Paths of Emergency Department Care: Development of a Decision Aid to Facilitate Shared Decision Making in Goals of Care Discussions in the Acute Setting.
Laura E Walker, M Fernanda Bellolio, Claudia C Dobler, Ian G Hargraves, Robert J Pignolo, Kevin Shaw, Jacob J Strand, Bjorg Thorsteinsdottir, Michael E Wilson, Erik P Hess
{"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.","authors":"Laura E Walker, M Fernanda Bellolio, Claudia C Dobler, Ian G Hargraves, Robert J Pignolo, Kevin Shaw, Jacob J Strand, Bjorg Thorsteinsdottir, Michael E Wilson, Erik P Hess","doi":"10.1177/23814683211058082","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>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. <i>Paths of ED Care</i>, a conversation guide, is the product of this work.</p><p><strong>Design: </strong>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.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>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.</p><p><strong>Limitations: </strong>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.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>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.</p>","PeriodicalId":520707,"journal":{"name":"MDM policy & practice","volume":" ","pages":"23814683211058082"},"PeriodicalIF":1.7000,"publicationDate":"2021-11-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/a7/08/10.1177_23814683211058082.PMC8593304.pdf","citationCount":"6","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"MDM policy & practice","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/23814683211058082","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2021/7/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 6
Abstract
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.
背景:急诊科(ED)的护理目标(GOC)对话通常是对代码状态的简短讨论,而不是以患者为导向的对话。我们的目标是制定一份指南,促进急诊科临床医生和患者之间的对话,以了解患者的价值观,并建立临终关怀的目标,同时保持急诊科的效率。谈话指南《ED护理之路》(Paths of ED Care)就是这项工作的成果。设计:一个多学科/多专业的小组采用推荐的做法,为急诊科患者调整GOC对话指南。急诊科临床医生使用指南,并就内容、设计和可用性提供反馈。记录了患者与临床医生的互动,用于讨论分析,并对两者进行了调查,以告知迭代改进。与患者代表、多学科临床医生、生物伦理学家和卫生保健设计者的一系列讨论产生了反馈。我们使用了一个类似于国际患者决策辅助标准的过程,并对这些标准进行了比较。结果:一份对话指南,8页,每页6乘6英寸,使用以患者为导向的提示,包括七个部分:1)评估患者/家庭对疾病的理解,2)解释可能的轨迹,3)介绍不同的护理途径,4)解释途径,5)评估理解和关注,6)代码状态,7)个性化总结。限制:招募足够数量的患者/提供者是项目的主要限制。方法局限于对导具创作和可行性的定性分析,缺乏定量分析。结论:《急诊科护理路径》是一份指南,旨在促进急诊科患者、家属和临床医生就GOC做出以患者为中心的共同决策。这可以确保护理符合患者的价值观和偏好。该指南的使用很受欢迎,并促进了患者和提供者之间有意义的对话。