Dataset Information

How Primary Care Clinicians Process Patient Death: Logistics, Emotions, and Opportunities for Structural Support.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Navigating the logistics and emotional processing of a patient's death is an inevitable part of many physicians' roles. While research has primarily examined how inpatient clinicians cope with patient loss, little work has explored how primary care clinicians (PCCs) handle patient death in the outpatient setting, and what support resources could help PCCs process loss.

Objective

To explore PCCs' experiences with the logistics and emotional processing of patient deaths and suggestions for supportive resources.

Design

Qualitative study using semi-structured interviews conducted between March and May 2023.

Participants

Recruitment emails were sent to 136 PCCs (physicians and nurse practitioners) at three San Francisco academic primary care clinics. Twelve clinicians participated in the study.

Approach

This study used a template analysis approach. Interview transcripts were analyzed in an iterative fashion to identify themes for how PCCs navigate patient death.

Results

Participants (n=12) described outpatient death notification as inconsistent, delayed, and rife with uncertainty regarding subsequent actions. They felt various emotions, notably sadness and guilt, especially with deaths of young, vulnerable patients or those from preventable illnesses. Participants identified strategies for emotional processing and recommended improvements including clear procedural guidance, peer debriefings, and formal acknowledgements of deceased patients.

Conclusions

Interviewing PCCs about their experiences following a patient death revealed key themes in logistical and emotional processing, and clinic resource recommendations to better support PCCs. Given the distinct characteristics of primary care-such as enduring patient relationships, greater isolation in ambulatory settings compared to inpatient environments, and rising burnout rates-enhancing guidance and support for PCCs is crucial to mitigate administrative burdens and grief after patient loss.

SUBMITTER: Erickson JA

PROVIDER: S-EPMC11347538 | biostudies-literature | 2024 Sep

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

How Primary Care Clinicians Process Patient Death: Logistics, Emotions, and Opportunities for Structural Support.

Erickson Jessica Alcalay JA O'Brien Bridget C BC Nouri Sarah S

Journal of general internal medicine 20240308 12

<h4>Background</h4>Navigating the logistics and emotional processing of a patient's death is an inevitable part of many physicians' roles. While research has primarily examined how inpatient clinicians cope with patient loss, little work has explored how primary care clinicians (PCCs) handle patient death in the outpatient setting, and what support resources could help PCCs process loss.<h4>Objective</h4>To explore PCCs' experiences with the logistics and emotional processing of patient deaths a ...[more]

PMID: 38459411

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundWomen with ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) report poor patient-clinician communication, and long-lasting confusion and anxiety about their treatment and prognosis. Research shows that patient-centred care (PCC) improves patient experience and outcomes. Little is known about the clinician experience of delivering PCC for DCIS. This study characterized communication challenges faced by clinicians, and interventions they need to improve PCC for DCIS.MethodsPurposive and snowball sampling were used to recruit Canadian clinicians by specialty, gender, years of experience, setting, and geographic location. Qualitative interviews were conducted by telephone. Data were analyzed using constant comparison. Findings were mapped to a cancer-specific, comprehensive PCC framework to identify opportunities for improvement.ResultsClinicians described approaches they used to address the PCC domains of fostering a healing relationship, exchanging information, and addressing emotions, but do not appear to be addressing the domains of managing uncertainty, involving women in making decisions, or enabling self-management. However, many clinicians described challenges or variable practices for all PCC domains but fostering a healing relationship. Clinicians vary in describing DCIS as cancer based on personal beliefs. When exchanging information, most find it difficult to justify treatment while assuring women of a good prognosis, and feel frustrated when women remain confused despite their efforts to explain it. While they recognize confusion and anxiety among women, clinicians said that patient navigators, social workers, support groups and high-quality information specific to DCIS are lacking. Despite these challenges, clinicians said they did not need or want communication interventions.ConclusionsFindings represent currently unmet opportunities by which to help clinicians enhance PCC for DCIS, and underscore the need for supplemental information and supportive care specific to DCIS. Future research is needed to develop and test communication interventions that improve PCC for DCIS. If effective and widely implemented, this may contribute to improved care experiences and outcomes for women diagnosed with and treated for DCIS.

Project description:BackgroundPatient-reported outcomes (PROs) are increasingly mandated in kidney care to incorporate patients' perspectives.ObjectivesWe assessed whether educational support for clinicians using electronic (e)PROs could enhance person-centered care.DesignA process evaluation, using a mixed methods longitudinal comparative concurrent design was undertaken of educational support to clinicians on routine use of ePROs. In two urban home dialysis clinics in Alberta, Canada, patients completed ePROs. At the implementation site, clinicians were provided with ePROs and clinician-oriented education via voluntary workshops. At the non-implementation site, neither were provided. Person-centered care was measured using the Patient Assessment of Chronic Illness Care-20 (PACIC-20).MethodsLongitudinal structural equation models (SEMs) compared change in overall PACIC scores. The interpretive description approach, using thematic analysis of qualitative data, further evaluated processes of implementation.ResultsData were collected from questionnaires completed by 543 patients, 4 workshops, 15 focus groups, and 37 interviews. There was no overall difference in person-centered care throughout the study, including after delivery of workshops. The longitudinal SEMs revealed substantial individual-level variability in overall PACIC trajectories. However, there was no improvement at the implementation site and no difference between the sites during both the pre- and post-workshop periods. Similar results were obtained for each PACIC domain. Qualitative analysis provided insights into why there was no substantial difference between sites: (1) clinicians wanted to see kidney symptoms, not quality of life, (2) workshops were tailored to clinicians' educational needs, not patients' needs, and (3) variable use of ePRO data by clinicians.ConclusionTraining clinicians on use of ePROs is complex and likely only part of what is required to enhance person-centered care.RegistrationNCT03149328. https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03149328.

