Caring for Critically Ill Patients : Clinicians’ Empathy Promotes Job Satisfaction and Does Not Predict Moral Distress

Background: Several studies have highlighted the benefits of empathy in healthcare settings. A correlation between clinicians' empathy and patients' adherence and satisfaction, as well as the ability for the clinician to accurately assess family members' needs, has been found. However, empathy is often seen by clinicians as a risk factor for their wellbeing. This study aims to assess whether the level of empathy of clinicians working in critical care settings may expose them to moral distress, poor job satisfaction, and intention to quit their job. Methods: Italian clinicians who attended the 2016 "Smart Meeting Anesthesia Resuscitation in Intensive Care" completed the Empathy Quotient questionnaire, the Moral Distress Scale-Revised, and two questions assessing job satisfaction and intention to quit the job. Multiple linear and logistic regressions were performed to determine if clinicians' empathy influences moral distress, job satisfaction, and intention to quit. Age, gender, and profession were used as control variables. Results: Out of 927 questionnaires distributed, 216 were returned (23% response rate) and 210 were used in the analyses. Respondents were 56% physicians, 24% nurses, and 20% residents. Over half of the clinicians (58%) were female. Empathy resulted the only significant predictor of job satisfaction (\u3b2 = 0.193; p < 0.05). None of the variables included in the model predicted moral distress. Conclusion: Empathy determined neither moral distress nor intention to quit. Findings suggest that empathy is not a risk factor for critical care clinicians in developing moral distress and the intention to quit their job. On the contrary, empathy was found to enhance clinicians' job satisfaction

Voices emerging from the shadows : Radiologic practitioners’ experiences of challenging conversations

Objective Traditionally, radiologists have practiced their profession behind the scenes. Today, radiologic practitioners face mounting expectations to communicate more directly with patients. However, their experiences with patient communication are not well understood. The aim of this study was to describe the challenges of radiologic practitioners when communicating with patients. Methods Twelve day-long interprofessional communication skills workshops for radiologic clinicians were held at Boston Children\u2019s Hospital. Prior to each workshop, participants were asked to write narratives describing experiences with difficult radiologic conversations that they found particularly challenging or satisfying. The narratives were transcribed and analyzed through thematic content analysis by two researchers. Results Radiologists, radiology trainees, technologists, nurses, and medical interpreters completed 92 narratives. The most challenging aspects of healthcare conversations included: Conveying Serious News (n = 44/92; 48%); Expanded Scope of Radiologic Practice (n = 37/92; 40%); Inexperience and Gaps in Education (n = 15/92; 16%); Clinical Uncertainty (n = 14/92; 15%); and Interprofessional Teamwork (n = 9/92; 10%). Conclusion Radiologic clinicians face substantial communicative challenges focused on conveying serious, unexpected and uncertain diagnoses amid practical challenges and limited educational opportunities. Practice implications Innovative educational curricula that address these challenges may enhance radiologic practitioners\u2019 success in adopting patient-centered communication

Measuring Moral Distress Among Critical Care Clinicians : Validation and Psychometric Properties of the Italian Moral Distress Scale-Revised

OBJECTIVES: Moral distress is a common experience among critical care professionals, leading to frustration, withdrawal from patient care, and job abandonment. Most of the studies on moral distress have used the Moral Distress Scale or its revised version (Moral Distress Scale-Revised). However, these scales have never been validated through factor analysis. This article aims to explore the factorial structure of the Moral Distress Scale-Revised and develop a valid and reliable scale through factor analysis. DESIGN: Validation study using a survey design. SETTING: Eight medical-surgical ICUs in the north of Italy. SUBJECTS: A total of 184 clinicians (64 physicians, 94 nurses, and 14 residents). INTERVENTIONS: The Moral Distress Scale-Revised was translated into Italian and administered along with a measure of depression (Beck Depression Inventory-Second Edition) to establish convergent validity. Exploratory factor analysis was conducted to explore the Moral Distress Scale-Revised factorial structure. Items with low (less than or equal to 0.350) or multiple saturations were removed. The resulting model was tested through confirmatory factor analysis. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: The Italian Moral Distress Scale-Revised is composed of 14 items referring to four factors: futile care, poor teamwork, deceptive communication, and ethical misconduct. This model accounts for 59% of the total variance and presents a good fit with the data (root mean square error of approximation = 0.06; comparative fit index = 0.95; Tucker-Lewis index = 0.94; weighted root mean square residual = 0.65). The Italian Moral Distress Scale-Revised evinces good reliability (\u3b1 = 0.81) and moderately correlates with Beck Depression Inventory-Second Edition (r = 0.293; p < 0.001). No significant differences were found in the moral distress total score between physicians and nurses. However, nurses scored higher on futile care than physicians (t = 2.051; p = 0.042), whereas physicians scored higher on deceptive communication than nurses (t = 3.617; p < 0.001). Moral distress was higher for those clinicians considering to give up their position (t = 2.778; p = 0.006). CONCLUSIONS: The Italian Moral Distress Scale-Revised is a valid and reliable instrument to assess moral distress among critical care clinicians and develop tailored interventions addressing its different components. Further research could test the generalizability of its factorial structure in other cultures

