Communication Skill Training Levels among Critical Care Doctors in India.

Medical training programs outline the necessity of communication skills but there is likely a dearth of teaching at the bedside in part due to prioritization of other skills over communication or due to lack of opportunity. In India, the majority of critical care units are open in nature, and communication lead is likely to be taken by the primary specialty rather than the critical care doctors themselves. In the majority of the cases, the root cause analysis shows a lack of clear communication as a barrier. The sicker the patient, the higher the chance for anxiety and miscommunication among healthcare professionals as well as the family. The current project aims to find the training levels in Indian critical care settings and draw conclusions to see if there are avenues to improve the process. This study was based on a web-based questionnaire that was sent out to 1,000 critical care doctors across India. Educational experience and learning of communication techniques/concepts were assessed using a modified educational experience and attitudes questionnaire. Baseline demographic data were obtained and results were tabulated across 193 complete responses, which consistently showed a disparity in perceived levels of competence across different mandatory aspects of communication. Further, we find that though communication is a trainable skill, the mode of training has been largely reactive and has remained so for the last 20 years hinting at poor training in communication. Our survey suggests an urgent need for improvement of the training processes to reduce the burden of ethical, clinical, and legal dilemmas in critical care. How to cite this article: Gopaldas JA, Narayanaswamy N, Chandregowda NP. Communication Skill Training Levels among Critical Care Doctors in India. Indian J Crit Care Med 2023;27(8):567-571.

Family Meetings in Palliative Care: Benefits and Barriers.

OPINION STATEMENT: Specialists in palliative care view the family meeting as a means to engage patients and their families in a serious illness discussion that may clarify the values of patients and caregivers, provide information, determine care preferences, and identify sources of illness-related distress and burden. The family meeting is considered the best practice for achieving patient- and family-centered care in palliative care. Although studies of the family meeting are limited, those extant suggest that these interventions may reduce caregiver distress, mitigate the perception of unmet needs, prepare family members for caregiving, and improve bereavement outcomes. The experience of palliative care specialists further suggests that the family meeting may reinforce the therapeutic alliance with families, promote consensus, and reduce the need for ad hoc meetings. Physician satisfaction may be enhanced when the treatment plan includes the opportunity to show empathy and see the family's perspective-core elements of the clinical approach to the family meeting. In the oncology setting, the potential to achieve these positive outcomes supports the integration of the family meeting into practice. Clinical skills for the planning and running of family meetings should be promoted with consideration of a standardized protocol for routine family meetings at critical points during the illness and its treatment using an interdisciplinary team. Further research is needed to refine understanding of the indications for the family meeting and determine the optimal timing, structure, and staffing models. Outcome studies employing validated measures are needed to better characterize the impact of family meetings on patient and family distress and on treatment outcomes. Although better evidence is needed to guide the future integration of the family meeting into oncology practice, current best practices can be recommended based on available data and the extensive observations of palliative care specialists.

Parental perspective: Factors that played a role in facilitating or impeding the parents' understanding of their child's developmental diagnostic assessment.

BACKGROUND: Full parental understanding of a child's diagnosis of a developmental disability is critical to be able to ensure the best health outcome for their child. Yet factors that parents perceived as influencing their comprehension during the final diagnostic meeting have not been well identified. METHOD: This study used a qualitative interpretive description approach. Seventeen parents were interviewed who received a child's developmental diagnosis from one of the clinical multidisciplinary teams located in northern British Columbia. The interviews focused on the factors that played a role in facilitating or impeding the parents' understanding of their child's diagnosis, and on the identification of factors that influenced the way in which the child's clinical recommendations were pursued. RESULTS: Two overarching themes with nine subthemes emerged from parents' reported experiences of receiving their child's developmental diagnosis. The themes and subthemes included (a) clinical encounter (including the subthemes structural considerations, professional diversity and new insights, questions regarding the assessment process, and validation) and (b) manner of the delivery of the diagnosis (emotional impact, impact on parenting practices, professionalism, professional language, and quantity of information). CONCLUSIONS: Parents' accounts established and clarified the positive and negative parental determinants that aided or challenged their ability to understand their child's developmental diagnosis during the final clinical interaction with the multidisciplinary team.

