Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39099622›Full record

ArticlePalliative care and social practice2024

Mid-Atlantic primary care providers' perception of barriers and facilitators to end-of-life conversation.

Melanie A Horning, Barbara Habermann

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Palliative care and social practice, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Melanie A HorningDepartment of Nursing, Towson University, 8000 York Road, Towson, MD 21252, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3963-6327
Barbara HabermannSchool of Nursing, Pacific Lutheran University, Tacoma, WA, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Among the chronically ill, end-of-life conversations are often delayed until emergently necessary and the quality of those conversations and subsequent decision-making become compromised by critical illness, uncertainty, and anxiety. Many patients receive treatment that they would have declined if they had a better understanding of benefits and risks. Primary care providers are ideal people to facilitate end-of-life conversations, but these conversations rarely occur in the out-patient setting. Objective: To investigate the self-reported experiences of physicians and advanced practice nurses with conversational barriers and facilitators while leading end-of-life discussions in the primary care setting. Design: A qualitative descriptive study. Methods: Six physicians and eight advanced practice nurses participated in singular semi-structured interviews. Results were analyzed using a qualitative descriptive design and content analysis approach to coding. Results: Reported barriers in descending order included resistance from patients and families, insufficient time, and insufficient understanding of prognosis and associated expectations. Reported facilitators in descending order included established trusting relationship with provider, physical and/or cognitive decline and poor prognosis; and discussion standardization per Medicare guidelines. Conclusion: Recommendations for improving the end-of-life conversational process in the primary care setting include further research regarding end-of-life conversational facilitators within families, the improvement of patient/family education about hospice/palliative care resources and examining the feasibility of longer appointment allotment.

Indexed as

advance care planningbarriers and facilitatorsend-of-life conversationsprimary care

Identifiers

PMID39099622
PMCPMC11295217

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.