Abstract

Providing patient care at the end of a patient's life is a humbling and sacred experience for both patient and provider. Without a truthful and meaningful conversation about end-of-life care preferences, the care that is delivered may not be the care that the patient prefers. Determine if there is a relationship between level of training, confidence, and presence of decisional conflict in making an accurate prognosis for 2 standardized cases. Additionally, we evaluated the correctness of the prognosis as measured against survival outcomes for patients with similar diagnoses. Decisional conflict was measured with the SURE tool, a validated 4-item tool that has been used in assessing for the presence of decisional conflict. Following analysis of data, it was found that providers with no decisional conflict were much more likely to be attendings with more than 5 years' experience. Providers were more conflicted overall when confronted with a case with a more grave prognosis. It was determined that providers with a lower level of training were more likely to have decisional conflict. Provider confidence increases and decisional conflict decreases as one increases their level of training. However, the degree in which the provider is correct in their prognosis does not change as one increases their level of training. These findings have broad implications on patients, providers, and the health-care system.

Full Text
Paper version not known

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call

Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.