Reduction of healthcare costs by implementing palliative family conference with the decision to withdraw life-sustaining treatments.

BACKGROUND: Evidence regarding the impact of early palliative family conferences (PFCs) and decision to withdraw life-sustaining treatment (DTW) on healthcare costs in an intensive care unit (ICU) setting is inconsistent. METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed patients who died in an ICU from 2013 to 2016. PFCs held within 7 days after ICU admission and DTWs were verified by reviewing medical records and claims data. Comparisons were first made between patients with and without DTWs, and secondly, between DTW patients with and without PFCs within 7 days. Propensity score matching methods were used to examine the difference in costs between patients with and without DTWs and PFCs within 7 days. RESULTS: Of the 579 patients included, those with DTWs (n = 73) had a longer ICU stay than those without (n = 506) (12.9 ± 7.1 vs. 8.4 ± 9.6 days, p < 0.001). The DTW patients were more likely to have a "do-not-resuscitate" order (p < 0.001) and PFCs within 7 days (p < 0.001) and had lower healthcare costs (USD 7358 ± 4116 vs. 8669 ± 9,535, p = 0.038). After matching, healthcare cost reduction for patients with DTWs, compared with those without DTWs, was USD 3467 [95% CI, 915-6019] (p < 0.001). Compared with DTW patients without PFCs within 7 days, the costs for DTW patients with PFCs within 7 days further reduced to USD 3042 [95%CI, 1358-4725] (p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Palliative family conferences held within 7 days after ICU admission with decisions to withdraw life-sustaining treatments significantly lowered healthcare costs.

Nurses' contribution to end-of-life family conferences in critical care: A Delphi study.

BACKGROUND: Family conferences (FCs) in the intensive care unit play an important role in reducing the psychological burden of patients' families at the end of life. However, no studies have clarified the specific roles and contributions of nurses related to FCs for terminally ill patients in critical care and their families. AIMS AND OBJECTIVES: To clarify nurses' contribution to FCs for terminally ill patients in critical care and their families and examine the priority of each item. DESIGN: A modified Delphi method was used. METHODS: This study consisted of two phases. In phase 1, an initial list was developed based on a literature review, individual interviews, and a focus group interview. Phase 2 involved two rounds of the Delphi survey. Practitioners (N = 55) from hospitals across Japan were recruited to the Expert Panel for phase 2. They were asked to rate each nurse's contribution in terms of its importance using a 9-point Likert scale (1 being "not important at all" to 9 being "very important"). Fifty participants responded to round 1 of the survey, and 46 participants completed round 2. If at least 80% of the panellists chose an importance level of 7 or higher, the item was considered "important". RESULTS: The 65 items of the potential list were classified into three domains: preparation (16 items), discussion and facilitating meaning during a FC (32 items), and follow up after a FC (17 items). The expert panel determined that, of 65 items, 49 items on the proposed list of nurses' contribution were considered important. CONCLUSIONS: This study clarified nurses' contribution to FCs, with consensus on their importance by expert nurses. RELEVANCE TO CLINICAL PRACTICE: This study could be useful for improving and ensuring the quality of nurses' contribution to FCs and promoting collaboration between nurses and other medical professionals.

What is the evidence for conducting palliative care family meetings? A systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Structured family meeting procedures and guidelines suggest that these forums enhance family-patient-team communication in the palliative care inpatient setting. However, the vulnerability of palliative patients and the resources required to implement family meetings in accordance with recommended guidelines make better understanding about the effectiveness of this type of intervention an important priority. Aim and design: This systematic review examines the evidence supporting family meetings as a strategy to address the needs of palliative patients and their families. The review conforms to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses Statement. DATA SOURCES: Six medical and psychosocial databases and "CareSearch," a palliative care-specific database, were used to identify studies reporting empirical data, published in English in peer-reviewed journals from 1980 to March 2015. Book chapters, expert opinion, and gray literature were excluded. The Cochrane Collaboration Tool assessed risk of bias. RESULTS: Of the 5051 articles identified, 13 met the inclusion criteria: 10 quantitative and 3 qualitative studies. There was low-level evidence to support family meetings. Only two quantitative pre- and post-studies used a validated palliative care family outcome measure with both studies reporting significant results post-family meetings. Four other quantitative studies reported significant results using non-validated measures. CONCLUSION: Despite the existence of consensus-based family meeting guidelines, there is a paucity of evidence to support family meetings in the inpatient palliative care setting. Further research using more robust designs, validated outcome measures, and an economic analysis are required to build the family meeting evidence before they are routinely adopted into clinical practice.

