"This is just too awful; I just can't believe I experienced that...": medical students' reactions to their "most memorable" patient death.

PURPOSE: To examine medical students' emotional reactions to their "most memorable" patient death and the support they receive. METHOD: In 2000-01, 65 third-year medical students at two Northeastern U.S. medical schools were randomly selected to participate in 60-90-minute interviews of open-ended and structured questions and a written questionnaire (using a ten-point scale) about their "most memorable" patient death. Independent reviewers coded each interview to identify the analytical categories. Descriptive data were generated from the written questionnaire. RESULTS: A total of 32 interviews were used in the analysis. Twelve (38%) students were in contact with the patient for less than 24 hours and 23 (73%) were not at all or minimally close to the patient (0-3 on ten-point scale). Sixteen of 28 students (57%) rated the impact of the death as highly emotionally powerful (7-10 on ten-point scale). The finality of deaths, particularly sudden deaths, evoked strong emotions. Four of 16 (25%) students who found the death highly emotionally powerful rated the amount of support from supervisors as extremely inadequate (0-3 on ten-point scale). There was no discussion of the death in 17 (63%) of the 27 cases in which the patient was cared for by the student's team. Students perceived from supervising physicians that death and emotions are negative aspects of medicine. CONCLUSIONS: Medical students experienced patient deaths as emotionally powerful even when they were not close to the patients. Debriefing sessions with students were rare, and many students felt inadequately supported. Thus, a unique opportunity to teach about death, emotions and coping with stress is often lost.

The need for end-of-life care training in nephrology: national survey results of nephrology fellows.

Because of the high mortality rate of end-stage renal disease, nephrologists care for many dying patients. However, the education of nephrology fellows in palliative care has not been assessed. We surveyed second-year nephrology fellows to assess the quantity and quality of teaching they received in palliative medicine and also asked about their preparedness to manage patients at the end of life. A 63% survey response rate yielded 173 surveys for evaluation. Nearly all fellows (99%) agreed that physicians have a responsibility to help patients at the end of life; half thought it was very important to learn how to care for dying patients. On a 10-point scale in which 0 is no teaching and 10 is a lot of teaching, fellows reported significantly less teaching in end-of-life care (mean score, 3.8 +/- 2.6) than in managing a patient with distal renal tubular acidosis (mean score, 6.3 +/- 2.5) or on hemodialysis therapy (mean score, 8.9 +/- 1.5; all P < 0.0001). Specific palliative care content areas were taught infrequently; only 22% of fellows were taught how to tell a patient he or she is dying. Fellows who had contact with a palliative care specialist reported more education on end-of-life issues and believed they were better prepared to provide such care. Fellows' palliative care experiences during fellowship frequently occurred without attending nephrologist supervision; 32% of fellows had conducted 2 or fewer family meetings, and 26% of all family meetings occurred without an attending nephrologist. Fellows believed they were best prepared to manage a patient on hemodialysis therapy (mean score, 8.9 +/- 1) and least prepared to manage a patient at the end of life (mean score, 6.1 +/- 2; P < 0.0001). Our results show that most nephrology fellows believe they should learn how to care for dying patients, but most fellowship programs do not offer this training. Our study therefore suggests that training in palliative care be incorporated into fellowship program curricula.

Symptom burden, quality of life, advance care planning and the potential value of palliative care in severely ill haemodialysis patients.

BACKGROUND: There has been little research on the potential value of palliative care for dialysis patients. In this pilot study, we sought (i) to identify symptom burden, health-related quality of life (HRQoL) and advance directives in extremely ill haemodialysis patients to determine their suitability for palliative care and (ii) to determine the acceptability of palliative care to patients and nephrologists. METHODS: Nineteen haemodialysis patients with modified Charlson co-morbidity scores of > or =8 were recruited. Each completed surveys to assess symptom burden, HRQoL and prior advance care planning. Palliative care specialists then visited patients twice and generated recommendations. Patients again completed the surveys, and dialysis charts were reviewed to assess nephrologists' (i) compliance with recommendations and (ii) documentation of symptoms reported by patients on the symptom assessment survey. Patients and nephrologists then completed surveys assessing their satisfaction with palliative care. RESULTS: Patients reported 10.5 symptoms, 40% of which were noted by nephrologists in patients' charts. HRQoL was significantly impaired. Thirty-two percent of patients had living wills. No differences were observed in symptoms, HRQoL or number of patients establishing advance directives as a result of the intervention. Sixty-eight percent of patients and 76% of nephrologists rated the intervention worthwhile. CONCLUSIONS: Extremely ill dialysis patients have marked symptom burden, considerably impaired HRQoL and frequently lack advance directives, making them appropriate candidates for palliative care. Patients and nephrologists perceive palliative care favourably despite its lack of effect in this study. A more sustained palliative care intervention with a larger sample size should be attempted to determine its effect on the care of this population.