Breaking Bad News During the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Systematic Review of the Literature.

The aim of the present review was to extend research by reviewing international research regarding the communication between oncologists and oncology patients and the communication of bad news to oncology patients during the COVID-19 pandemic. Following the PRISMA guidelines a review of the literature was performed by searching PubMed, Scopus, and EMBASE bibliographic databases from inception to October 10, 2022. The search was limited to articles written in English. Two reviewers independently completed title and abstract, full-text screening, and data extraction. A total of five studies were deemed eligible for this systematic review. A narrative synthesis was undertaken. Of these five articles, three referred to the communication of bad news to patients by medical oncologists during the COVID-19 pandemic, whereas the remaining two referred to the transmission of bad news to patients by surgeons during the pandemic. The COVID-19 pandemic and the social distancing measures imposed caused radical changes in the forms of communication in medical environments. The challenges faced by the oncologist in breaking bad news to cancer patients are highlighted in this systematic review, and the need for physician preparation prior to communication with the patient is emphasized. Overall, new studies are needed on the effects of distance communication on both health professionals and patients. New studies are also needed that would explore the perceptions of physicians and patients in Greece.

Breaking Bad News During COVID-19 Time in Surgical, Emergency and Medical Specialties - What More we Need to Develop?

Background: Breaking bad news is one of the complex communication skills essential to the practice of every clinician. It involves not only the mere provision of information, but also how to deal with the emotions of the patients and the response of their relatives. Therefore, certain protocols are employed for this process, including "BREAKS", "SPIKES", and "ABCDE" protocols. The emergence of the COVID-19 pandemic mandated the use of strict infection control measures including social distancing, requiring the utilization of telecommunication technologies for breaking bad news. Objective: The aim of the study was to assess the use on non-physical methods in breaking bad news by physicians and to evaluate the need for more development and training. Methods: Cross-sectional survey conducted in Kufa Medical College Al-Najaf during April - June 2021, and included 60 physicians of various specialties working in that hospital. Results: Majority of participants 88.3% reported breaking bad news regularly. Less than half of participants 46.7% received training on breaking bad news, and only 13.3% received training on non-physical breaking bad news. More than half of participants mentioned that showing empathy is the area that needs improvement the most. Conclusion: High proportion of physicians lacks the necessary skills to break bad news, especially using non-physical ways during the pandemic. Well-structured programs are needed for the training of healthcare providers on breaking bad news, with certain adaptations for traditional protocols to be appropriate for telephone or video conferencing.

Teaching how to break bad news in Oncology: In-class vs. virtual peer role-plays.

BACKGROUND: We report two different peer role-play training courses for breaking bad news (BBN) in Oncology, the classic "in-class" model and the "virtual" peer role-play (VPRP) model developed during the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic. METHODS: Each session included 20-25 4th year medical students supervised by two practitioners experienced in oncology. After an ice breaking activity to exchange with students on means to promote hope to patients when BBN, peer role-plays started. Pre-and post-session questionnaires were submitted to evaluate students' satisfaction, attitudes, and perceptions. Pre-and post-session knowledge test were realized. Each student has participated to only one peer-role play either "in-class" (2018) or VPRP (2020). RESULTS: In 2018, a total of 222 students received the "in-class" training. In 2020, a total 431 students received the VPRP training. For almost all students it was the first peer role-play training session. Before training, reported level of confidence in BBN was low. After training, students of the VPRP group were highly satisfied regarding quality (realism, organization). Students also reported great interest and perceived benefits. Students who underwent "in-class" training course showed a significantly higher improvement (+1.9 points) of their knowledge scores compared to those who underwent the VPRP training course (+0.7 points) (P-value=2e-16). CONCLUSION: The two methods seem beneficial to improve knowledge skills in BBN although "in-class" training class seem to be more efficient. To our knowledge, this is the first comparison between virtual and in-class peer-role play training for BBN in oncology.

Art of breaking bad news: A qualitative study in Indian healthcare perspective.