Examining family meetings at end of life: The model of practice in a hospice inpatient unit.

OBJECTIVE: Our purpose was to rigorously examine the nature of family meetings as conducted in an inpatient hospice care unit in order to generate an inductive theoretical model. METHOD: In this two-phase project, we first interviewed eight members of the interdisciplinary care team who participated in multiple family meetings each week. Interview questions explored why and how they conducted family meetings. Using an observation template created from these interview data, we subsequently conducted ethnographic observations during family meetings. Using the methods of grounded theory, our findings were synthesized into a theoretical model depicting the structure and process of formal family meetings within this setting. RESULTS: The core of the family meeting was characterized by cognitive and affective elements aimed at supporting the family and facilitating quality care by clarifying the past, easing the present, and protecting the future. This inductive model was subsequently found to be highly aligned with a sense of coherence, an important influence on coping, and adaptation to the stress of a life-limiting illness. SIGNIFICANCE OF RESULTS: Provider communication with family members is particularly critical during advanced illness and end-of-life care. The National Consensus Project clinical practice guidelines for quality palliative care list regular family meetings among the recommended practices for excellent communication during end-of-life care, but do not provide specific guidance on how and when to provide such meetings. Our findings provide a theoretical model that can inform the design of a family meeting to address family members' needs for meaningful and contextualized information, validation of their important contributions to care, and preparation for the patient's death.

An Authentic Learning Experience for Medical Students on Conducting a Family Meeting.

BACKGROUND: Medical schools often lack training for serious illness conversations with patients and caregivers. We developed a curriculum in our elective Transitioning to Residency medical student course, focused on end-of-life discussions. This paper provides an overview of the curriculum and outcomes from an advanced preparation assignment and student evaluations. METHODS: The curriculum included a "hands-on" skills session delivered via Zoom. Small groups of students (3-4) assumed roles on an interprofessional team (Intensivist, cardiologist, nurse, social worker). They met with two adult children, played by palliative/geriatric clinical staff, of a 79-year-old patient with a complex cardiac history and on ventilator support to address: (1) the patient's status, (2) goals of care, and (3) withdrawal of ventilator support. Using a flipped classroom format, students reviewed the case, role assignments, a family meeting webinar, and other materials in advance. They completed a survey reflecting on the upcoming family meeting. Afterwards, students evaluated the session. RESULTS: Eighty students (19.6%) participated in 2021 and 2022. The reflection survey shows students agreed the patient's prognosis was poor and decision-making should be shared. They anticipated difficulty accepting prognosis, discordance between family members and/or the team, and challenging emotions. Results show a difference between the anticipated roles of the assigned physicians compared to the other disciplines. Post-session evaluations ranged from 4.7 to 4.9/5 (1 = strongly disagree, 5 = strongly agree). CONCLUSION: The pre-session reflection helped students prepare for their roles. The training was well received, and we hope it prepares students to take on serious illness discussions during residency.

Interprofessional Interventions to Improve Serious Illness Communication in the Intensive Care Unit: A Scoping Review.

Serious illness communication is fundamental to the provision of quality care for patients in the intensive care unit (ICU). Evidence suggests that including interprofessional team members in such communication is beneficial. This scoping review--conducted in accordance with Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines-maps existing evidence regarding interprofessional interventions to improve serious illness communication in the ICU. The review yielded 14 studies for inclusion, which were organized by 3 thematic categories of strategies implemented: training curriculum, scheduled meetings, and liaison role. Most used a combination of intervention strategies. Outcome measures varied across the studies but could be broadly categorized as patient/family-focused, provider-focused, or systems-focused. Great heterogeneity between studies exists. More research is needed.

