User login
SAN FRANCISCO – Despite training recommendations, half of physicians and less than a third of nurses surveyed in adult intensive care units at 56 California hospitals reported receiving formal training in talking with patients and families about the end of life.
A 2008 consensus statement by the American College of Critical Care Medicine included a recommendation for end-of-life communication skills training for clinicians to improve the care of patients dying in ICUs ((Crit. Care Med. 2008;36:953-63).
Dr. Matthew H.R. Anstey and his associates approached 149 California hospitals to gauge the extent of implementation of this recommendation. At 56 hospitals, doctors and nurses who work in adult ICUs voluntarily completed an anonymous web-based survey. Eighty-four percent of the 1,363 respondents were nurses, he reported in a poster presentation at the Critical Care Congress, sponsored by the Society for Critical Care Medicine.
Overall, 32% of the respondents said they had received formal training in communication skills. A significantly higher percentage of doctors had undergone training (50%) compared with nurses (29%), said Dr. Anstey, who is currently a lecturer in anesthesia at Harvard Medical School, Boston.
Sixty-six percent of all respondents agreed that "nurses are present during the communication of end-of-life information to the family" at their institution. Nurses were significantly more likely to agree with this statement (69%) than were doctors (52%).
Both doctors and nurses were very supportive of the idea of formal communication training for ICU providers. When asked about possible strategies to reduce inappropriate care for ICU patients, 91% of respondents said communication training would have a positive effect, Dr. Anstey reported.
This could be accomplished by requiring ICU physicians to complete a communication training module for ongoing credentialing, he said in an e-mail interview. Either individual hospitals could require this as part of credentialing for privileges to work in the ICU, or state medical boards could require it, similar to the California Medical Board’s requirement that physicians obtain some continuing medical education in pain management, he suggested.
The characteristics of participating hospitals were similar to those of nonparticipating hospitals in the sizes of the hospitals and ICUs, their regional location in California, and the proportions of hospitals that are teaching facilities.
The 93 nonparticipating hospitals were significantly more likely to be for-profit hospitals (59%) compared with participating hospitals (7%), and significantly less likely to be part of a hospital system containing more than three hospitals (54%) compared with participating hospitals (75%).
Dr. Anstey reported having no financial disclosures. His research was in conjunction with a Commonwealth Fund Harkness Fellowship in Health Care Policy and Practice for which he was placed at Kaiser Permanente in California.
Dr. Paul A. Selecky, FCCP, comments: Physicians are notorious about not doing a good job of communicating with patients in general, and when you focus on a vital subject as end-of-life care, it is of even greater importance. The findings in this study are not surprising. The unanswered question is how to fix it.
On Twitter @sherryboschert
SAN FRANCISCO – Despite training recommendations, half of physicians and less than a third of nurses surveyed in adult intensive care units at 56 California hospitals reported receiving formal training in talking with patients and families about the end of life.
A 2008 consensus statement by the American College of Critical Care Medicine included a recommendation for end-of-life communication skills training for clinicians to improve the care of patients dying in ICUs ((Crit. Care Med. 2008;36:953-63).
Dr. Matthew H.R. Anstey and his associates approached 149 California hospitals to gauge the extent of implementation of this recommendation. At 56 hospitals, doctors and nurses who work in adult ICUs voluntarily completed an anonymous web-based survey. Eighty-four percent of the 1,363 respondents were nurses, he reported in a poster presentation at the Critical Care Congress, sponsored by the Society for Critical Care Medicine.
Overall, 32% of the respondents said they had received formal training in communication skills. A significantly higher percentage of doctors had undergone training (50%) compared with nurses (29%), said Dr. Anstey, who is currently a lecturer in anesthesia at Harvard Medical School, Boston.
Sixty-six percent of all respondents agreed that "nurses are present during the communication of end-of-life information to the family" at their institution. Nurses were significantly more likely to agree with this statement (69%) than were doctors (52%).
Both doctors and nurses were very supportive of the idea of formal communication training for ICU providers. When asked about possible strategies to reduce inappropriate care for ICU patients, 91% of respondents said communication training would have a positive effect, Dr. Anstey reported.
