Cargando…

Paths of Emergency Department Care: Development of a Decision Aid to Facilitate Shared Decision Making in Goals of Care Discussions in the Acute Setting

BACKGROUND: Goals of care (GOC) conversations in the emergency department (ED) are often a brief discussion of code status rather than a patient-oriented dialogue. We aimed to develop a guide to facilitate conversations between ED clinicians and patients to elicit patient values and establish goals...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Walker, Laura E., Bellolio, M. Fernanda, Dobler, Claudia C., Hargraves, Ian G., Pignolo, Robert J., Shaw, Kevin, Strand, Jacob J., Thorsteinsdottir, Bjorg, Wilson, Michael E., Hess, Erik P.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: SAGE Publications 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8593304/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34796267
http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/23814683211058082
_version_ 1784599702954573824
author Walker, Laura E.
Bellolio, M. Fernanda
Dobler, Claudia C.
Hargraves, Ian G.
Pignolo, Robert J.
Shaw, Kevin
Strand, Jacob J.
Thorsteinsdottir, Bjorg
Wilson, Michael E.
Hess, Erik P.
author_facet Walker, Laura E.
Bellolio, M. Fernanda
Dobler, Claudia C.
Hargraves, Ian G.
Pignolo, Robert J.
Shaw, Kevin
Strand, Jacob J.
Thorsteinsdottir, Bjorg
Wilson, Michael E.
Hess, Erik P.
author_sort Walker, Laura E.
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Goals of care (GOC) conversations in the emergency department (ED) are often a brief discussion of code status rather than a patient-oriented dialogue. We aimed to develop a guide to facilitate conversations between ED clinicians and patients to elicit patient values and establish goals for end-of-life care, while maintaining ED efficiency. Paths of ED Care, a conversation guide, is the product of this work. DESIGN: A multidisciplinary/multispecialty group used recommended practices to adapt a GOC conversation guide for ED patients. ED clinicians used the guide and provided feedback on content, design, and usability. Patient-clinician interactions were recorded for discussion analysis, and both were surveyed to inform iterative refinement. A series of discussions with patient representatives, multidisciplinary clinicians, bioethicists, and health care designers yielded feedback. We used a process similar to the International Patient Decision Aid Standards and provide comparison to these. RESULTS: A conversation guide, eight pages with each page 6 by 6 inches in dimension, uses patient-oriented prompts and includes seven sections: 1) evaluation of patient/family understanding of disease, 2) explanation of possible trajectories, 3) introduction to different pathways of care, 4) explanation of pathways, 5) assessment of understanding and concerns, 6) code status, and 7) personalized summary. LIMITATIONS: Recruitment of sufficient number of patients/providers to the project was the primary limitation. Methods are limited to qualitative analysis of guide creation and feasibility without quantitative analysis. CONCLUSIONS: Paths of ED Care is a guide to facilitate patient-centered shared decision making for ED patients, families, and clinicians regarding GOC. This may ensure care concordant with patients’ values and preferences. Use of the guide was well-received and facilitated meaningful conversations between patients and providers.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8593304
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher SAGE Publications
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-85933042021-11-17 Paths of Emergency Department Care: Development of a Decision Aid to Facilitate Shared Decision Making in Goals of Care Discussions in the Acute Setting Walker, Laura E. Bellolio, M. Fernanda Dobler, Claudia C. Hargraves, Ian G. Pignolo, Robert J. Shaw, Kevin Strand, Jacob J. Thorsteinsdottir, Bjorg Wilson, Michael E. Hess, Erik P. MDM Policy Pract Brief Report BACKGROUND: Goals of care (GOC) conversations in the emergency department (ED) are often a brief discussion of code status rather than a patient-oriented dialogue. We aimed to develop a guide to facilitate conversations between ED clinicians and patients to elicit patient values and establish goals for end-of-life care, while maintaining ED efficiency. Paths of ED Care, a conversation guide, is the product of this work. DESIGN: A multidisciplinary/multispecialty group used recommended practices to adapt a GOC conversation guide for ED patients. ED clinicians used the guide and provided feedback on content, design, and usability. Patient-clinician interactions were recorded for discussion analysis, and both were surveyed to inform iterative refinement. A series of discussions with patient representatives, multidisciplinary clinicians, bioethicists, and health care designers yielded feedback. We used a process similar to the International Patient Decision Aid Standards and provide comparison to these. RESULTS: A conversation guide, eight pages with each page 6 by 6 inches in dimension, uses patient-oriented prompts and includes seven sections: 1) evaluation of patient/family understanding of disease, 2) explanation of possible trajectories, 3) introduction to different pathways of care, 4) explanation of pathways, 5) assessment of understanding and concerns, 6) code status, and 7) personalized summary. LIMITATIONS: Recruitment of sufficient number of patients/providers to the project was the primary limitation. Methods are limited to qualitative analysis of guide creation and feasibility without quantitative analysis. CONCLUSIONS: Paths of ED Care is a guide to facilitate patient-centered shared decision making for ED patients, families, and clinicians regarding GOC. This may ensure care concordant with patients’ values and preferences. Use of the guide was well-received and facilitated meaningful conversations between patients and providers. SAGE Publications 2021-11-13 /pmc/articles/PMC8593304/ /pubmed/34796267 http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/23814683211058082 Text en © The Author(s) 2021 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/) which permits non-commercial use, reproduction and distribution of the work without further permission provided the original work is attributed as specified on the SAGE and Open Access pages (https://us.sagepub.com/en-us/nam/open-access-at-sage).