Integrating the Choosing Wisely 5 Questions into Family Meetings in the Intensive Care Unit: A Randomized Controlled Trial Investigating the Effect on Family Perceived Involvement in Decision-Making.

Family members often act as surrogate decision makers for patients in the intensive care unit (ICU). The use of printed prompts may assist with families feeling empowered to fulfill this role. Prospective, randomized controlled trial in 3 ICUs in Western Australia. In the intervention arm, families received the Choosing Wisely 5 questions as printed prompts prior to a family meeting, and the control arm did not receive prompts. The primary outcome was family perceived involvement in decision-making. Outcomes were measured using a survey. Sixty families participated in the study. The majority of families (87.1% control, 79.3% intervention; P = .334) reported feeling "very included" in decision-making. There was no difference in secondary outcomes, including minimal uptake of the questions by the intervention arm. This has been the first randomized trial evaluating the use of a decision-making tool for families in the ICU. Despite ceiling effects in outcome measures, these results suggest room for future study of the Choosing Wisely 5 questions in the ICU.

Establishing Goals of Care.

Establishing goals of care (GOC) is a crucial component of a patient's treatment plan. The need for better physician-patient communication in this area has been recognized for decades, yet several gaps remain. Challenges exist for both physician and patient. Physicians should pursue a patient-led approach, exercise cultural competency, and use various communication techniques to guide patients when establishing GOC.

Family-clinician shared decision making in intensive care units: Cluster randomized trial in China.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate if a Family-Clinician Shared Decision-Making (FCSDM) intervention benefits patients, families and intensive care units (ICUs) clinicians. METHODS: Six ICUs in China were allocated to intervention or usual care. 548 patients with critical illness, 548 family members and 387 ICU clinicians were included into the study. Structured FCSDM family meetings were held in the intervention group. Scales of SSDM, HADS, QoL2 and CSACD were used to assess families' satisfaction and distress, patients' quality of life, and clinicians' collaboration respectively. RESULTS: Comparing the intervention group with the control group at post-intervention, there were significant differences in the families' satisfaction (P = 0.0001), depression level (P = 0.005), and patients' quality of life (P = 0.0007). The clinicians' mean CSCAD score was more positive in the intervention group than controls (P < 0.05). There was no significant between-group differences on ICU daily medical cost, but the intervention group demonstrated shorter number of days' stay in ICU (P = 0.0004). CONCLUSION: The FCSDM intervention improved families' satisfaction and depression, shortened patients' duration of ICU stay, and enhanced ICU clinicians' collaboration. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: Further improvement and promotion of the FCSDM model are needed to provide more evidence to this field in China.

Intervention Codesign in the Pediatric Cardiac Intensive Care Unit to Improve Family Meetings.

CONTEXT: Family meetings are encouraged in the pediatric cardiac intensive care unit (CICU) with the expectation of supporting parental shared decision-making (SDM). However, they often fall short of this goal. Additionally, interprofessional team and family meetings are dominated by input from physicians, under-utilizing the skillset of the full clinical team. OBJECTIVES: 1) To determine feasibility of a codesign process to optimize the preparation of the interprofessional team and parents for conducting SDM-oriented family meetings in the CICU, and 2) to describe the resulting elements of the intervention including new support documents for the team and family to prepare for the meeting, team member roles in the meeting, and optimization of communication skills. METHODS: Experience-based codesign was used with CICU clinicians and parents of children hospitalized in the CICU to develop an intervention at a single institution. Sessions were audio recorded and transcribed and analyzed using modified grounded theory. Participants were surveyed about their engagement in the codesign process to assess feasibility. RESULTS: Fifteen professionals and six parents enrolled in the codesign and endorsed engagement in the process and importance of the intervention elements. Participants identified the benefit of complementary parent and team preparation for family meetings noting five distinct types of meetings that occurred frequently. Documents, processes, and skills training were developed to improve interprofessional teamwork regarding shared decision making and support of parents in family meetings. CONCLUSION: A codesign of an intervention with clinicians and parents in the CICU is a feasible and resulted in an intervention with broad support among clinicians in the CICU.

