Perils and payoffs for patients in serious illness conversations as described by physicians: a qualitative study

Abstract

BackgroundThe Serious Illness Care Programme was developed to promote more, better and earlier serious illness conversations. Conversations about goals and values are associated with improved experiences and outcomes for seriously ill patients. Clinicians’ attitudes and beliefs are thought to influence the uptake and performance of serious illness conversations, yet little is known about how clinicians perceive the impact of these conversations on patients. This study aimed to explore physicians’ perceptions regarding the impact of serious illness conversations for patients.MethodsThe Serious Illness Care Programme was implemented as a quality improvement project in two hospitals in Southern Sweden. Focus group evaluation discussions were conducted with 14 physicians and inductive thematic analysis was undertaken.ResultsThe results revealed that physicians considered potential perils and optimised potential payoffs for patients when engaging in serious illness conversations. Potential perils encompassed inappropriate timing, damaging emotions and shattering hopes. Potential payoffs included reflection time, secure space, and united understandings.ConclusionsPhysicians depicted a balance in evaluating the perils and payoffs of serious illness conversations for patients and recognised the interrelation of these possibilities through continual assessment and adjustment.