spellingShingle Brief Report
Walker, Laura E.
Bellolio, M. Fernanda
Dobler, Claudia C.
Hargraves, Ian G.
Pignolo, Robert J.
Shaw, Kevin
Strand, Jacob J.
Thorsteinsdottir, Bjorg
Wilson, Michael E.
Hess, Erik P.
Paths of Emergency Department Care: Development of a Decision Aid to Facilitate Shared Decision Making in Goals of Care Discussions in the Acute Setting
title Paths of Emergency Department Care: Development of a Decision Aid to Facilitate Shared Decision Making in Goals of Care Discussions in the Acute Setting
title_full Paths of Emergency Department Care: Development of a Decision Aid to Facilitate Shared Decision Making in Goals of Care Discussions in the Acute Setting
title_fullStr Paths of Emergency Department Care: Development of a Decision Aid to Facilitate Shared Decision Making in Goals of Care Discussions in the Acute Setting
title_full_unstemmed Paths of Emergency Department Care: Development of a Decision Aid to Facilitate Shared Decision Making in Goals of Care Discussions in the Acute Setting
title_short Paths of Emergency Department Care: Development of a Decision Aid to Facilitate Shared Decision Making in Goals of Care Discussions in the Acute Setting
title_sort paths of emergency department care: development of a decision aid to facilitate shared decision making in goals of care discussions in the acute setting
topic Brief Report
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8593304/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34796267
http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/23814683211058082
work_keys_str_mv AT walkerlaurae pathsofemergencydepartmentcaredevelopmentofadecisionaidtofacilitateshareddecisionmakingingoalsofcarediscussionsintheacutesetting
AT belloliomfernanda pathsofemergencydepartmentcaredevelopmentofadecisionaidtofacilitateshareddecisionmakingingoalsofcarediscussionsintheacutesetting
AT doblerclaudiac pathsofemergencydepartmentcaredevelopmentofadecisionaidtofacilitateshareddecisionmakingingoalsofcarediscussionsintheacutesetting
AT hargravesiang pathsofemergencydepartmentcaredevelopmentofadecisionaidtofacilitateshareddecisionmakingingoalsofcarediscussionsintheacutesetting
AT pignolorobertj pathsofemergencydepartmentcaredevelopmentofadecisionaidtofacilitateshareddecisionmakingingoalsofcarediscussionsintheacutesetting
AT shawkevin pathsofemergencydepartmentcaredevelopmentofadecisionaidtofacilitateshareddecisionmakingingoalsofcarediscussionsintheacutesetting
AT strandjacobj pathsofemergencydepartmentcaredevelopmentofadecisionaidtofacilitateshareddecisionmakingingoalsofcarediscussionsintheacutesetting
AT thorsteinsdottirbjorg pathsofemergencydepartmentcaredevelopmentofadecisionaidtofacilitateshareddecisionmakingingoalsofcarediscussionsintheacutesetting
AT wilsonmichaele pathsofemergencydepartmentcaredevelopmentofadecisionaidtofacilitateshareddecisionmakingingoalsofcarediscussionsintheacutesetting
AT hesserikp pathsofemergencydepartmentcaredevelopmentofadecisionaidtofacilitateshareddecisionmakingingoalsofcarediscussionsintheacutesetting