Caregivers are critical in advanced care planning (ACP) discussions, which are difficult but necessary to carry out patients’ goals of care. We developed and evaluated the feasibility and acceptability of a communication training to equip caregivers of patients with malignant brain tumors with skills to navigate ACP conversations.

Caregivers completed a 2-h virtual training addressing ACP Discussions with Your Loved One and ACP Discussions with the Medical Team. A pre-training assessment was completed at baseline and a training evaluation was completed one day post-training. A subset of participants completed semi-structured interviews 2 months post-training.

Of 15 caregivers recruited, 9 attended the training and 4 completed qualitative interviews. Post-training, 40% felt confident in discussing ACP with loved ones and 67% felt confident doing so with healthcare professionals; 100% reported feeling confident in using skills learned in the training to facilitate these conversations. Data from qualitative interviews highlighted additional benefits of the training in empathic communication skills and fostering social support.

Our communication skills training shows promise in supporting caregivers’ skills and confidence in engaging in ACP discussions with patients and healthcare providers. A future randomized controlled trial with a larger and more diverse caregiving sample is needed to determine training efficacy.

Despite the potential benefits of open communication about possible desires to die for patients receiving palliative care, health professionals tend to avoid such conversations and often interpret desires to die as requests for medical aid in dying. After implementing trainings to foster an open, proactive approach toward desire to die, we requested trained health professionals to lead and document desire to die-conversations with their patients. In this article, we explore how trained health professionals experience an open (proactive) approach to desire to die-conversations with their patients.

Between April 2018 and March 2020, health professionals recorded their conversation-experiences on documentation sheets by answering seven open questions. A subsample was invited to offer deeper insights through semi-structured qualitative interviews. Interviews and documentation sheets were transcribed verbatim and analyzed thematically, then findings from both sources were compared and synthesized.

Overall, N = 29 trained health professionals documented N = 81 open desire to die-conversations. A subsample of n = 13 health professionals participated in qualitative interviews. Desire to die-conversations after the training were reported as a complex but overall enriching experience, illustrated in seven themes: (1) beneficial (e.g., establishing good rapport) and (2) hindering aspects (e.g., patients’ emotional barriers) of desire to die-conversations, (3) follow-up measures, (4) ways of addressing desire to die, as well as (5) patient reactions to it. The interviews offered space for health professionals to talk about (6) content of desire to die-conversation and (7) (self-)reflection (e.g., on patients’ biographies or own performance).

As part of an open (proactive) approach, desire to die-conversations hold potential for health professionals’ (self-)reflection and a deeper understanding of patient background and needs. They may lead to a strengthened health professional–patient relationship and potentially prevent suicide.

From a communication perspective, the term “do not resuscitate” (DNR) is challenging to use in end-of-life discussions because it omits the goals of care. An alternative, “Allow Natural Death” (AND), has been proposed as a better way of framing this palliative care discussion.

We present a case where a nurse unsuccessfully discusses end-of-life goals of care using the term DNR. Subsequently, with the aid of a communication trainer, he is coached to successfully use the term “AND” to facilitate this discussion and advance his goal of palliative care communication and planning.

We contrast the advantages and disadvantages of the term AND from the communication training perspective and suggest that AND-framing language replace DNR as a better way to facilitate meaningful end-of-life communication. One well-designed, randomized, controlled simulation study supports this practice. We also consider the communication implications of “natural” versus “unnatural” death.

Discussing the transition from active anti-cancer treatment to palliative care can be difficult for cancer patients and oncology health professionals (OHP). We developed a brief communication skills workshop to assist OHP with these conversations, and examined satisfaction with the workshop and perceived confidence regarding these discussions.

Interactive workshops were conducted by trained facilitators and included cognitive, behavioral, and experiential components. The major component of the workshop involved role-plays with trained actors (simulated patients). Participants completed an evaluation questionnaire.

Sixty-two OHP participated in workshops. Overall, participants were highly satisfied with the workshop content and format. All participants felt the workshop provided relevant practical information, and >80% thought that participation benefited their work. Over 98% said that the workshop had increased confidence in their communication skills.

Participants were very satisfied with the workshop, and thought that participation increased confidence in communicating about the transition to palliative care. Dissemination of this model of communication skills training seems warranted.

End-of-life communication is crucial because most U.S. hospitals implement cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) in the absence of do-not-resuscitate directives (DNRs). Despite this, there is little DNR utilization data to guide the design of communication-training programs. The objective of this study was to determine DNR utilization patterns and whether their use is increasing.

A retrospective database analysis (2000–2005) of DNR data for 206,437 patients, the entire patient population at Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center (MSKCC), was performed.

The hospital recorded, on average, 4,167 deaths/year. In 2005, 86% of inpatient deaths had a DNR, a 3% increase since 2000 (p < .01). For patients who died outside the institution (e.g., hospice), 52% had a DNR, a 24% increase over 6 years (p < .00001). Adult inpatients signed 53% of DNRs but 34% were signed by surrogates. The median time between signing and death was 0 days, that is, the day of death. Only 5.5% of inpatient deaths had previously signed an outpatient DNR. Here, the median time between signing and death was 30 days.

Although DNR directives are commonly utilized and their use has increased significantly over the past 6 years, most cancer patients/surrogates sign the directives on the day of death. The proximity between signing and death may be a marker of delayed end-of-life palliative care and suboptimal doctor–patient communication. These data underscore the importance of communication-training research tailored to improve end-of-life decision making.