Patient-related Communication Research Articles

Satisfaction on patient related Communication by Healthcare Professionals among Caregivers of Patients Admitted in ICUs: A Descriptive Cross Sectional Study

Aim: A descriptive study was done to assess the satisfaction on patient related communication by healthcare professionals among caregivers of patients admitted in ICUs of a tertiary care hospital, Ernakulam. Background: Admission of a patient to an intensive care unit (ICU) can result in tremendous stress to family caregivers not only because of the need to provide physical and emotional support to the sick relative, but also due to the burden of decision-making on behalf of the critically ill person. When acute illness leads to admission to an intensive care unit (ICU), the patient's dependence for assistance increases several-fold and much of this burden falls on the family caregiver. Communication practices of multiple professionals in health care settings can impact patient outcomes. The purpose of this study was to assess caregiver’s satisfaction on patient related communication by healthcare professionals and also to study the difference in the caregiver satisfaction on patient related communication by different category of health care professional. Methods: A descriptive study was conducted among caregivers of patients admitted in the ICUs of a tertiary care hospital. By using convenient sampling technique 100 caregivers were enrolled to the study and the data was collected by self-report techniques by using structured communication satisfaction assessment scale for doctors and nurses. Results: Data were analyzed by using descriptive and inferential statistics presented in tables, bar diagrams. Significant difference (p=0.01) was observed in the score obtained for communication satisfaction for doctors 61(60, 63) and nurses 59.5(58, 61). Conclusion: The findings of the present study highlights that the caregiver communication satisfaction was higher with doctors than other health care professionals.

Cancer Caregivers' Prognostic and End-of-Life Communication Needs and Experiences and their Impact.

Family caregivers of patients with advanced cancer are integrally involved in communications regarding prognosis and end-of-life (EOL) planning and care. Yet little research has examined caregivers' communication experiences or the impact of these experiences on patients and caregivers at EOL. Investigate cancer caregivers' communication experiences and potential impact on patient and caregiver outcomes. Semistructured interviews with bereaved family cancer caregivers (N=19) about their communication needs and experiences as their loved one approached EOL and died. Audiotaped interviews were transcribed and thematically analyzed for communication-related themes. Caregivers described fulfilling many important communication roles including information gathering and sharing, advocating, and facilitating-often coordinating communication with multiple partners (e.g., patient, family, oncology team, hospital team). Caregivers reported that, among the many topics they communicated about, prognosis and EOL were the most consequential and challenging. These challenges arose for several reasons including caregivers' and patients' discordant communication needs, limited opportunity for caregivers to satisfy their personal communication needs, uncertainty regarding their communication needs and responsibilities, and feeling unacknowledged by the care team. These challenges negatively impacted caregivers' abilities to satisfy their patient-related communication responsibilities, which shaped many outcomes including end-of-life decisions, care satisfaction, and bereavement. Caregivers often facilitate essential communication for patients with advanced cancers yet face challenges successfully fulfilling their own and patients' communication needs, particularly surrounding prognostic and end-of-life conversations. Future research and interventions should explore strategies to help caregivers navigate uncertainty, create space to ask sensitive questions, and facilitate patient-caregiver discussions about differing informational needs.

Enhancing patient safety by integrating ethical dimensions to Critical Incident Reporting Systems

BackgroundCritical Incident Reporting Systems (CIRS) provide a well-proven method to identify clinical risks in hospitals. All professions can report critical incidents anonymously, low-threshold, and without sanctions. Reported cases are processed to preventive measures that improve patient and staff safety. Clinical ethics consultations offer support for ethical conflicts but are dependent on the interaction with staff and management to be effective. The aim of this study was to investigate the rationale of integrating an ethical focus into CIRS.MethodsA six-step approach combined the analysis of CIRS databases, potential cases, literature on clinical and organizational ethics, cases from ethics consultations, and experts’ experience to construct a framework for CIRS cases with ethical relevance and map the categories with principles of biomedical ethics.ResultsFour main categories of critical incidents with ethical relevance were derived: (1) patient-related communication; (2) consent, autonomy, and patient interest; (3) conflicting economic and medical interests; (4) staff communication and corporate culture. Each category was refined with different subcategories and mapped with case examples and exemplary related ethical principles to demonstrate ethical relevance.ConclusionThe developed framework for CIRS cases with its ethical dimensions demonstrates the relevance of integrating ethics into the concept of risk-, quality-, and organizational management. It may also support clinical ethics consultations’ presence and effectiveness. The proposed enhancement could contribute to hospitals’ ethical infrastructure and may increase ethical behavior, patient safety, and employee satisfaction.

