4.3 Article

PALLIATIVE CARE PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT FOR CRITICAL CARE NURSES: A MULTICENTER PROGRAM

Journal

AMERICAN JOURNAL OF CRITICAL CARE
Volume 26, Issue 5, Pages 361-371

Publisher

AMER ASSOC CRITICAL CARE NURSES
DOI: 10.4037/ajcc2017336

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. CHQIQERM, a joint venture of the University of California Center for Health Quality and Innovation
  2. Office of Risk Services

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background Integrating palliative care into intensive care units (ICUs) requires involvement of bedside nurses, who report inadequate education in palliative care. Objective To implement and evaluate a palliative care professional development program for ICU bedside nurses. Methods From May 2013 to January 2015, palliative care advanced practice nurses and nurse educators in 5 academic medical centers completed a 3-day train-the-trainer program followed by 2 years of mentoring to implement the initiative. The program consisted of 8-hour communication workshops for bedside nurses and structured rounds in ICUs, where nurse leaders coached bedside nurses in identifying and addressing palliative care needs. Primary outcomes were nurses' ratings of their palliative care communication skills in surveys, and nurses' identification of palliative care needs during coaching rounds. Results Each center held at least 6 workshops, training 428 bedside nurses. Nurses rated their skill level higher after the workshop for 15 tasks (eg, responding to family distress, ensuring families understand information in family meetings, all P < .01 vs preworkshop). Coaching rounds in each ICU took a mean of 3 hours per month. For 82% of 1110 patients discussed in rounds, bedside nurses identified palliative care needs and created plans to address them. Conclusions Communication skills training workshops increased nurses' ratings of their palliative care communication skills. Coaching rounds supported nurses in identifying and addressing palliative care needs.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.3
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available