Barriers to Goal-concordant Care for Older Patients with Acute Surgical Illness

Lauren J. Taylor, Sara K. Johnson, Michael J. Nabozny, Jennifer L. Tucholka, Nicole M. Steffens, Kristine L. Kwekkeboom, Karen Brasel, Toby C. Campbell, Margaret L. Schwarze

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

4 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Objective: We sought to characterize patterns of communication extrinsic to a decision aid that may impede goal-concordant care. Background: Decision AIDS are designed to facilitate difficult clinical decisions by providing better treatment information. However, these interventions may not be sufficient to effectively reveal patient values and promote preference-aligned decisions for seriously ill, older adults. Methods: We conducted a secondary analysis of 31 decision-making conversations between surgeons and frail, older inpatients with acute surgical problems at a single tertiary care hospital. Conversations occurred before and after surgeons were trained to use a decision aid. We used directed qualitative content analysis to characterize patterns within 3 communication elements: disclosure of prognosis, elicitation of patient preferences, and integration of preferences into a treatment recommendation. Results: First, surgeons missed an opportunity to break bad news. By focusing on the acute surgical problem and need to make a treatment decision, surgeons failed to expose the life-limiting nature of the patient's illness. Second, surgeons asked patients to express preference for a specific treatment without gaining knowledge about the patient's priorities or exploring how patients might value specific health states or disabilities. Third, many surgeons struggled to integrate patients' goals and values to make a treatment recommendation. Instead, they presented options and noted, "It's your decision." Conclusions: A decision aid alone may be insufficient to facilitate a decision that is truly shared. Attention to elements beyond provision of treatment information has the potential to improve communication and promote goal-concordant care for seriously ill older patients.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)677-682
Number of pages6
JournalAnnals of Surgery
Volume267
Issue number4
DOIs
StatePublished - Apr 1 2018

Fingerprint

Patient Care
Decision Support Techniques
Communication
Therapeutics
Patient Preference
Disclosure
Tertiary Healthcare
Tertiary Care Centers
Surgeons
Inpatients
Decision Making
Acquired Immunodeficiency Syndrome
Health

Keywords

  • older adults
  • serious illness
  • shared decision making
  • surgeon-patient communication

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Surgery

Cite this

Taylor, L. J., Johnson, S. K., Nabozny, M. J., Tucholka, J. L., Steffens, N. M., Kwekkeboom, K. L., ... Schwarze, M. L. (2018). Barriers to Goal-concordant Care for Older Patients with Acute Surgical Illness. Annals of Surgery, 267(4), 677-682. https://doi.org/10.1097/SLA.0000000000002282

Barriers to Goal-concordant Care for Older Patients with Acute Surgical Illness. / Taylor, Lauren J.; Johnson, Sara K.; Nabozny, Michael J.; Tucholka, Jennifer L.; Steffens, Nicole M.; Kwekkeboom, Kristine L.; Brasel, Karen; Campbell, Toby C.; Schwarze, Margaret L.

In: Annals of Surgery, Vol. 267, No. 4, 01.04.2018, p. 677-682.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Taylor, LJ, Johnson, SK, Nabozny, MJ, Tucholka, JL, Steffens, NM, Kwekkeboom, KL, Brasel, K, Campbell, TC & Schwarze, ML 2018, 'Barriers to Goal-concordant Care for Older Patients with Acute Surgical Illness', Annals of Surgery, vol. 267, no. 4, pp. 677-682. https://doi.org/10.1097/SLA.0000000000002282
Taylor LJ, Johnson SK, Nabozny MJ, Tucholka JL, Steffens NM, Kwekkeboom KL et al. Barriers to Goal-concordant Care for Older Patients with Acute Surgical Illness. Annals of Surgery. 2018 Apr 1;267(4):677-682. https://doi.org/10.1097/SLA.0000000000002282
Taylor, Lauren J. ; Johnson, Sara K. ; Nabozny, Michael J. ; Tucholka, Jennifer L. ; Steffens, Nicole M. ; Kwekkeboom, Kristine L. ; Brasel, Karen ; Campbell, Toby C. ; Schwarze, Margaret L. / Barriers to Goal-concordant Care for Older Patients with Acute Surgical Illness. In: Annals of Surgery. 2018 ; Vol. 267, No. 4. pp. 677-682.
@article{165e075799ad4fd4bd325eed748edabc,
title = "Barriers to Goal-concordant Care for Older Patients with Acute Surgical Illness",
abstract = "Objective: We sought to characterize patterns of communication extrinsic to a decision aid that may impede goal-concordant care. Background: Decision AIDS are designed to facilitate difficult clinical decisions by providing better treatment information. However, these interventions may not be sufficient to effectively reveal patient values and promote preference-aligned decisions for seriously ill, older adults. Methods: We conducted a secondary analysis of 31 decision-making conversations between surgeons and frail, older inpatients with acute surgical problems at a single tertiary care hospital. Conversations occurred before and after surgeons were trained to use a decision aid. We used directed qualitative content analysis to characterize patterns within 3 communication elements: disclosure of prognosis, elicitation of patient preferences, and integration of preferences into a treatment recommendation. Results: First, surgeons missed an opportunity to break bad news. By focusing on the acute surgical problem and need to make a treatment decision, surgeons failed to expose the life-limiting nature of the patient's illness. Second, surgeons asked patients to express preference for a specific treatment without gaining knowledge about the patient's priorities or exploring how patients might value specific health states or disabilities. Third, many surgeons struggled to integrate patients' goals and values to make a treatment recommendation. Instead, they presented options and noted, {"}It's your decision.{"} Conclusions: A decision aid alone may be insufficient to facilitate a decision that is truly shared. Attention to elements beyond provision of treatment information has the potential to improve communication and promote goal-concordant care for seriously ill older patients.",
keywords = "older adults, serious illness, shared decision making, surgeon-patient communication",
author = "Taylor, {Lauren J.} and Johnson, {Sara K.} and Nabozny, {Michael J.} and Tucholka, {Jennifer L.} and Steffens, {Nicole M.} and Kwekkeboom, {Kristine L.} and Karen Brasel and Campbell, {Toby C.} and Schwarze, {Margaret L.}",
year = "2018",
month = "4",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1097/SLA.0000000000002282",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "267",
pages = "677--682",
journal = "Annals of Surgery",
issn = "0003-4932",
publisher = "Lippincott Williams and Wilkins",
number = "4",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Barriers to Goal-concordant Care for Older Patients with Acute Surgical Illness

