Aligning Family-Clinician Expectations During Pediatric Surgical Informed Consent: Development and Implementation of an Innovative Communication Skills Workshop.

INTRODUCTION: Aligning expectations during the informed consent process before a child's surgery is an important element of good communication that benefits both surgical staff and families. We developed and evaluated a 2-hour pilot interprofessional workshop to improve the communication and relational skills of pediatric surgeons and nurse practitioners. METHODS: Focus groups with families identified key challenges in the process of informed consent. An interprofessional team, including parents whose children had experienced complex surgeries, developed the workshop collaboratively. A realistic simulation with professional actors portraying parents allowed surgical staff to practice communication skills and receive feedback about the parent perspective. Participants completed a postworkshop evaluation to determine whether the workshop met its objectives and whether they would change practice. RESULTS: Five key themes identified for the workshop included customize communication; align expectations; share clinical uncertainty; recognize/attend to emotions; and identify team members. Thirty-five clinicians participated in a workshop, and 89% completed evaluations. Three-quarters reported the learning to be valuable, and 64% were likely to change practice. Eighty-seven percent would recommend the workshop to other colleagues, and 58 to 74% felt more prepared to achieve each of eight specific skills. DISCUSSION: An innovative workshop for pediatric surgical practitioners to align family-clinician expectations can help improve clinician communication skills and comfort with informed consent. Keys to workshop development included involving parents to identify themes and participate as workshop co-faculty; enlisting leadership and recruiting surgical champions; and using pre-existing meetings to ease scheduling challenges of busy practitioners. Booster sessions may facilitate the desired cultural changes.

Increasing Patient-Clinician Concordance About Medical Error Disclosure Through the Patient TIPS Model.

OBJECTIVE: To test whether an educational model involving patients and family members (P/F) in medical error disclosure training for interprofessional clinicians can narrow existing gaps between clinician and P/F views about disclosure. METHOD: Parallel presurveys/postsurveys using Likert scale questions for clinicians and P/F. RESULTS: Baseline surveys were completed by 91% (50/55) of clinicians who attended the workshops and 74% (65/88) of P/F from a hospital patient and family advisory council. P/F's baseline views about disclosure were significantly different from clinicians' in 70% (7/10) of the disclosure expectation items and 100% (3/3) of the disclosure vignette items. For example, compared with clinicians, P/F more strongly agreed that "patients want to know all the details of what happened" and more strongly disagreed that "patients find explanation(s) more confusing than helpful." In the medication error vignette, compared with clinicians, P/F more strongly agreed that the error should be disclosed and that the patient would want to know and more strongly disagreed that disclosure would do more harm than good (all P < 0.05). After the workshop, P/F and clinician views about information sharing, fallibility, truth telling, and threshold for disclosure showed greater concordance, with significant differences remaining in less than half of the expectation items and none of the vignette responses. DISCUSSION: Even with self-selecting clinicians, collaborative learning with P/F highlights important differences in patient and clinician baseline perspectives about medical error disclosure and brings patient and clinicians views closer together.

Development of a Standardized Kalamazoo Communication Skills Assessment Tool for Radiologists: Validation, Multisource Reliability, and Lessons Learned.

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to develop and test a standardized communication skills assessment instrument for radiology. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The Delphi method was used to validate the Kalamazoo Communication Skills Assessment instrument for radiology by revising and achieving consensus on the 43 items of the preexisting instrument among an interdisciplinary team of experts consisting of five radiologists and four nonradiologists (two men, seven women). Reviewers assessed the applicability of the instrument to evaluation of conversations between radiology trainees and trained actors portraying concerned parents in enactments about bad news, radiation risks, and diagnostic errors that were video recorded during a communication workshop. Interrater reliability was assessed by use of the revised instrument to rate a series of enactments between trainees and actors video recorded in a hospital-based simulator center. Eight raters evaluated each of seven different video-recorded interactions between physicians and parent-actors. RESULTS: The final instrument contained 43 items. After three review rounds, 42 of 43 (98%) items had an average rating of relevant or very relevant for bad news conversations. All items were rated as relevant or very relevant for conversations about error disclosure and radiation risk. Reliability and rater agreement measures were moderate. The intraclass correlation coefficient range was 0.07-0.58; mean, 0.30; SD, 0.13; and median, 0.30. The range of weighted kappa values was 0.03-0.47; mean, 0.23; SD, 0.12; and median, 0.22. Ratings varied significantly among conversations (χ26 = 1186; p < 0.0001) and varied significantly by viewing order, rater type, and rater sex. CONCLUSION: The adapted communication skills assessment instrument is highly relevant for radiology, having moderate interrater reliability. These findings have important implications for assessing the relational competencies of radiology trainees.

Patients and families as teachers: a mixed methods assessment of a collaborative learning model for medical error disclosure and prevention.

BACKGROUND: Despite growing interest in engaging patients and families (P/F) in patient safety education, little is known about how P/F can best contribute. We assessed the feasibility and acceptability of a patient-teacher medical error disclosure and prevention training model. METHODS: We developed an educational intervention bringing together interprofessional clinicians with P/F from hospital advisory councils to discuss error disclosure and prevention. Patient focus groups and orientation sessions informed curriculum and assessment design. A pre-post survey with qualitative and quantitative questions was used to assess P/F and clinician experiences and attitudes about collaborative safety education including participant hopes, fears, perceived value of learning experience and challenges. Responses to open-ended questions were coded according to principles of content analysis. RESULTS: P/F and clinicians hoped to learn about each other's perspectives, communication skills and patient empowerment strategies. Before the intervention, both groups worried about power dynamics dampening effective interaction. Clinicians worried that P/F would learn about their fallibility, while P/F were concerned about clinicians' jargon and defensive posturing. Following workshops, clinicians valued patients' direct feedback, communication strategies for error disclosure and a 'real' learning experience. P/F appreciated clinicians' accountability, and insights into how medical errors affect clinicians. Half of participants found nothing challenging, the remainder clinicians cited emotions and enormity of 'culture change', while P/F commented on medical jargon and desire for more time. Patients and clinicians found the experience valuable. Recommendations about how to develop a patient-teacher programme in patient safety are provided. CONCLUSIONS: An educational paradigm that includes patients as teachers and collaborative learners with clinicians in patient safety is feasible, valued by clinicians and P/F and promising for P/F-centred medical error disclosure and prevention training.