It is unknown whether telemedicine-delivered palliative care (tele-PC) supports emotionally responsive patient–clinician interactions.
Objectives:
We conducted a mixed-methods formative study at two academic medical centers in rural U.S. states to explore the acceptability, feasibility, and emotional responsiveness of tele-PC.
Design:
We assessed clinicians' emotional responsiveness through questionnaires, qualitative interviews, and video coding.
Results:
We completed 11 tele-PC consultations. Mean age was 71 years, 30% did not complete high school, 55% experienced at least moderate financial insecurity, and 2/3 rated their overall health poorly. All patients rated tele-PC as equal to, or better than, in-person PC at providing emotional support. There was a tendency toward higher positive and lower negative emotions following the consultation. Video coding identified 114 instances of patients expressing emotions, and clinicians detected and responded to 98% of these events.
Conclusion:
Tele-PC appears to support emotionally responsive patient–clinician interactions. A mixed-methods approach to evaluating tele-PC yields useful, complementary insights.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
KavalieratosD, CorbelliJ, ZhangD, et al.: Association between palliative care and patient and caregiver outcomes: A systematic review and meta-analysis. JAMA, 2016; 316:2104–2114.
2.
TemelJS, GreerJA, MuzikanskyA, et al.: Early palliative care for patients with metastatic non-small-cell lung cancer. N Engl J Med, 2010; 363:733–742.
3.
RogersJG, PatelCB, MentzRJ, et al.: Palliative care in heart failure: The PAL-HF randomized, controlled clinical trial. J Am Coll Cardiol, 2017; 70:331–341.
4.
LynchS: Hospice and palliative care access issues in rural areas. Am J Hosp Palliat Med, 2013; 30:172–177.
5.
RobinsonCA, PesutB, BottorffJL, et al.: Rural palliative care: A comprehensive review. J Palliat Med, 2009; 12:253–258.
6.
ElkR, EmanuelL, HauserJ, et al.: Developing and testing the feasibility of a culturally based tele-palliative care consult based on the cultural values and preferences of southern, rural African American and White community members: A program by and for the community. Health Equity, 2020; 4:52–83.
7.
WorsterB and SwartzK: Telemedicine and palliative care: An increasing role in supportive oncology. Curr Oncol Rep, 2017; 19:37.
8.
Slavin-StewartC, PhillipsA, and HortonR: A feasibility study of home-based palliative care telemedicine in rural Nova Scotia. J Palliat Med, 2020; 23:548–551.
9.
CaltonB, AbediniN, and FratkinM: Telemedicine in the time of coronavirus. J Pain Symptom Manage, 2020; 60:e12–e14.
10.
KuntzJG, KavalieratosD, EsperGJ, et al.: Feasibility and acceptability of inpatient palliative care E-family meetings during COVID-19 pandemic. J Pain Symptom Manage, 2020; 60:e28–e32.
11.
DhahriAA, De ThabrewAU, LadvaN, and PardoeH: The benefits and risks of the provision of a hospital-wide high-definition video conferencing virtual visiting service for patients and their relatives. Cureus, 2021; 13:e13435.
12.
CherniwchanHR: Harnessing new and existing virtual platforms to meet the demand for increased inpatient palliative care services during the COVID-19 pandemic: A 5 key themes literature review of the characteristics and barriers of these evolving technologies. Am J Hosp Palliat Care, 2021:10499091211036698.
13.
AndersonM and PerrinA: Technology Use Among Seniors. Washington, DC: Pew Research Center for Internet & Technology, 2017.
JacobsenJ, JacksonV, DahlinC, et al.: Components of early outpatient palliative care consultation in patients with metastatic nonsmall cell lung cancer. J Palliat Med, 2011; 14:459–464.
16.
BackAL, ParkER, GreerJA, et al.: Clinician roles in early integrated palliative care for patients with advanced cancer: A qualitative study. J Palliat Med, 2014; 17:1244–1248.
17.
