Cited by 53Palliative Care and End-of-Life IssuesInnovations in Medical EducationPalliative and Oncologic Care

An Educational Intervention To Improve Resident Comfort with Communication at the End of Life

Smith, Leah, O'Sullivan, Patricia, Lo, Bernard, Chen, Hubert·2013·Journal of Palliative Medicine

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Approximately 20% of deaths in the United States occur in the intensive care unit (ICU). Physician trainees lack the practical communication skills required for end-of-life care, including establishing patient preferences, participating in shared decision making, discussing prognosis, and delivering bad news. Utilizing facilitated, case-based, peer interactions, we sought to assess the feasibility and impact of a novel resident curriculum in end-of-life education. METHODS: The study took place at each of the three University of California, San Francisco (UCSF) teaching hospitals, and involved all internal medicine residents at UCSF. The curriculum consisted of two one-hour lunch conference sessions and six one-hour morning reports. A pre- and post-intervention electronic survey was administered. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION: The teaching sessions offered in this study were well-attended and well-received by residents. Our curriculum impacted resident reports of comfort with specific topics in end-of-life care, including discussions of code status and comfort care. Furthermore, we found that this curriculum, although brief, demonstrated a small impact on resident reports of self-efficacy for communication. Our findings demonstrate the feasibility of incorporating end-of-life communication skills training into an existing internal medicine resident curriculum.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1089/jpm.2012.0173

Cites

27 of 27 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Smith, L., O'Sullivan, P., Lo, B., & Chen, H.
Affiliations
  • University of California, San Francisco (US)
  • University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, California.
Corresponding author
Smith, Leah
Venue
Journal of Palliative Medicine
Published
2013-01
Volume
16
Issue
1
Pages
54-59
ISSN
  • 1096-6218 (ISSN-L)
  • 1557-7740
OpenAlex
W2028739844
Cited by
53
References
27
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 2 · 2023: 4 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 7 · 2020: 4 · 2019: 5 · 2018: 3 · 2017: 2 · 2016: 6 · 2015: 9 · 2014: 4 · 2013: 2
FWCI
4.62
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Journal of Palliative Medicine (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Palliative Care and End-of-Life Issues
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Innovations in Medical Education
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Palliative and Oncologic Care
Keywords
end-of-life communication, physician-patient communication, internal medicine residents, communication skills training, end-of-life education, shared decision-making, breaking bad news, code status discussions, comfort care, self-efficacy, ICU mortality, curriculum feasibility
MeSH terms
Adult, Curriculum, Decision Making, Female, Humans, Internal Medicine, Internship and Residency, Male, Physician-Patient Relations, Pilot Projects, Prospective Studies, San Francisco, Terminal Care, Truth Disclosure, Program Evaluation, Self Efficacy, Patient Preference

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review