Impact of Structured and Scheduled Family Meetings on Satisfaction in Patients Admitted to Hospitalist Service.

Effective communication is key to patient satisfaction. Family meetings been shown to be effective in other settings such as critical care and palliative medicine. We evaluated the impact of scheduled and structured family meetings on patients admitted to the hospitalist service in terms of satisfaction with care delivery. More patients in the intervention group reported better understanding of their diagnosis, treatment plan, medications, and discharge plan. Based on these results, we advocate for structured and scheduled family meetings to be implemented as a communication tool for selected patients on the hospital medicine service to improve patient experience and satisfaction.

Patients Receiving Palliative Care and Their Families' Experiences of Participating in a "Patient-Centered Family Meeting": A Qualitative Substudy of the Valuing Opinions, Individual Communication, and Experience Feasibility Trial.

Background: Family meetings are used in palliative care to facilitate discussion between palliative patients, their families, and the clinical team. However, few studies have undertaken qualitative assessment of the impact of family meetings on patients and their families. Objectives: To explore inpatients receiving palliative care and their families' experiences of participation in a patient-centered family meeting ("Meeting"), where the patient sets the Meeting agenda. Design: This qualitative study used the constant comparative method for thematic content analysis of the data. Setting/Participants: The setting was a specialist palliative care (SPC) inpatient unit in Australia. Nine palliative care inpatients and nine family members were interviewed. Measurements: Semistructured interviews were used evaluate the patients' and their families' experiences and perceptions of the Meeting. Results: Three overarching themes described the experiences of participating in a patient-focused family meeting, namely that the Meeting: (1) provides a forum for inpatients receiving SPC to speak openly about their end-of-life concerns, clarify issues, and is of comfort to patients; (2) provides the family members with a voice, and an opportunity to discuss their concerns and have their needs addressed; and (3) helps to ensure that everyone is "on the same page" and patient care plans can be discussed. Conclusions: These Meetings are a potentially effective means of supporting certain palliative care patients and their families to articulate, confront, and address end-of-life issues in the presence of the interdisciplinary team. It is important to undertake further research to further examine the evidence for this Meeting model and to identify the patients and families who would most benefit from this type of Meeting.

"Standing Shoulder to Shoulder to Tell the Family What Was Really Going On": A Qualitative Study Exploring Palliative Care Clinicians' Perceptions of "Patient-Centered Family Meetings".

Background: Family meetings are often conducted in palliative care, but there is no universal agreed or accepted model. A new model of Patient-Centered Family Meetings is proposed whereby the patient sets the agenda. Aim: To seek palliative care clinicians' perceptions and experiences of Patient-Centered Family Meetings ("Meetings") and their acceptability and feasibility in the inpatient specialist palliative care setting. Design: A qualitative study used semistructured interviews. Theoretical and procedural direction was taken from grounded theory with thematic content analysis using the constant comparative method. Setting/Participants: Interviews were conducted with clinicians (n = 10) at the intervention site who had participated in a Meeting. Results: Four themes were identified: (1) a patient-set agenda gives patients a "voice"; (2) a patient-set agenda and the Meeting model enhances clinicians' understanding of patients and families; (3) the Meeting model was perceived to be acceptable; and (4) the Meeting model was perceived to be only feasible for selected patients. Conclusion: Clinicians perceived that a patient-set meeting agenda with defined questions enhanced their knowledge of the patient's issues and their understanding of the patient and their family's needs. The patients' most important issues often differed from the clinicians' expectations of what might be important to individual patients. There were contrasting views about the acceptability and feasibility of these Meetings as standard practice due to clinician time constraints and the Meeting not being required or relevant to all patients. Given the perceived benefits, the identification of patients and families who would most benefit is an important research priority.

Family Meeting Training Curriculum: A Multimedia Approach With Real-Time Experiential Learning for Residents.

