The Serious Illness Conversation Guide (SICG) has been shown to be an effective communication tool used by health care professionals when interacting with patients facing a life-limiting illness. However, Ariadne Labs, the originators of the tool, have not tested it with First Nations and Indigenous Peoples. In this project, the British Columbia Centre for Palliative Care and the First Nations Health Authority in British Columbia (BC), Canada collaborated to adapt the SICG to be more culturally safe for First Nations and Indigenous Peoples. Multiple feedback strategies were employed. Feedback was received from 35 older adults, Elders, and community members from two First Nations communities plus approximately 80 nurses serving in First Nations communities across BC. Key areas of focus for feedback on the clinical tool included setting up the conversation, involving family, closing the conversation, and using principles of health literacy to reduce power differences. Three questions were added in response to feedback received. By creating a safe space for dialogue, it is hoped that health care providers and family members will develop a deeper understanding of what is important to the person with a life-limiting illness. These conversations promote patient-centred health care that aligns with patient values and wishes. Findings from this project directly informed modification of the tool to support a more culturally safe conversation. Further research will inform whether this tool is culturally safe for all seriously ill people.

Aim/Objective: The purpose of the project was to provide information to inform the choice of educational resources available in British Columbia to support palliative care competency development for 4 disciplines: nurses, physicians, health care assistants, and social workers/counsellors. This article will describe the process of resource review. Results of the review are available at https://www.bc-cpc.ca/cpc/education-resource-review/ . The objectives were to (1) identify gaps common to all educational resources, (2) provide information on content addressing competencies as well as logistics such as time required, cost, delivery method, and training requirements for instructors, and (3) develop a reproducible process for assessment of educational resources which is unbiased, transparent, and competency based. Method: Sixteen educational resources were assessed for the percentage of competencies that were addressed. Gaps common to all resources were identified. Results: The review process is described and can be replicated when assessing future versions of these and other palliative continuing education courses. This is a reproducible methodology for review of competency-based educational resources which could be applied for any practice-related subject. Conclusion: This review process provided information which can inform a provincial interprofessional palliative education plan. The methodology may be used by others to assess and choose between competency-based education resources with a palliative population focus and other patient population foci.

No abstract

provincial/territorial governments. The research also provides recommendations to other researchers and First Nations communities who wish to conduct research to develop palliative care programs. Conclusion: In order to improve the access to culturally relevant palliative care services for First Nations communities, local palliative care programs need to be created. First Nations communities in Canada however, must develop palliative care programs without government funding and there is currently little research evidence to guide the development of palliative care programs within First Nations communities. This research begins to provide evidence to address these gaps in knowledge.