OBJECTIVE: Communication about patients values, goals, and prognosis in serious illness (serious illness communication) is a cornerstone of person-centered care yet difficult to implement in practice. As part of Serious Illness Care Program implementation in five health systems, we studied the clinical culture-related factors that supported or impeded improvement in serious illness conversations. METHODS: Qualitative analysis of semi-structured interviews of clinical leaders, implementation teams, and frontline champions. RESULTS: We completed 30 interviews across palliative care, oncology, primary care, and hospital medicine. Participants identified four culture-related domains that influenced serious illness communication improvement: (1) clinical paradigms; (2) interprofessional empowerment; (3) perceived conversation impact; (4) practice norms. Changes in clinicians beliefs, attitudes, and behaviors in these domains supported values and goals conversations, including: shifting paradigms about serious illness communication from end-of-life planning to knowing and honoring what matters most to patients; improvements in psychological safety that empowered advanced practice clinicians, nurses and social workers to take expanded roles; experiencing benefits of earlier values and goals conversations; shifting from avoidant norms to integration norms in which earlier serious illness discussions became part of routine processes. Culture-related inhibitors included: beliefs that conversations are about dying or withdrawing care; attitudes that serious illness communication is the physicians job; discomfort managing emotions; lack of reliable processes. CONCLUSIONS: Aspects of clinical culture, such as paradigms about serious illness communication and inter-professional empowerment, are linked to successful adoption of serious illness communication. Further research is warranted to identify effective strategies to enhance clinical culture and drive clinician practice change.

Context

Although the importance of palliative care (PC) integration in the emergency department (ED) has long been recognized, few formalized programs have been reported, and none have evaluated the experience of ED clinicians with embedded PC.

Objectives

We evaluate the experience of ED clinicians with embedded PC in the ED during the coronavirus disease pandemic.

Methods

ED clinicians completed a survey about their perceptions of embedded PC in the ED. We summarized responses to closed-ended items using descriptive statistics and analyzed open-ended items using thematic analysis.

Results

There were 134 ED clinicians surveyed. About 101 replied (75% response rate). Of those who had interacted with PC, 100% indicated a benefit of having PC involved. These included freeing up ED clinicians for other tasks (89%), helping them feel more supported (84%), changing the patients care trajectory (67%), and contributing to clinician education (57%) and skills (49%). Among barriers related to engaging PC were difficulty locating them (8%) and lack of time to consult because of ED volume (5%). About 98% of respondents felt that having PC in the ED was either valuable or very valuable. Open-ended responses reflected a positive impact on clinician wellness and improvement in access to high-quality goal-concordant care. Clinicians expressed gratitude for having PC in the ED and noted the importance of having readily available and easily accessible PC in the ED.

Conclusion

ED clinicians' perception of embedded PC was overall positive, with an emphasis on the impact related to task management, enrichment of PC skills, providing support for the team, and improved care for ED patients.

Background: The Emergency Department (ED) has increasingly been recognized as an important site of care for older adults with unmet palliative care needs. Despite this, no clear model of care delivery has emerged. Aim: To assess the acceptability and feasibility of a scripted palliative care communication intervention in the ED directed by social workers. We hypothesized that the intervention would be feasible, acceptable to patients and ED social workers, and that the collection of patient outcomes would be possible. Design: A prospective, unblinded, pilot randomized clinical trial of older adults with serious illness presenting to the ED. Patients were randomized to either receive a social worker-directed palliative care intervention (n-65), which consisted of a conversation focused on patients goals, values, hopes and worries, or to usual care (n-52). The intervention was evaluated for feasibility and acceptability. Results: Of patients randomized to the intervention arm, 66% (43/65) completed a conversation with the social worker. Focus group feedback with the social workers further demonstrated the feasibility of these conversations. There was minimal (12%) loss to follow-up. Of the patients who received the intervention, the majority reported that they appreciated the social workers bringing up their goals for the future (77%), their social workers asking about their fears and worries (72%), and they liked the way the conversation was set up (81%). Social workers administered 95% of the conversation components. Conclusions: This pilot trial demonstrated the feasibility and acceptability of a social worker-directed, scripted palliative care communication intervention in a single urban, academic ED.