Caregiver Engagement in Serious Illness Communication in a Long-Term Acute Care Hospital Setting

Author:

Levoy Kristin123ORCID,Ashare Rebecca L.4,Ganta Niharika5,O’Connor Nina6,Meghani Salimah H.78ORCID

Affiliation:

1. Department of Community and Health Systems, Indiana University School of Nursing, Indianapolis, IN, USA

2. Indiana University Center for Aging Research, Regenstrief Institute, Indianapolis, IN, USA

3. Indiana University Melvin and Bren Simon Comprehensive Cancer Center, Indianapolis, IN, USA

4. Department of Psychology, State University of New York at Buffalo, Buffalo, NY, USA

5. Department of Medicine, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA

6. Temple Center for Population Health, Temple Health, Philadelphia, PA, USA

7. NewCourtland Center for Transitions and Health, Department of Biobehavioral Health Sciences, University of Pennsylvania School of Nursing, Philadelphia, PA, USA

8. Leonard Davis Institute of Health Economics, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA

Abstract

Context Prolonged management of critical illnesses in long-term acute care hospitals (LTACH) makes serious illness communication (SIC), a clinical imperative. SIC in LTACH is challenging as clinicians often lack training and patients are typically unable to participate—making caregivers central. Objectives This qualitative descriptive study characterized caregiver engagement in SIC encounters, while considering influencing factors, following the implementation of Ariadne Labs’ SIC training at a LTACH in the Northeastern United States. Methods Clinicians’ documented SIC notes (2019-2020) were analyzed using directed content analysis. Codes were grouped into four categories generated from two factors that influence SIC—evidence of prognostic understanding (yes/no) and documented preferences (yes/no)—and caregiver engagement themes identified within each category. Results Across 125 patient cases, 251 SIC notes were analyzed. In the presence of prognostic understanding and documented preferences, caregivers acted as upholders of patients’ wishes (29%). With prognostic understanding but undocumented preferences, caregivers were postponers of healthcare decision-making (34%). When lacking prognostic understanding but having documented preferences, caregivers tended to be searchers, intent on identifying continued treatment options (13%). With poor prognostic understanding and undocumented preferences, caregivers were strugglers, having difficulty with the clinicians or family unit over healthcare decision-making (21%). Conclusion The findings suggest that two factors—prognostic understanding and documented preferences—are critical factors clinicians can leverage in tailoring SIC to meet caregivers’ SIC needs in the LTACH setting. Such strategies shift attention away from SIC content alone toward factors that influence caregivers’ ability to meaningfully engage in SIC to advance healthcare decision-making.

Funder

National Institute of Nursing Research Ruth L. Kirschstein National Research Service Award Program

Indiana University Simon Comprehensive Cancer Center's American Cancer Society Institution Research Grant

National Palliative Care Research Center Kornfeld Scholars Program Award

National Cancer Institute

National Institute of Nursing Research

Publisher

SAGE Publications

Subject

General Medicine

Cited by 1 articles. 订阅此论文施引文献 订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3