EpsteinR. and Street RL: Patient-Centered Communication in Cancer Care: Promoting Healing and Reducing Suffering. NIH Publication. U.S. Dept. of Health and Human Services, National Institutes of Health, National Cancer Institute, 2007:xii, p. 203.
18.
GramlingR, NortonS, LadwigS, et al.: Latent classes of prognosis conversations in palliative care: A mixed-methods study. J Palliat Med, 2013; 16:653–660.
19.
GramlingR, NortonSA, LadwigS, et al.: Direct observation of prognosis communication in palliative care: A descriptive study. J Pain Symptom Manage, 2013; 45:202–212.
WolfI, WaissengrinB, and PellesS: Breaking bad news via telemedicine: A new challenge at times of an epidemic. Oncologist, 2020; 25:e879.
22.
CaltonB, ShibleyWP, CohenE, et al.: Patient and caregiver experience with outpatient palliative care telemedicine visits. Palliat Med Rep, 2020; 1:339–346.
23.
CheungKL, TamuraMK, StapletonRD, et al.: Feasibility and acceptability of telemedicine-facilitated palliative care consultations in rural dialysis units. J Palliat Med, 2021; 24:1307–1313.
24.
BekelmanDB, HookerS, NowelsCT, et al.: Feasibility and acceptability of a collaborative care intervention to improve symptoms and quality of life in chronic heart failure: Mixed methods pilot trial. J Palliat Med, 2014; 17:145–151.
25.
GramlingR, StanekS, LadwigS, et al.: Feeling heard and understood: A patient-reported quality measure for the inpatient palliative care setting. J Pain Symptom Manage, 2016; 51:150–154.
26.
WatsonD, ClarkLA, and TellegenA: Development and validation of brief measures of positive and negative affect: The PANAS scales. J Personal Soc Psychol, 1988; 54:1063.
27.
BylundCL and MakoulG: Examining empathy in medical encounters: An observational study using the empathic communication coding system. Health Commun, 2005; 18:123–140.
28.
Wittenberg-LylesE, DebraPO, DemirisG, et al.: Conveying empathy to hospice family caregivers: Team responses to caregiver empathic communication. Patient Educ Counsel, 2012; 89:31–37.
29.
SzucsD and IoannidisJ: When null hypothesis significance testing is unsuitable for research: A reassessment. Front Hum Neurosci, 2017; 11:390.
30.
CorbinJ and StraussA: Basics of Qualitative Research: Techniques and Procedures for Developing Grounded Theory. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, 2014.
31.
MaxQDA 2020: VERBI Software. maxqda.com (Last accessed March25, 2020).
32.
Dionne-OdomJN, KonoA, FrostJ, et al.: Translating and testing the ENABLE: CHF-PC concurrent palliative care model for older adults with heart failure and their family caregivers. J Palliat Med, 2014; 17:995–1004.
33.
Johnson ShenM, OstroffJS, HamannHA, et al.: Structured analysis of empathic opportunities and physician responses during lung cancer patient-physician consultations. J Health Commun, 2019; 24:711–718.
34.
Themessl-HuberM, HumphrisG, DowellJ, et al.: Audio-visual recording of patient–GP consultations for research purposes: A literature review on recruiting rates and strategies. Patient Educ Counsel, 2008; 71:157–168.
35.
FordS, BuscemiJ, HirkoK, et al.: Society of Behavioral Medicine (SBM) urges congress to ensure efforts to increase and enhance broadband internet access in rural areas. Transl Behav Med, 2020; 10:489–491.
36.
SchillerJS, LucasJW, PeregoyJA: Summary health statistics for U.S. adults: National health interview survey, 2012. Vital Health Stat 10, 2014; 260:1–161.
37.
GramlingR, Gajary-CootsE, StanekS, et al.: Design of and enrollment in, the palliative care communication research initiative: A direct-observation cohort study. BMC Palliat Care, 2015; 14:40.
38.
IngersollLT, SaeedF, LadwigS, et al.: Feeling heard & understood in the hospital environment: Benchmarking communication quality among patients with advanced cancer before and after palliative care consultation. J Pain Symptom Manage, 2018; 56:239–244.
