Skip to main content

The Importance of Patient–Provider Communication in End-of-Life Care

Abstract

Successful formulation and implementation of end-of-life care requires ongoing communication with the patient. When patients, for reasons of general medical or psychiatric illness, fail to verbally communicate, providers must be receptive to messages conveyed through alternate avenues of communication. We present the narrative of a man with schizophrenia who wished to forgo hemodialysis as a study in the ethical importance of attention to nonverbal communication. A multilayered understanding of the patient, as may be provided by both behavioral and motivational models, can inform the provider’s ability to receive, process, and represent communicated content to the patient or his or her surrogate decision-maker.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Notes

  1. 1.

    This legal maxim has been traced to Judge Robert Rolfe, Baron Cranworth, in Winterbottom v Wright (1842) 10 M&W 109 (Davis and Stark 2001).

References

  1. American Bar Association Commission on Law and Aging. 2009. Default surrogate consent statutes, November 2009. American Bar Association. http://www.americanbar.org/content/dam/aba/migrated/aging/PublicDocuments/famcon_2009.authcheckdam.pdf.

  2. Appelbaum, P.S. 2007. Assessment of patients’ competence to consent to treatment. The New England Journal of Medicine 357(18): 1834–1840.

    PubMed  Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Bion, W.R. 1962. Learning from experience. London: Tavistock.

    Google Scholar 

  4. Davis, M., and A. Stark. 2001. Conflict of interest in the professions. New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  5. Karel, M.J., R.J. Gurrera, B. Hicken, and J. Moye. 2010. Reasoning in the capacity to make medical decisions: The consideration of values. The Journal of Clinical Ethics 21(1): 58–71.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Kluge, E.-H. 2005. Competence, capacity, and informed consent: Beyond the cognitive-competence model. Canadian Journal on Aging 24(3): 295–304.

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Lopez, R.P., E.J. Amella, S.L. Mitchell, and N.E. Strumpf. 2010. Nurses’ perspectives on feeding decisions for nursing home residents with advanced dementia. Journal of Clinical Nursing 19(5–6): 632–638.

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Silveria, M., S.Y.H. Kim, and K.M. Langa. 2010. Advance directive and outcomes of surrogate decision-making before death. The New England Journal of Medicine 362(13): 1211–1218.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Stanley, J.M. 1989. The Appleton Consensus: Suggested international guidelines for decisions to forgo medical treatment. Journal of Medical Ethics 15(3): 129–136.

    PubMed  Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Viederman, M. 1977. The doctor–patient relationship as it pertains to patients with terminal renal failure. Journal of Dialysis 1(8): 749–755.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgment

No declared sources of financial support for this study.

Conflict of Interest

No declared conflicts of interest.

Author information

Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Timothy R. Rice.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Rice, T.R., Dobry, Y., Novakovic, V. et al. The Importance of Patient–Provider Communication in End-of-Life Care. Bioethical Inquiry 9, 439–441 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11673-012-9397-4

Download citation

Keywords

  • End-of-life care
  • Therapeutic alliance
  • Capacity
  • Surrogate decision-maker
  • Renal failure
  • Dialysis
  • Consent
  • Moral responsibility
  • Physician duty