: On average, there were only 40 hours of required curricula in SIC over four years. Over 80% of relevant SIC hours occurred as elective experiences, mostly during the postclerkship phase, with limited capacity in these elective experiences. Only one school had SIC educational activities during the clerkship phase when students are developing clinical competencies. Assessment methods focused on student participation, and no school-assessed clinical performance in the clerkship or postclerkship phase. Conclusions: Medical schools are failing to consistently train and ensure basic competency in effective, compassionate SIC. Curriculum mapping allows schools to evaluate their current state on a particular topic such as SIC, ensure proper assessment, and evaluate curricular changes over time. Through the deliberate inclusion of SIC competencies in longitudinal curriculum design, we can fill this training gap and create best practices in undergraduate medical education.

Online Forums as a Tool for Broader Inclusion of Voices on Health Care Communication Experiences and Serious Illness Care: Mixed Methods Study.

BACKGROUND: Existing health care research, including serious illness research, often underrepresents individuals from historically marginalized communities. Capturing the nuanced perspectives of individuals around their health care communication experiences is difficult. New research strategies are needed that increase engagement of individuals from diverse backgrounds. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to develop a mixed methods approach with qualitative online forums to better understand health communication experiences of individuals, including people from groups historically marginalized such as Black and Latino individuals; older adults; and people with low income, disability, or serious illness. METHODS: We used a multiphase mixed methods, community-informed research approach to design study instruments and engage participants. We engaged a diverse group of collaborators with lived experience of navigating the health care system who provided feedback on instruments, added concepts for testing, and offered guidance on creating a safe experience for participants (phase 1). We conducted a national quantitative survey between April and May 2021 across intrapersonal, interpersonal, and systems-level domains, with particular focus on interpersonal communication between patients and clinicians (phase 2). We conducted two asynchronous, qualitative online forums, a technique used in market research, between June and August 2021, which allowed us to contextualize the learnings and test concepts and messages (phase 3). Using online forums allowed us to probe more deeply into results and hypotheses from the survey to better understand the "whys" and "whats" that surfaced and to test public messages to encourage action around health. RESULTS: We engaged 46 community partners, including patients and clinicians from a Federally Qualified Health Center, to inform study instrument design. In the quantitative survey, 1854 adults responded, including 50.5% women, 25.2% individuals over 65 years old, and 51.9% individuals with low income. Nearly two-thirds identified as non-Hispanic white (65.7%), 10.4% identified as non-Hispanic Black, and 15.5% identified as Hispanic/Latino. An additional 580 individuals participated in online forums, including 60.7% women, 17.4% individuals over 65 years old, and 49.0% individuals with low income. Among the participants, 70.3% identified as non-Hispanic white, 16.0% as non-Hispanic Black, and 9.5% as Hispanic/Latino. We received rich, diverse input from our online forum participants, and they highlighted satisfaction and increased knowledge with engagement in the forums. CONCLUSIONS: We achieved modest overrepresentation of people who were over 65 years old, identified as non-Hispanic Black, and had low income in our online forums. The size of the online forums (N=580) reflected the voices of 93 Black and 55 Hispanic/Latino participants. Individuals who identify as Hispanic/Latino remained underrepresented, likely because the online forums were offered only in English. Overall, our findings demonstrate the feasibility of using the online forum qualitative approach in a mixed methods study to contextualize, clarify, and expound on quantitative findings when designing public health and clinical communications interventions.

Impairment and Disability Identity and Perceptions of Trust, Respect, and Fairness.

Importance: Most studies use impaired functioning alone to specify populations with disabilities. However, some people with functional impairments do not identify as disabled. With functional status-based definitions, studies have shown disparate care quality for people with disabilities. Objective: To examine whether impairment and disability identity have different associations with perceived health care experiences and explore factors associated with disability identification. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cross-sectional study used a nationally representative survey of US adults conducted from April 20 through May 31, 2021, and analyzed between June 1 and August 31, 2022. Survey participants were 1822 English- or Spanish-speaking adults responding either online or via telephone. Exposures: Using 8 survey questions, participants were grouped according to presence of impairment and disability identity. Main Outcomes and Measures: Likert scale measures of trust, respect, and fairness (henceforth, procedural justice measures) were dichotomized. Sociodemographic characteristics and rates of procedural justice responses were compared across groups. Multivariable logistic regressions adjusting for baseline characteristics were performed to (1) estimate associations of impairment and disability identity with perceptions of procedural justice and (2) explore factors associated with disability identification. Analyses applied survey weights. Results: Of 6126 individuals invited to participate, 1854 (30.3%) completed the survey. Thirty-two were excluded due to unreportable gender, for a final analytic sample of 1822 participants. Participants with impairments (n = 816; mean [SD] age, 48.1 [17.0] years; 51.2% women, 48.8% men) had worse perceptions on 7 of 10 procedural justice measures (crude) compared with those without impairments (n = 1006; mean [SD] age, 49.6 [18.1] years, 55.1% female, 44.9% male). Among respondents with impairments, those who did (n = 340) vs did not (n = 476) identify as disabled gave better ratings for clinician communication efforts (a lot of effort, 38.8% vs 31.0%) and having health goals understood (understood very or fairly well, 77.2% vs 70.1%) but gave worse ratings for respect (almost never felt inferior or talked down to, 66.1% vs 59.1%). Disability identification was associated with more reports of unfair treatment (31.0% vs 22.4%; adjusted odds ratio, 1.65; 95% CI, 1.12-2.42) and of being unafraid to ask questions or disagree (50.5% vs 40.1%; adjusted odds ratio, 1.51; 95% CI, 1.04-20.19). Income and employment were associated with disability identification. Conclusions and Relevance: In this cross-sectional survey study of US adults, health care perceptions differed between groups defined by impairment status and disability identity. These findings suggest that, alongside functional measures, health systems should capture disability identity to better address disparities for people with impairments.

Racial and Ethnic Differences in Advance Care Planning: Results of a Statewide Population-Based Survey.

BACKGROUND: Few studies have focused on racial and ethnic differences in advance care planning other than advance directives among population-based samples of adults across the lifespan. METHODS: Using data from a statewide random-digit dial telephone survey of adults 18 years or older (n = 1851), we investigated racial and ethnic differences in (1) designation of a healthcare agent (HCA); and (2) communication of goals, values, and preferences for end-of-life care with healthcare providers, a HCA, or other family members and friends. RESULTS: Less than half (44%, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 41.3%-47.0%) of all participants had named a HCA. In multivariable analyses, participants who identified as Hispanic (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] = 0.4, 95% CI = 0.2-0.7) or non-Hispanic other (aOR = 0.6, 95% CI = 0.4-0.9) were less likely than non-Hispanic whites to have named a HCA. Only 14.5% (95% CI = 12.6%-16.5%) of all participants had ever had a conversation with a healthcare provider about their end-of-life care wishes, with no differences by race/ethnicity. Over half (53.9%, 95% CI = 51.0%-56.8%) of all participants reported having had conversations with someone other than a healthcare provider about their end-of-life wishes. In multivariable analyses, non-Hispanic whites were more likely than Hispanics (aOR = 0.5, 95% CI = 0.3-0.7), black/African Americans (aOR = 0.5, 95% CI = 0.3-0.9), and non-Hispanic others (aOR = 0.7, 95% CI = 0.5-1.0) to report having had such conversations. CONCLUSIONS: Racial and ethnic minorities may be disadvantaged in the quality of care they receive if they have a serious illness and are unable to make decisions for themselves because most have not talked to anyone about their goals, values, or preferences for care.