Communication between Dutch community nurses and general practitioners lacks structure: An explorative mixed methods study

Background Community nurses and general practitioners evaluate their patient-related communication to be poor. However, their actual communication has hardly been investigated and specific strategies for improvement are unclear. Objectives To explore actual community nurse-general practitioner communication in primary care and gain insights into communication style, and conversation structure and their determinants. Methods A mixed-methods design was applied. Telephone conversations between community nurses and general practitioners in the Netherlands were recorded and transcribed verbatim. We measured structure and the duration of their conversations, and community nurses’ self-confidence towards general practitioners and their trust in and familiarity with the conversation partner. A thematic analysis was applied to the transcripts of the conversations. Correlations between these determinants were calculated using Spearman’s correlation coefficient. Results The 18 community nurses recorded 23 conversations with general practitioners. Qualitative analysis revealed that many conversations lacked structure and conciseness, i.e. the nurses started conversations without a clearly articulated question and did not provide adequate background information. The mean duration of their conversations with doctors was 8.8 min. Community nurses with higher self-confidence towards doctors communicated in a more structured way (p = 0.01) and general practitioners were more satisfied about the conversations (p = 0.01). Conclusion This exploratory study of actual community nurse-doctor telephone conversations in primary care identified communication structure and nurse self-confidence towards general practitioners as key targets for the improvement of interprofessional communication, which may increase the effectiveness of community nurse-general practitioner collaboration.

Teaching Patient-Related Communication to Surgical Residents in Brief Training Sessions

Effective provider-patient communication has several benefits; however, few surgical residency programs have communication training and surgical residents have limited time for education. We developed a communication curriculum with limited didactics and emphasis on practice. Our objective was to evaluate whether this time-limited intervention led to changes in surgical resident communication skills. A 4-module curriculum was implemented for surgical residents (PGY2-4). Each 30-minute module focused on specific communication micro-skills: empathy, concerns and expectations, chunking information and avoiding jargon, and teach-back. Modules included brief didactics, simulated patient interactions, feedback, and debriefing. Precurriculum, residents completed a 2-station objective structured clinical examination (OSCE) and a survey on communication confidence. Residents evaluated each module and postcurriculum, completed another 2-station OSCE, confidence survey, and overall curriculum evaluation. Using validated rating scales, OSCEs were scored by 2 independent raters. Tertiary care, academic center with a 5-year surgical residency program. All 17 eligible residents completed both OSCEs and surveys, and 14 attended ≥3 modules. Following the curriculum, residents reported increased use of the targeted skills and increased confidence in responding to emotions, information sharing, and bad news telling (p < 0.004). There was no change in history taking. Residents rated the usefulness of each module modestly (2.5-3.1, scale 0-4), however, the likelihood of skill implementation was higher (3.2-3.6). The overall postcurriculum OSCE scores increased (versus precurriculum scores, p < 0.001). Postcurriculum scores increased for empathy, concerns and expectations, and teach-back. Chunking information and avoiding jargon was unchanged. Fifteen residents reported module length as appropriate, and 2 thought they were too short. The brief modules led to increased self-reported use of communication skills and were effective in improving resident communication in OSCEs. This may be a useful curricular model for both surgical and nonsurgical residency programs with limited availability for curricular time.

Backstage Staff Communication: The Effects of Different Levels of Visual Exposure to Patients.

This article examines how visual exposure to patients predicts patient-related communication among staff members. Communication among healthcare professionals private from patients, or backstage communication, is critical for staff teamwork and patient care. While patients and visitors are a core group of users in healthcare settings, not much attention has been given to how patients' presence impacts staff communication. Furthermore, many healthcare facilities provide team spaces for improved staff teamwork, but the privacy levels of team areas significantly vary. This article presents an empirical study of four team-based primary care clinics where staff communication and teamwork are important. Visual exposure levels of the clinics were analyzed, and their relationships to staff members' concerns for having backstage communication, including preferred and nonpreferred locations for backstage communication, were investigated. Staff members in clinics with less visual exposure to patients reported lower concerns about having backstage communication. Staff members preferred talking in team areas that were visually less exposed to patients in the clinic, but, within team areas, the level of visual exposure did not matter. On the other hand, staff members did not prefer talking in visually exposed areas such as corridors in the clinic and visually exposed areas within team spaces. Staff members preferred talking in team areas, and they did not prefer talking in visually exposed areas. These findings identified visually exposed team areas as a potentially uncomfortable environment, with a lack of agreement between staff members' preferences toward where they had patient-related communication.

Identification of influencing factors and strategies to improve communication between general practitioners and community nurses: a qualitative focus group study

As the number of patients with complex healthcare needs grows, inter-professional collaboration between primary care professionals must be constantly optimized. General practitioners (GPs) and community nurses (CNs) are key professions in primary care; however, poor GP-CN communication is common, and research into the factors influencing its quality is limited. To explore patient-related GP-CN communication and facilitating and hindering factors, and to identify strategies to enhance this communication. A qualitative focus group design was used to identify the facilitating and hindering factors and strategies for improvement. In a Dutch primary care setting, 6 mono-professional focus group interviews (3 meetings of 13 GPs; 3 meetings of 18 CNs) were organized between June 2015 and April 2016, recorded and transcribed verbatim. Two independent researchers performed the coding of these interviews, identifying their categories and themes. Results show that, despite the regular contact between GPs and CNs, communication was generally perceived as poor in effectiveness and efficiency by both professions. Mutual trust was considered the most important facilitating factor for effective communication. Profession-specific factors (e.g. differences in responsibility and profession-specific language) and organizational factors (e.g. lack of shared care plans, no in-person communication, lack of time) may be of influence on communication. Participants' suggestions for improvement included organizing well-structured and reimbursed team meetings and facilitating face-to-face contact. GP-CN patient-related communication benefits most from trusting inter-personal relationships. Inter-professional training programmes should address both professional and organizational factors and should be evaluated for their effect on quality of care.

A Review of Resources and Methodologies Available for Teaching and Assessing Patient-Related Communication Skills in Radiology

ACGME expectations for radiology trainees' proficiencies in communication skills pose a challenge to program directors who wish to develop curricula addressing these competencies. Numerous educational resources and pedagogical approaches have emerged to address such competencies specifically for radiology, but have yet to be systematically catalogued. In this paper, we review and compile these resources into a toolkit that will help residencies develop curricula around patient-centered communication. We describe numerous web-based resources and published models that have incorporated innovative, contemporary pedagogical techniques. In undertaking this compilation, our hope is to kindle discussion about the development of formalized or standardized communication curricula or guides for radiology residencies.

It all comes down to trust; determinants for miscommunication in Primary Healthcare

Introduction: Adequate communication between care and medical disciplines is an important prerequisite for safe patient care. Studies have shown that personal, social and organizational barriers might hinder communication in hospital care and long term care. Literature in primary care on these topics is scarce, but studies on implementation of collaborative services in primary healthcare indicate that communication is an important prerequisite for collaboration. This study aims to identify factors that facilitate or hinder patient related communication between General Practitioners (GPs) and Community Nurses (CNs), in order to find strategies to improve poor communication, if present. Six mono-disciplinary focus groups (13 GPs, 3 meetings; 18 CNs, 3 meetings) were organized, to create an atmosphere of equality and trust, knowing that hierarchical relationships could hinder open discussions. The interviews were tape-recorded and transcribed ad verbatim. Professionals were invited to discuss topics concerning individual attitudes and experiences, barriers and facilitators, prerequisites and current and future strategies for improvement. ATLAS.ti was used to code transcripts. Results: Despite the fact that GPs and CNs have regular contacts (mostly via telephone, less often in person), poor communication was frequently perceived. Trustful relations appeared to be the most important prerequisite for effective communication. Organizational factors (e.g. lack of shared care plans, no contact in person and lack of time) and professional specific factors (e.g. discipline specific language, perspective, education level and position) influenced development of trustful relationships. Significant suggestions for improvement of communication by both GPs and CNs were made, for example the importance of communication skills training and use of practical communication tools that structure information. Discussions: The results of this study are in line with earlier studies in hospital and long term care settings with regard to miscommunication between doctors and nurses. However, in this primary care study, causes seem to be more divers and disruptive. Medical and nursing professionals are not part of one team, but work from different organizations, with different interests, visions, procedures and methods of working. Conclusions: Different professional and organizational factors might hinder effective patient related communication between GPs and CNs. Inter-professional training programmes should address these factors and should be evaluated for their effect on quality of care. Lessons learned: To improve collaboration between primary care professionals, promoting trust and crossing professional boundaries are the most important clues for improved patient-related communication between GPs and CNs. Vocational training of GPs and CNs should focus more on collaboration, since particularly GPs are merely trained as solo practitioners. Limitations: A limitation was that this study was conducted in the Netherlands; in other countries organizational arrangements, education programs and collaborative practice may differ from the Dutch situation, that may lead to different accents and conclusions towards specific determinants for miscommunication. Suggestions for future research: Future research should be directed to investigate effectiveness of different aspects of communication that align with solutions practitioners themselves find meaningful.

Noise peaks influence communication in the operating room. An observational study

Noise peaks are powerful distractors. This study focuses on the impact of noise peaks on surgical teams’ communication during 109 long abdominal surgeries. We related measured noise peaks during 5-min intervals to the amount of observed communication during the same interval. Results show that noise peaks are associated with less case-relevant communication; this effect is moderated by the level of surgical experience; case-relevant communications decrease under high noise peak conditions among junior, but not among senior surgeons. However, case-irrelevant communication did not decrease under high noise level conditions, rather there was a trend to more case-irrelevant communication under high noise peaks. The results support the hypothesis that noise peaks impair communication because they draw on attentional resources rather than impairing understanding of communication. As case-relevant communication is important for surgical performance, exposure to high noise peaks in the OR should be minimised especially for less experienced surgeons.Practitioner Summary: This study investigated whether noise during surgeries influenced the communication within surgical teams. During abdominal surgeries, noise levels were measured and communication was observed. Results showed that high noise peaks reduced the frequency of patient-related communication, but did not reduce patient-irrelevant communication. Noise may negatively affect team coordination in surgeries.

Smartphones and Patient Care: Exploring the Use of Text-Based Messaging for Patient-Related Communication.

Background Text messaging (texting) has become a routine medium of communication in society. However, its use among clinicians has not been fully characterized. We explored general surgery residents' practices and views on texting for patient-related communication. Methods An email survey was distributed to all general surgery residents at a large Canadian medical school. Results Overall, 46 (57%) of those surveyed responded. All used texting for patient-related communication. Eleven percent of residents did not have a password on their cell phone and 89% did not have encrypted phones. Texting was the most common way (41%) by which residents communicated routine patient-related information with staff physicians. Most (85%) residents agreed that texting enhances patient care. The majority (66%) did not know if their hospital had a policy on texting and were unaware of legislation surrounding texting in patient care (89%). Conclusions Most general surgery residents use texting for communication of routine patient-related care issues. However, they acknowledge concerns regarding the security of this medium.

"WhatsApp"ening in orthopedic care: a concise report from a 300-bedded tertiary care teaching center.

Smartphones have emerged as essential tools providing assistance in patient care, monitoring, rehabilitation, communication, diagnosis, teaching, research and reference. Among innumerable communication apps, WhatsApp has been widely popular and cost effective. The aim of our study was to report the impact of introduction of a smartphone app "WhatsApp" as an intradepartmental communication tool on (1) awareness of patient-related information, (2) efficiency of the handover process and (3) duration of traditional morning handovers among orthopedic residents in a 300-bedded tertiary care teaching center. Written handovers and paging used for communication at our center led to occasional inefficiencies among residents. Widespread use, low cost, availability and double password protection (phone lock and WhatsApp lock) made WhatsApp's group conversation feature an ideal tool for intradepartmental patient-related communication. Twenty-five consecutive admissions before and after WhatsApp (BW, AW) were included in the study. Eight orthopedic residents attempted fifty randomly arranged questions based on the twenty-five patients in each study period. A null hypothesis that introduction of WhatsApp group would neither increase the awareness of patient-related information nor improve the efficiency of the handovers among residents was assumed. A significant improvement observed in scores obtained by residents in the AW group led to rejection of the null hypothesis. The residents also reported swifter and efficient handovers after the introduction of WhatsApp. Our results indicate that the introduction of a smartphone app "WhatsApp" as an intradepartmental communication tool can bring about an improvement in patient-related awareness, communication and handovers among orthopedic residents.

Medical students and personal smartphones in the clinical environment: the impact on confidentiality of personal health information and professionalism.

BackgroundSmartphones are becoming ubiquitous in health care settings. The increased adoption of mobile technology such as smartphones may be attributed to their use as a point-of-care information source and to perceived improvements in clinical communication and efficiency. However, little is known about medical students’ use of personal smartphones for clinical work.ObjectiveThe intent of the study was to examine final-year medical students’ experience with and attitudes toward using personal mobile technology in the clinical environment, with respect to the perceived impact on patient confidentiality and provider professionalism.MethodsCross-sectional surveys were completed by final-year medical students at the University of Toronto. Respondents were asked about the type of personal mobile phone they use, security features on their personal phone, experiences using their personal phone during clinical rotations, and attitudes about using their personal phone for clinical work purposes.ResultsThe overall response rate was 45.4% (99/218). Smartphone ownership was prevalent (98%, 97/99) with the majority (86%, 85/99) of participants using their personal phones for patient-related communication during clinical rotations. A total of 26% (26/99) of participants reported not having any type of security feature on their personal phone, 94% (90/96) of participants agreed that using their personal phone for clinical work makes them more efficient, and 86% (82/95) agreed that their personal phone allows them to provide better patient care. Although 68% (65/95) of participants believe that the use of personal phones for patient-related communication with colleagues poses a risk to the privacy and confidentiality of patient health information, 22% (21/96) of participants still use their personal phone to text or email identifiable patient data to colleagues.ConclusionsOur findings suggest that the use of personal smartphones for clinical work by medical students is prevalent. There is a need to more fully address the threat to patient confidentiality posed by the use of unsecured communication devices such as smartphones.

Evaluating Communication Between Pediatric Primary Care Physicians and Hospitalists

To determine the preferences for and satisfaction with communication between pediatric primary care physicians (PCPs) and hospitalists, 2 surveys (PCP and hospitalist versions with matching questions) were developed. Overall, PCPs were less satisfied than hospitalists with communication (P < .01). The 2 provider types had differing opinions on responsibility for care after hospital discharge, with hospitalists more likely than PCPs to assign responsibility to the PCP for pending labs (65% vs 49%; P < .01), adverse events (85% vs 67%; P < .01), or status changes (85% vs 69%; P < .01). Whereas satisfaction with and preferences for patient-related communication differed between hospitalists and PCPs, the incongruent views on the responsibility for care after patient discharge have major implications for safety particularly if poor communication occurs at discharge. Successful transitions from the hospital to primary care require communication between hospitalists and PCPs to be consistent, timely, and informative with responsibility for care discussed at discharge.

Communication barriers perceived by older patients and nurses

This study investigated the communication barriers perceived by older hospitalized patients and nurses in Korea, with the aim of identifying disparities between the two parties. The authors developed a 50-item communication-barrier questionnaire that includes patient, nurse, and environmental factors. One hundred older hospitalized patients and 136 nurses were asked to rate the importance of each communication-barrier item. Nurses and patients were found to perceive the importance of barriers differently: nurses reported higher scores on patient-related communication barriers, whereas patients reported higher scores on the nurse-related barriers. There were significant differences between patients and nurses in 57%, 62%, and 71% of the nurse-, patient-, and environment-related communication barriers, respectively. Based on these findings, it is necessary for nurses to understand older patients’ perceptions about communication barriers and acquire better communication skills and attitudes.

Expectations of established neurologists and general practitioners regarding the psychiatric clinic

Psychiatrists' and general practitioners' expectations regarding psychiatric hospitals were evaluated using qualitative methodology. A content analysis was carried out of interviews with 27 psychiatrists and 24 general practitioners. The statements were analysed quantitatively to assess their relative importance. Immediate delivery of discharge summaries and continuous patient-related communication were mentioned most frequently. In addition, psychiatrists assigned much importance to therapy referral after completion of inpatient care and to the prescription of less expensive drugs. Nearly half of all statements related to the communication process between local and clinic physicians, a quarter to aspects of referral, and a quarter to quality of inpatient care. Differences between psychiatrists and general practitioners mainly concerned aspects of medical education. Taking into account these findings, more attention should be paid to psychiatrists' and general practitioners' expectations to reduce problems of interaction between clinicians and their colleagues in private practice; this might be helpful to improve the continuity of psychiatric care.