Background: Health-care communication is essential for amiable provider-recipient relationship. This study explored various health-care experiences and expectations of service recipients and providers in private clinical establishments of West Bengal, India, while breaking difficult news, bad news, and death. Aim: The current study was framed with the following research question: What are the varying perceptions, experiences, and expectations of healthcare recipients and their providers while seeking/delivering support in situations of breaking bad news and communications on death? Materials and Methods: The data were collected through individual in-depth interviews-31 respondents that included 16 patients and their families (recipient) and 15 medical practitioners (provider). Inductive thematic analysis was used. Results: Three main themes and nine sub-themes were identified highlighting livid experiences and perceptions of respondents. The findings suggest that interpersonal communications involve language barriers, health literacy and COVID-19 pandemic, situations of sudden unexplained death, perceptual negativity surrounding healthcare, empathy as well as emotions and multiple affiliations leading to ethical moral conflicts to influence individual perception. Regarding treatment attributes, factors of inaccessibility misconceived as incompetence and waiting and contact time are involved. The behavior and personality dimensions include attitude and robustness of the patient party and capability to handle emotions that affect provider-recipient relationship during communications of bad news and death. Conclusion: This study provided a local perspective about the experiences and expectations of healthcare recipients and their providers. Understanding this critical realm shall help in bridging the gap between recipient expectations and provider practices. It will also attempt towards possible alignment to improve patient satisfaction.

Communicating bad news of COVID-19: An empirical study of patients' preferences in India.

The study aims to assess patients' preferences regarding physicians communicating bad news of COVID-19. Based on the data collected from 74 patients with COVID-19 in India, this study assesses "how" patients want bad news to be delivered. Key aspects of the physician-patient interaction were identified from the literature. Regression tests proved that three main constructs contribute significantly toward patient outcomes. Content of the message and facilitation were most crucial, however too much emotional support was not desirable by patients. Also, the patient's gender and educational background should be considered before breaking bad news . Thus, to increase patient compliance full disclosure and patient-centered methods of communication can be used.

Breaking bad news to patients in the emergency department.

Breaking the news of potentially serious and new diagnoses to patients in the emergency department (ED) is a common but challenging aspect of the autonomous practitioner's role. It is a complex process, requiring expertise and skill. If the news is delivered appropriately there is evidence to suggest a beneficial effect on the patient's ability to cope, yet there is little formal training available and literature focused on the ED setting is limited. This article aims to guide and prepare autonomous practitioners in the ED to break bad news to patients, including during remote consultations introduced due to the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic. It identifies the importance of preparation; different approaches to breaking bad news, namely the six-stage SPIKES framework and a case study exploring its application in practice; the range of potential patient reactions and how these can be managed, including the provision of support; and how to involve and communicate with other members of the multidisciplinary team. Suggestions for further training are outlined.

Breaking bad news to cancer patients in times of COVID-19.

Breaking bad news is a mandatory provision in the professional life of nearly every physician. One of its most frequent occasions is the diagnosis of malignancy. Responding to the recipients' emotions is a critical issue in the delivery of unsettling information, and has an impact on the patient's trust in the treating physician, adjustment to illness and ultimately treatment. Since the World Health Organization (WHO) declared COVID-19 a pandemic on March 11, 2020, several measures of social distancing and isolation have been introduced to our clinical setting. In the wake of these restrictions, it is important to reexamine existing communication guidelines to determine their applicability to face-to-face counseling in the context of social distancing, as well as to new communication technologies, such as telemedicine. We address these issues and discuss strategies to convey bad news the most empathetic and comprehensible way possible.

Communicating cystic fibrosis newborn screening results to parents.

The way results of cystic fibrosis (CF) newborn screening are communicated to parents is critical yet is done differently across the globe. We surveyed parents of 101 children in our tertiary London paediatric centre with a 48% response rate. Parental responses were as follows: 40/42 (95%) said the information could not have been given over the phone and 39/43 (91%) said they wanted both partners present; 27/42 (64%) said it was helpful having the health visitor also present; and 37/40 (92%) felt it was acceptable to wait until the next day for the sweat test. We have reduced the time from first contact to arriving in the home to 2-3 h.Conclusion: We believe that this survey backs up our approach of a home visit by a CF nurse specialist with the family's health visitor to break the news. This is challenging in the current COVID-19 pandemic. What is Known: • Breaking bad news can have a lasting impact on parents when not done the right way. • Giving results of cystic fibrosis (CF) newborn screening is done differently within the UK and around the world. What is New: • Our parental survey revealed that the majority (92%) believed this should be done face to face and not over the telephone. • There was a mixed response to whether the parents should be told the genotype (assuming the CF centre knew), and thus the CF diagnosis before the confirmatory sweat test was carried out.

Breaking Bad News Training in the COVID-19 Era and Beyond.

COVID-19 has disrupted the status quo for healthcare education. As a result, redeployed doctors and nurses are caring for patients at the end of their lives and breaking bad news with little experience or training. This article aims to understand why redeployed doctors and nurses feel unprepared to break bad news through a content analysis of their training curricula. As digital learning has come to the forefront in health care education during this time, relevant digital resources for breaking bad news training are suggested.