Anesthesiology trainees face ethical, practical and relational challenges in obtaining informed consent

BACKGROUND: Categorizing difficulties anesthesiologists have in obtaining informed consent may influence education, performance, and research. This study investigated the trainees' perspectives and educational needs through a qualitative analysis of narratives. METHODS: The Program to Enhance Relational and Communication Skills-Anesthesia used professional actors to teach communication skills and relational abilities associated with informed consent. Before attending the program, participants wrote about a challenging informed consent experience. Narratives were analyzed by two researchers following the principles of grounded theory. The researchers independently read the narratives and marked key words and phrases to identify reoccurring challenges described by anesthesiologists. Through rereading of the narratives and discussion, the two researchers reached consensus on the challenges that arose and calculated their frequency. RESULTS: Analysis of the 39 narratives led to the identification of three types of challenges facing anesthesiologists in obtaining informed consent. Ethical challenges included patient wishes not honored, conflict between patient and family wishes and medical judgment, patient decision-making capacity, and upholding professional standards. Practical challenges included the amount of information to provide, communication barriers, and time limitations. Relational challenges included questions about trainee competence, mistrust associated with previous negative experiences, and misunderstandings between physician and patient or family. CONCLUSIONS: The ethical, practical, and relational challenges in obtaining informed consent colored trainees' views of patient care and affected their interactions with patients. Using participant narratives personalizes education and motivates participants. The richness of narratives may help anesthesiologists to appreciate the qualitative aspects of informed consent

Cross-cultural adaptation of an innovative approach to learning about difficult conversations in healthcare

Background:\u2003The Program to Enhance Relational and Communication Skills (PERCS) was developed at a large hospital in the United States to enhance clinicians\u2019 preparedness to engage in difficult conversations. Aim:\u2003To describe the implementation of PERCS in an Italian hospital and assess the program's efficacy. Methods:\u2003The Italian PERCS program featured 4-h experiential workshops enrolling 10\u201315 interdisciplinary participants. The workshops were organized around the enactment and debriefing of realistic case scenarios portrayed by actors and volunteer clinicians. Before and after the workshop, participants rated their perceived preparation, communication and relational skills, confidence, and anxiety on 5-point Likert scales. Open-ended questions explored their reflections on the learning. T-tests and content analysis were used to analyze the quantitative and qualitative data, respectively. Results:\u2003146 clinicians attended 13 workshops. Participants reported better preparation, confidence, and communication skills (p\u2009<\u20090.001) after the workshops. The program had a different impact depending on the discipline. Participants valued the emphasis on group feedback, experiential and interdisciplinary learning, and the patient's perspective, and acquired: new communication skills, self-reflective attitude, reframed perspective, and interdisciplinary teamwork. Conclusion:\u2003PERCS proved culturally adaptable to the Italian context and effective in improving participants\u2019 sense of preparation, communication skills, and confidence

Cultural competency in healthcare : Learning across boundaries

During 2006-2007, 1 was fortunate to study and work as a Fulbright Scholar at the Institute for Professionalism and Ethical Practice, Children's Hospital, Boston. As part of my Fulbright experience in the United States, 1 collaboratively developed a cross-cultural educational experience between the faculty of the Institute of Professionalism and Ethical Practice and of the Chair of Medical Psychology, San Paolo Hospital, Milan to explore how patient-centered care is interpreted and enacted across cultures. Both groups wrote a patient-centered dialogue based on the same clinical scenario. Dialogues were exchanged and each group commented on the other's dialogue during a videoconference. Both groups identified responding to the patient's illness experience and emotions as central to patient-centeredness, while patient autonomy was understood differently. Constructing an ideal patient-centered dialogue and the discussion with a group of another culture enabled participants to become more aware of their implicit assumptions about patient-centeredness. This experience helped both groups to better understand our 'blind spots' and enhance our cultural humility. It was thanks to the 'other' that we ultimately learned more about ourselves

Teaching nurses how to teach : an evaluation of a workshop on patient education

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the effects of a patient education workshop on nurses: (1) communication skills; (2) Knowledge of patient-centered model, patient education process, and sense of preparedness to provide patient education. METHODS: Fourteen nurses attended a 2-day workshop on patient education based on a patient-centered model. Data on communication skills were collected by means of pre-/post-written dialogues and analyzed with the Roter Interaction Analysis System (RIAS). Data of nurses' knowledge and sense of preparedness were collected through a post questionnaire comprised of 5-point Likert scale items. RESULTS: Post-dialogues showed an increase in patient talking (P<0.001) and in patient-centered communication as indicated by the increase in Psychosocial exchanges (P=0.003) and Process exchanges (P=0.001). Nurses reported that the workshop increased "very much" their knowledge of the patient-centered model (mean=4.19) and patient education process (mean=4.69), and their sense of preparedness to provide patient education (P=0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Data suggest the efficacy of the workshop in developing patient-centered communication skills and improving nurses' knowledge and preparedness to deliver patient education. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: Training based on a patient-centered model and interactive learning methods should be implemented for nurses to improve their ability to deliver effective patient education