This could be accomplished by requiring ICU physicians to complete a communication training module for ongoing credentialing, he said in an e-mail interview. Either individual hospitals could require this as part of credentialing for privileges to work in the ICU, or state medical boards could require it, similar to the California Medical Board’s requirement that physicians obtain some continuing medical education in pain management, he suggested.
The characteristics of participating hospitals were similar to those of nonparticipating hospitals in the sizes of the hospitals and ICUs, their regional location in California, and the proportions of hospitals that are teaching facilities.
The 93 nonparticipating hospitals were significantly more likely to be for-profit hospitals (59%) compared with participating hospitals (7%), and significantly less likely to be part of a hospital system containing more than three hospitals (54%) compared with participating hospitals (75%).
Dr. Anstey reported having no financial disclosures. His research was in conjunction with a Commonwealth Fund Harkness Fellowship in Health Care Policy and Practice for which he was placed at Kaiser Permanente in California.
Dr. Paul A. Selecky, FCCP, comments: Physicians are notorious about not doing a good job of communicating with patients in general, and when you focus on a vital subject as end-of-life care, it is of even greater importance. The findings in this study are not surprising. The unanswered question is how to fix it.
On Twitter @sherryboschert
SAN FRANCISCO – Despite training recommendations, half of physicians and less than a third of nurses surveyed in adult intensive care units at 56 California hospitals reported receiving formal training in talking with patients and families about the end of life.
A 2008 consensus statement by the American College of Critical Care Medicine included a recommendation for end-of-life communication skills training for clinicians to improve the care of patients dying in ICUs ((Crit. Care Med. 2008;36:953-63).
Dr. Matthew H.R. Anstey and his associates approached 149 California hospitals to gauge the extent of implementation of this recommendation. At 56 hospitals, doctors and nurses who work in adult ICUs voluntarily completed an anonymous web-based survey. Eighty-four percent of the 1,363 respondents were nurses, he reported in a poster presentation at the Critical Care Congress, sponsored by the Society for Critical Care Medicine.
Overall, 32% of the respondents said they had received formal training in communication skills. A significantly higher percentage of doctors had undergone training (50%) compared with nurses (29%), said Dr. Anstey, who is currently a lecturer in anesthesia at Harvard Medical School, Boston.
Sixty-six percent of all respondents agreed that "nurses are present during the communication of end-of-life information to the family" at their institution. Nurses were significantly more likely to agree with this statement (69%) than were doctors (52%).
Both doctors and nurses were very supportive of the idea of formal communication training for ICU providers. When asked about possible strategies to reduce inappropriate care for ICU patients, 91% of respondents said communication training would have a positive effect, Dr. Anstey reported.
This could be accomplished by requiring ICU physicians to complete a communication training module for ongoing credentialing, he said in an e-mail interview. Either individual hospitals could require this as part of credentialing for privileges to work in the ICU, or state medical boards could require it, similar to the California Medical Board’s requirement that physicians obtain some continuing medical education in pain management, he suggested.
The characteristics of participating hospitals were similar to those of nonparticipating hospitals in the sizes of the hospitals and ICUs, their regional location in California, and the proportions of hospitals that are teaching facilities.
The 93 nonparticipating hospitals were significantly more likely to be for-profit hospitals (59%) compared with participating hospitals (7%), and significantly less likely to be part of a hospital system containing more than three hospitals (54%) compared with participating hospitals (75%).
Dr. Anstey reported having no financial disclosures. His research was in conjunction with a Commonwealth Fund Harkness Fellowship in Health Care Policy and Practice for which he was placed at Kaiser Permanente in California.
Dr. Paul A. Selecky, FCCP, comments: Physicians are notorious about not doing a good job of communicating with patients in general, and when you focus on a vital subject as end-of-life care, it is of even greater importance. The findings in this study are not surprising. The unanswered question is how to fix it.
On Twitter @sherryboschert
Major finding: Half of doctors and 29% of nurses in ICUs said they had received formal training in end-of-life communications.
Data source: A voluntary web-based survey of 1,363 doctors and nurses working in adult ICUs in 56 California hospitals.
Disclosures: Dr. Anstey reported having no financial disclosures. His research was in conjunction with a Commonwealth Fund Harkness Fellowship in Health Care Policy and Practice, for which he was placed at Kaiser Permanente in California.