AU - Taylor, Lauren J.

AU - Johnson, Sara K.

AU - Nabozny, Michael J.

AU - Tucholka, Jennifer L.

AU - Steffens, Nicole M.

AU - Kwekkeboom, Kristine L.

AU - Brasel, Karen

AU - Campbell, Toby C.

AU - Schwarze, Margaret L.

PY - 2018/4/1

Y1 - 2018/4/1

N2 - Objective: We sought to characterize patterns of communication extrinsic to a decision aid that may impede goal-concordant care. Background: Decision AIDS are designed to facilitate difficult clinical decisions by providing better treatment information. However, these interventions may not be sufficient to effectively reveal patient values and promote preference-aligned decisions for seriously ill, older adults. Methods: We conducted a secondary analysis of 31 decision-making conversations between surgeons and frail, older inpatients with acute surgical problems at a single tertiary care hospital. Conversations occurred before and after surgeons were trained to use a decision aid. We used directed qualitative content analysis to characterize patterns within 3 communication elements: disclosure of prognosis, elicitation of patient preferences, and integration of preferences into a treatment recommendation. Results: First, surgeons missed an opportunity to break bad news. By focusing on the acute surgical problem and need to make a treatment decision, surgeons failed to expose the life-limiting nature of the patient's illness. Second, surgeons asked patients to express preference for a specific treatment without gaining knowledge about the patient's priorities or exploring how patients might value specific health states or disabilities. Third, many surgeons struggled to integrate patients' goals and values to make a treatment recommendation. Instead, they presented options and noted, "It's your decision." Conclusions: A decision aid alone may be insufficient to facilitate a decision that is truly shared. Attention to elements beyond provision of treatment information has the potential to improve communication and promote goal-concordant care for seriously ill older patients.

AB - Objective: We sought to characterize patterns of communication extrinsic to a decision aid that may impede goal-concordant care. Background: Decision AIDS are designed to facilitate difficult clinical decisions by providing better treatment information. However, these interventions may not be sufficient to effectively reveal patient values and promote preference-aligned decisions for seriously ill, older adults. Methods: We conducted a secondary analysis of 31 decision-making conversations between surgeons and frail, older inpatients with acute surgical problems at a single tertiary care hospital. Conversations occurred before and after surgeons were trained to use a decision aid. We used directed qualitative content analysis to characterize patterns within 3 communication elements: disclosure of prognosis, elicitation of patient preferences, and integration of preferences into a treatment recommendation. Results: First, surgeons missed an opportunity to break bad news. By focusing on the acute surgical problem and need to make a treatment decision, surgeons failed to expose the life-limiting nature of the patient's illness. Second, surgeons asked patients to express preference for a specific treatment without gaining knowledge about the patient's priorities or exploring how patients might value specific health states or disabilities. Third, many surgeons struggled to integrate patients' goals and values to make a treatment recommendation. Instead, they presented options and noted, "It's your decision." Conclusions: A decision aid alone may be insufficient to facilitate a decision that is truly shared. Attention to elements beyond provision of treatment information has the potential to improve communication and promote goal-concordant care for seriously ill older patients.

KW - older adults

KW - serious illness

KW - shared decision making

KW - surgeon-patient communication

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85044291228&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85044291228&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1097/SLA.0000000000002282

DO - 10.1097/SLA.0000000000002282

M3 - Article

C2 - 28448386

AN - SCOPUS:85044291228

VL - 267

SP - 677

EP - 682

JO - Annals of Surgery

JF - Annals of Surgery

SN - 0003-4932

IS - 4

ER -