Improving Communication About Serious Illness in Primary Care: A Review

• Published in: JAMA internal medicine Vol. 176; no. 9; p. 1380
• Main Authors: Lakin, Joshua R, Block, Susan D, Billings, J Andrew, Koritsanszky, Luca A, Cunningham, Rebecca, Wichmann, Lisa, Harvey, Doreen, Lamey, Jan, Bernacki, Rachelle E
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: United States 01-09-2016
• Subjects: Attitude of Health Personnel; Clinical Competence; Communication; Critical Illness; Documentation; Feedback; Humans; Physician-Patient Relations; Physicians, Primary Care; Primary Health Care; Quality Improvement
• DOI: 10.1001/jamainternmed.2016.3212
• EISSN: 2168-6114

The Institute of Medicine recently called for systematic improvements in clinician-led conversations about goals, values, and care preferences for patients with serious and life-threatening illnesses. Studies suggest that these conversations are associated with improved outcomes for patients and their families, enhanced clinician satisfaction, and lower health care costs; however, the role of primary care clinicians in driving conversations about goals and priorities in serious illness is not well defined.
To present a review of a structured search of the evidence base about communication in serious illness in primary care.
MEDLINE was searched, via PubMed, on January 19, 2016, finding 911 articles; 126 articles were reviewed and selected titles were added from bibliography searches.
Review of the literature informed 2 major topic areas: the role of primary care in communication about serious illness and clinician barriers and system failures that interfere with effective communication. Literature regarding the role that primary care plays in communication focused primarily on the ambiguity about whether primary care clinicians or specialists are responsible for initiating conversations, the benefits of primary care clinicians and specialists conducting conversations, and the quantity and quality of discussions. Timely and effective communication about serious illness in primary care is hampered by key clinician barriers, which include deficits in knowledge, skills, and attitudes; discomfort with prognostication; and lack of clarity about the appropriate timing and initiation of conversations. Finally, system failures in coordination, documentation, feedback, and quality improvement contribute to lack of conversations.
Clinician and system barriers will challenge primary care clinicians and institutions to meet the needs of patients with serious illness. Ensuring that conversations about goals and values occur at the appropriate time for seriously ill patients will require improved training, validation, and dissemination of patient selection tools, systems for conducting and revisiting conversations, accessible documentation, and incentives for measurement, feedback, and continuous improvement.