A Qualitative Examination of Physician Gender and Parental Status in Pediatric End-of-Life Communication.

In this study we utilized the framework of patient-centered communication to explore the influence of physician gender and physician parental status on (1) physician-parent communication and (2) care of pediatric patients at the end of life (EOL). The findings presented here emerged from a larger qualitative study that explored physician narratives surrounding pediatric EOL communication. The current study includes 17 pediatric critical care and pediatric emergency medicine physician participants who completed narrative interviews between March and October 2012 to discuss how their backgrounds influenced their approaches to pediatric EOL communication. Between April and June of 2013, participants completed a second round of narrative interviews to discuss topics generated out of the first round of interviews. We used grounded theory to inform the design and analysis of the study. Findings indicated that physician gender is related to pediatric EOL communication and care in two primary ways: (1) the level of physician emotional distress and (2) the way physicians perceive the influence of gender on communication. Additionally, parental status emerged as an important theme as it related to EOL decision-making and communication, emotional distress, and empathy. Although physicians reported experiencing more emotional distress related to interacting with patients at the EOL after they became parents, they also felt that they were better able to show empathy to parents of their patients.

Physician Communication in Pediatric End-of-Life Care: A Simulation Study.

OBJECTIVE: The objective of this exploratory study is to describe communication between physicians and the actor parent of a standardized 8-year-old patient in respiratory distress who was nearing the end of life. METHODS: Thirteen pediatric emergency medicine and pediatric critical care fellows and attendings participated in a high-fidelity simulation to assess physician communication with an actor-parent. RESULTS: Fifteen percent of the participants decided not to initiate life-sustaining technology (intubation), and 23% of participants offered alternatives to life-sustaining care, such as comfort measures. Although 92% of the participants initiated an end-of-life conversation, the quality of that discussion varied widely. CONCLUSION: Findings indicate that effective physician-parent communication may not consistently occur in cases involving the treatment of pediatric patients at the end of life in emergency and critical care units. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: The findings in this study, particularly that physician-parent end-of-life communication is often unclear and that alternatives to life-sustaining technology are often not offered, suggest that physicians need more training in both communication and end-of-life care.

Physician Religion and End-of-Life Pediatric Care: A Qualitative Examination of Physicians' Perspectives.

Physician religion/spirituality has the potential to influence the communication between physicians and parents of children at the end of life. In order to explore this relationship, the authors conducted two rounds of narrative interviews to examine pediatric physicians' perspectives (N=17) of how their religious/spiritual beliefs affect end-of-life communication and care. Grounded theory informed the design and analysis of the study. As a proxy for religiosity/spirituality, physicians were classified into the following groups based on the extent to which religious/spiritual language was infused into their responses: Religiously Rich Responders (RRR), Moderately Religious Responders (MRR), and Low Religious Responders (LRR). Twelve of the 17 participants (71%) were classified into the RRR or MRR groups. The majority of participants suggested that religion/spirituality played a role in their practice of medicine and communication with parents in a myriad of ways and to varying degrees. Participants used their religious/spiritual beliefs to support families' spirituality, uphold hope, participate in prayer, and alleviate their own emotional distress emerging from their patients' deaths.

Developing, integrating, and perpetuating new ways of applying sociology to health, medicine, policy, and everyday life.

As a framework for presenting ideas on developing ways to make sociology more applicable, we focus on the recent state of medical sociology research. Data for this paper were generated through a content analysis of a twelve-year period (1993-2004) of the Journal of Health and Social Behavior (JHSB) and Social Science & Medicine (SSM). The analysis aims to determine if the content of JHSB and SSM reflect the breadth of the sub-discipline of medical sociology as well as the stated goals of the journals. The selected issues of JHSB and SSM were coded on the basis of the following attributes: (1) Primary Substantive Topic, (2) Methodology, (3) Data Type and Analytic Technique, and (4) Research and Policy Recommendations. We found that the orientation of JHSB articles was towards generating research and theory that shy away from policy, interdisciplinary approaches, and applied issues. SSM content tends to display more interdisciplinary breadth and variety, but also reflects a dearth of applied recommendations. Our discussion focuses on what JHSB and SSM could be. We present ideas on how the sociological discipline in general-and JHSB and SSM in particular-can help generate and nourish new forms of inquiry that can impact the way research questions are framed. We conclude that such a shift is needed in order to maximize the applicability of social scientific evidence to everyday life, and we share examples situated within a socio-medical context, where there is a particular need for the application of social evidence to practice.

A scale to assess attitudes toward euthanasia.

The topic of euthanasia has been a matter of public debate for several decades. Although empirical research should inform policy, scale measurement is lacking. After analyzing shortcomings of previous work, we offer a systematically designed scale to measure attitudes toward euthanasia. We attempt to encompass previously unspecified dimensions of the phenomenon that are central to the euthanasia debate. The results of our pretest show that our attitude towards euthanasia (ATE) scale is both reliable and valid. We delineate active and passive euthanasia, no chance for recovery and severe pain, and patient's autonomy and doctor's authority. We argue that isolating these factors provides a more robust scale capable of better analyzing sample variance. Internal consistency is established with Cronbach's alpha=.871. Construct external consistency is established by correlating the scale with other predictors such as race and spirituality.