Palliative Care Communication Among Home Health Interprofessional Staff: A Randomized Controlled Trial of Feasibility, Acceptability, and Preliminary Effectiveness.

IF 1.5 4区 医学 Q3 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES
Sharon E Bigger, Noah Zanville, Elaine Wittenberg, Gail Towsley, Lee Glenn
{"title":"Palliative Care Communication Among Home Health Interprofessional Staff: A Randomized Controlled Trial of Feasibility, Acceptability, and Preliminary Effectiveness.","authors":"Sharon E Bigger, Noah Zanville, Elaine Wittenberg, Gail Towsley, Lee Glenn","doi":"10.1177/10499091231165013","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Skilled home health care (HH) is the largest and fastest growing long-term care setting in the United States. Patients in HH are served by an interprofessional team, and may have little direct contact with physicians, when discussing their progress, prognosis, and goals of care. Such conversations are part of primary palliative care communication. Evidence on primary palliative care communication training in the non-physician HH interprofessional team is lacking. The objectives of this study were to assess the feasibility, acceptability, and preliminary effectiveness of using a palliative care communication model known as COMFORT© to provide palliative care communication training to HH staff. A randomized controlled trial was conducted at a regional health system in the southeastern U.S. to test online training modules (n = 10) (Group 1) and online training modules plus face-to-face training (n = 8) (Group 2). Measures included training completion rates, staff acceptability ratings, comfort with palliative and end-of-life communication (C-COPE) and moral distress (MMD-HP). Results showed that COMFORT© training was feasible (92%), highly acceptable (>4 on a 6-point scale), and positively correlated with improved C-COPE scores (<i>P</i> = .037). There was no significant difference in moral distress scores pre- and post-intervention or in effectiveness between the groups. However, acceptability of COMFORT© was positively correlated with history of leaving or considering leaving a job due to moral distress (<math><mrow><msup><mi>χ</mi><mn>2</mn></msup></mrow></math> = 7.6, <i>P</i> = .02). Preliminary findings from this pilot study suggest that administration of COMFORT© training was feasible, and it was correlated with increased HH staff comfort with palliative care communication.</p>","PeriodicalId":50810,"journal":{"name":"American Journal of Hospice & Palliative Medicine","volume":" ","pages":"203-210"},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"American Journal of Hospice & Palliative Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/10499091231165013","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/4/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

Skilled home health care (HH) is the largest and fastest growing long-term care setting in the United States. Patients in HH are served by an interprofessional team, and may have little direct contact with physicians, when discussing their progress, prognosis, and goals of care. Such conversations are part of primary palliative care communication. Evidence on primary palliative care communication training in the non-physician HH interprofessional team is lacking. The objectives of this study were to assess the feasibility, acceptability, and preliminary effectiveness of using a palliative care communication model known as COMFORT© to provide palliative care communication training to HH staff. A randomized controlled trial was conducted at a regional health system in the southeastern U.S. to test online training modules (n = 10) (Group 1) and online training modules plus face-to-face training (n = 8) (Group 2). Measures included training completion rates, staff acceptability ratings, comfort with palliative and end-of-life communication (C-COPE) and moral distress (MMD-HP). Results showed that COMFORT© training was feasible (92%), highly acceptable (>4 on a 6-point scale), and positively correlated with improved C-COPE scores (P = .037). There was no significant difference in moral distress scores pre- and post-intervention or in effectiveness between the groups. However, acceptability of COMFORT© was positively correlated with history of leaving or considering leaving a job due to moral distress (χ2 = 7.6, P = .02). Preliminary findings from this pilot study suggest that administration of COMFORT© training was feasible, and it was correlated with increased HH staff comfort with palliative care communication.

居家医疗跨专业工作人员之间的姑息关怀沟通:一项关于可行性、可接受性和初步有效性的随机对照试验。
专业家庭医疗护理(HH)是美国规模最大、发展最快的长期护理机构。居家医疗服务中的病人由一个跨专业团队提供服务,在讨论他们的病情进展、预后和护理目标时,他们可能很少与医生直接接触。这种对话是初级姑息关怀沟通的一部分。目前尚缺乏对非医生 HH 跨专业团队进行初级姑息关怀沟通培训的证据。本研究旨在评估使用姑息关怀沟通模式 COMFORT© 为 HH 员工提供姑息关怀沟通培训的可行性、可接受性和初步有效性。在美国东南部的一个地区医疗系统进行了一项随机对照试验,测试在线培训模块(n = 10)(第 1 组)和在线培训模块加面对面培训(n = 8)(第 2 组)。衡量标准包括培训完成率、员工接受度评分、姑息治疗和临终沟通舒适度(C-COPE)和精神压力(MMD-HP)。结果显示,COMFORT© 培训是可行的(92%),可接受性高(在 6 分制中大于 4 分),与 C-COPE 分数的提高呈正相关(P = 0.037)。干预前后的道德困扰得分或干预效果在各组之间没有明显差异。不过,COMFORT© 的可接受性与因道德困扰而离职或考虑离职的历史呈正相关(χ2 = 7.6,P = .02)。这项试点研究的初步结果表明,COMFORT© 培训的实施是可行的,而且它与提高 HH 员工对姑息关怀沟通的舒适度相关。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
American Journal of Hospice & Palliative Medicine
American Journal of Hospice & Palliative Medicine HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES-
CiteScore
3.80
自引率
5.30%
发文量
169
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: American Journal of Hospice & Palliative Medicine (AJHPM) is a peer-reviewed journal, published eight times a year. In 30 years of publication, AJHPM has highlighted the interdisciplinary team approach to hospice and palliative medicine as related to the care of the patient and family. This journal is a member of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE).
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信