Introduction: Effective communication skills are widely recognized as an important aspect of medical practice. Several tools and curricula for communications training in medicine have been proposed, with increasing attention to the need for an evidence-based curriculum for communication with families of patients in the intensive care unit (ICU). Methods: We developed a curriculum for internal medicine residents rotating through the medical ICU that consisted of a didactic session introducing basic and advanced communication skills, computer-based scenarios exposing participants to commonly encountered dilemmas in simulated family meetings, and experiential learning through the opportunity to identify potential communication challenges prior to facilitating actual family meetings, followed by structured peer debriefing. Seventeen residents participated in the study. Results: We administered the Communication Skills Attitude Scale to participants before and after participation in the curriculum, as well as a global self-efficacy survey, with some items based on the Common Ground rating instrument, at the end of the academic year. There were no significant changes in either positive or negative attitudes toward learning communication skills. Resident self-perceived efficacy in several content domains improved but did not reach statistical significance. Discussion: Our curriculum provided interactive preparatory training and an authentic experience for learners to develop skills in family meeting facilitation. Learners responded favorably to the curriculum. Use of the Family Meeting Behavioral Skills (FMBS) tool helped residents and educators identify and focus on specific skills related to the family meeting. Next steps include gathering and analyzing data from the FMBS tool.

Interprofessional Teamwork During Family Meetings in the Pediatric Cardiac Intensive Care Unit.

CONTEXT: Parents of children in the pediatric cardiac intensive care unit (CICU) report inadequate communication and a lack of empathy during conversations with their clinicians. OBJECTIVE: To assess quantitatively and qualitatively the contributions made by team members of different professions in communicating with parents during family meetings. METHODS: Prospective observational study. The study was conducted in the pediatric CICU at the Children's Hospital of Philadelphia. Subjects were members of the interprofessional team attending family meetings for patients admitted to the CICU longer than two weeks. We used quantitative conversation attribution and coding to compare durations of attendee contributions and contribution type by professional role. The SCOPE codebook and other quantitative codes drawn from best practices in family meetings were used to measure communication behaviors. A qualitative analysis of nurses' and social workers' contributions was used to identify themes not otherwise captured. RESULTS: Across 10 meetings, physicians spoke for an average of 78.1% (SD 10.7%) of each meeting, nonphysicians 9.6% (SD 7.8%), and parents 17.4% (SD 12.2%). Parental understanding was assessed an average of 0.2 (SD 0.4) times per meeting. Parents expressed emotion an average of 4.2 times per meeting (SD 7.1), and the clinical team responded empathetically 2.2 times per meeting (SD 4.3). All clinician empathic responses were a minority of their overall contributions. Conversation was almost exclusively between physicians and families until physicians indicated other team members could contribute. CONCLUSIONS: Coordination of team members' roles in the meetings may improve parental engagement necessary for decision-making and empathic responses that are often missed.

A National VA Palliative Care Quality Improvement Project for Improving Intensive Care Unit Family Meetings (ICU-FMs).

BACKGROUND: We sought to increase intensive care unit-family meeting (ICU-FM) documentation in the electronic health record in Veterans Affairs (VA) hospitals. MEASURES: Primary outcomes were proportion of VA decedents with ICU-FM and Bereaved Family Survey-Performance Measure (BFS-PM) scores of "excellent." INTERVENTION: Quality improvement (QI) project, clinical champion, and ICU-FM templates were implemented in nine participating VA facilities. ICU-FMs and BFS-PM were determined in decedents between 2011 and 2018. OUTCOMES: ICU-FM increased from 3% to 28% in participating vs. 5% to 6% in nonparticipating facilities over time. Participating facilities were five-fold more likely to have ICU-FMs among ICU decedents (OR = 5.69, [4.45-7.28]). Facility-wide excellent BFS-PM scores increased by 19% in participating vs. nonparticipating facilities at the end of the observation period (OR = 1.19, [1.10-1.30]), but no difference between groups was observed in patients who died in the ICU. CONCLUSIONS: Increasing ICU-FMs is necessary but not sufficient to improve family-reported satisfaction after an ICU death.