Project description:Background and aimSelf-management support is an integral part of current chronic care guidelines. The success of self-management interventions varies between individual patients, suggesting a need for tailored self-management support. Understanding the role of patient factors in the current decision making of health professionals can support future tailoring of self-management interventions. The aim of this study is to identify the relative importance of patient factors in health professionals' decision making regarding self-management support.MethodA factorial survey was presented to primary care physicians and nurses. The survey consisted of clinical vignettes (case descriptions), in which 11 patient factors were systematically varied. Each care provider received a set of 12 vignettes. For each vignette, they decided whether they would give this patient self-management support and whether they expected this support to be successful. The associations between respondent decisions and patient factors were explored using ordered logit regression.ResultsThe survey was completed by 60 general practitioners and 80 nurses. Self-management support was unlikely to be provided in a third of the vignettes. The most important patient factor in the decision to provide self-management support as well as in the expectation that self-management support would be successful was motivation, followed by patient-provider relationship and illness perception. Other factors, such as depression or anxiety, education level, self-efficacy and social support, had a small impact on decisions. Disease, disease severity, knowledge of disease, and age were relatively unimportant factors.ConclusionThis is the first study to explore the relative importance of patient factors in decision making and the expectations regarding the provision of self-management support to chronic disease patients. By far, the most important factor considered was patient's motivation; unmotivated patients were less likely to receive self-management support. Future tailored interventions should incorporate strategies to enhance motivation in unmotivated patients. Furthermore, care providers should be better equipped to promote motivational change in their patients.

Project description:Prompt provision of post-exposure-prophylaxis (PEP) including vaccines and rabies immunoglobulin (RIG) to persons bitten by suspect rabid dogs is a key strategy to eliminating human deaths from dog-mediated rabies in Kenya by 2030. We assessed the availability, forecasting and supply chain logistics for rabies PEP in Kenya, compared with the system used for vaccines in the expanded program of immunization (routine vaccines). Semi-structured questionnaires capturing data on forecasting, procurement, distribution, cold chain and storage, monitoring and reporting for routine vaccines and rabies vaccines and RIG were administered to 35 key personnel at the national, county, sub-county and health facility levels in five counties. Results showed large variability in PEP availability (stockouts ranged from 3 to 36 weeks per year) with counties implementing rabies elimination activities having shorter stockouts. PEP is administered intramuscularly using the 5-dose Essen regimen (day 0, 3, 7, 14 and 28). PEP costs to bite patients were reported to range from 10 to 15 US dollars per dose; RIG was seldom available. A less robust supply and logistics infrastructure is used for rabies PEP compared to routine vaccines. Forecasting and monitoring mechanisms for rabies PEP was poor in the study counties. The supply of vaccines from the national to the sub-national level is mainly through two government agencies and a private agency. Since government decentralization, the National Vaccine and Immunization Program has remained as the main supplier of the routine vaccines, playing a lesser role in the supply of rabies biologicals. Adoption of the dose-saving intradermal route for PEP administration, reduction of PEP costs to patients, and placing rabies vaccines within the routine vaccines supply and logistics system would significantly improve PEP availability and accessibility to persons at risk of rabies; a critical step to achieving elimination of human deaths from rabies.

Project description:BackgroundA quality improvement collaborative, often used by the Institute for Healthcare Improvement, is used to educate healthcare professionals and improve healthcare at the same time. However, no prior research has been done on the knowledge and skills healthcare professionals need to achieve improvements or the extent to which quality improvement collaboratives help enhance both knowledge and skills. Our research focused on quality improvement collaboratives aiming to improve patient logistics and tried to identify which knowledge and skills are required and to what extent these were enhanced during the QIC.MethodsWe defined skills important for logistic improvements in a three-phase Delphi study. Based on the Delphi results we made a questionnaire. We surveyed participants in a national quality improvement collaborative to assess the skills rated as 1) important, 2) available and 3) improved during the collaborative. At two sense-making meetings, experts reflected on our findings and hypothesized on how to improve (logistics) collaboratives.ResultsThe Delphi study found 18 skills relevant for reducing patient access time and 21 for reducing throughput time. All skills retrieved from the Delphi study were scored as 'important' in the survey. Teams especially lacked soft skills connected to project and change management. Analytical skills increased the most, while more reflexive skills needed for the primary goal of the collaborative (reduce access and throughput times) increased modestly. At two sense-making meetings, attendees suggested four improvements for a quality improvement collaborative: 1) shift the focus to project- and change management skills; 2) focus more on knowledge transfer to colleagues; 3) teach participants to adapt the taught principles to their own situations; and 4) foster intra-project reflexive learning to translate gained insights to other projects (inter-project learning).ConclusionsOur findings seem to suggest that Quality collaboratives could benefit if more attention is paid to the transfer of 'soft skills' (e.g. change, project management and communication skills) and reflexive skills (e.g. adjusting logistics principles to specific situations and inter-project translation of experiences).

Dataset Information

How Primary Care Clinicians Process Patient Death: Logistics, Emotions, and Opportunities for Structural Support.

Background

Objective

Design

Participants

Approach

Results

Conclusions

Publications

How Primary Care Clinicians Process Patient Death: Logistics, Emotions, and Opportunities for Structural Support.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets