Article

What is most important for you to achieve?: An analysis of patient responses when receiving palliative care consultation

Center for Palliative Care and Clinical Ethics, University of Rochester Medical Center, NY 14642, USA.
Journal of Palliative Medicine (Impact Factor: 2.06). 05/2006; 9(2):382-8. DOI: 10.1089/jpm.2006.9.382
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT Hospitalized patients with a wide range of serious, but not necessarily terminal illnesses are now receiving palliative care consultations. The purpose of this report is to describe what palliative care patients say is "most important to achieve" at the time of initial consultation.
We conducted a retrospective descriptive content analysis of patient responses to the question "What is most important for you to achieve?" recorded at the time of initial inpatient palliative care consultation. Two hundred fifteen patient records had documented first-person patient responses recorded. These responses were independently reviewed and categorized in a four-phase iterative process.
Responses were divided into four major categories: (1) Improving quality and meaning ("I want to be able to sit on my front porch and watch the farm go by.") (52%); (2) Achieving relief or comfort ("Can you get rid of my pain?") (34%); (3) Altering the trajectory of illness ("If there is a treatment that can make me well, I want it.") (22%); and (4) Preparing for dying ("I am not afraid of dying. I just don't want to suffer.") (11%). Five percent of responses were unable to be reliably categorized ("You ask hard questions."). Some respondents gave more than one response, so the total is greater than 100%.
Patients receiving palliative care consultation give a wide range of responses to the question "What is most important for you to achieve?" Such patient-centered inquiry about priorities deserves more systematic study in the future if patient-specific goals are to be a marker of high-quality palliative care.

0 Followers
 · 
57 Views
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: In this article I analyze two brief case studies to propose that a “spiritual strength story” has five defining characteristics: (1) it is brief; (2) it is ontological; (3) it uses symbols and metaphors; (4) it is a “big story” or meta-narrative with a positive spiritual and/or religious focus that informs other narrative data; and (5) most conspicuously of all, it repeats. Cultivating awareness of the “spiritual strength” narrative type can help to improve the quality of inter-professional patientcentered care teamwork and understanding, especially in regard to the reflexive, embodied, and relational aspects of palliative and end-of-life care.
    Palliative and Supportive Care 01/2011; 9:419-424. · 0.98 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Abstract Older patients and their families desire control over health decisions in serious illness. Experts recommend discussion of prognosis and goals of care prior to decisions about treatment. Having achieved longevity, older persons often prioritize other goals such as function, comfort, or family support-and skilled communication is critical to shift treatment to match these goals. Shared decision making is the ideal approach in serious illness. Older patients desire greater family involvement; higher rates of cognitive impairment mean greater dependency on surrogates to make decisions. Despite the importance of communication, fewer than half of older patients or families recall treatment discussions with clinicians, and poor quality communication adversely affects family satisfaction and patient outcomes. Direct audiorecording of clinical encounters and longitudinal studies of communication and treatment decisions have yielded important insights into the quality of clinical communication. Current clinical practice rarely meets standards for shared decision making. Innovative methods to record and use patient preferences show promise to overcome the limitations of traditional advance directives. Decision aids, intensive clinician training, and structured interpersonal communication interventions have all been shown to be effective to improve the quality of communication and decision making. Priorities for geriatric palliative care research, building on these insights, now include empirical testing of communication approaches for surrogates and for diverse populations, exploration of meaningful ways to communicate prognosis, and expansion of intervention research.
    Journal of palliative medicine 09/2013; 16(10). DOI:10.1089/jpm.2013.9475 · 2.06 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: After accessing the PDF file, please: 1) Carefully proofread the entire article, including any tables, equations, figure legends and references. 2) Ensure that your affiliations and address are correct and complete. 3) Check that any Greek letter, especially "mu", has translated correctly; 4) Verify all scientific notations, drug dosages, and names and locations of manufacturers; 5) Be sure permission has been procured for any reprinted material. 6) Answer all author queries completely. They are listed on the last page of the proof; You may choose to list the corrections (including the replies to any queries) in an e-mail and return to me using the "reply" button. Using this option, please refer to the line numbers on the proof. If, for any reason, this is not possible, mark the corrections and any other comments (including replies to questions) on a printout of the PDF file and fax this to Brian Arnold (215-239-3388) or mail to the address given below. Do not attempt to edit the PDF file (including adding post-it type notes).
    EXPLORE The Journal of Science and Healing 01/2007; · 0.94 Impact Factor