Palliative Care and Social Practice (Sep 2023)

Characterizing end-of-life communication in families

  • Melanie A. Horning,
  • Mary Elizabeth Bowen

DOI
https://doi.org/10.1177/26323524231193033
Journal volume & issue
Vol. 17

Abstract

Read online

Background: The chronic disease course can be uncertain, contributing to delayed end-of-life discussion within families resulting in missed opportunity to articulate wishes, increased decisional uncertainty, and delayed hospice care. Consistent with the Family Communication Patterns Theory (FCPT), family communication patterns may affect the quality and timing of end-of-life discussion, hospice utilization, and the experience of ‘a good death.’ Objective: To assess how families’ conversation and conformity orientation (spontaneity of conversation and hierarchical rigidity) form four family communication patterns (consensual, pluralistic, protective, and laissez-faire) and may be associated with the number and timing of end-of-life discussions. Design: A cross-sectional study. Methods: Family members of loved ones who died from chronic illnesses while in hospice ( n = 56) completed online surveys including a modified Revised Family Communication Pattern instrument (RFCP) and the Chronic Illness Rating Scale (CIRS). Additional survey questions assessed the number and timing of end-of-life discussions and timing of hospice enrollment. IBM SPSS version 26 was used for descriptive analysis. Results: Most families (42.9%) were pluralistic, reporting communication styles with high conversation and low conformity orientation; (39.29%) were protective, reporting low conversation and high conformity orientation. Pluralistic families had more end-of-life conversations than did protective families. Conclusion: Study findings suggest that there may be a relationship between family communication pattern type and inclination toward end-of-life discussion. This first step supports future research regarding whether the FCPT can be used to predict which families may be at increased risk for ineffective or delayed end-of-life discussion. Additional variables to consider include the timing of hospice enrollment and the quality of the dying experience. Clinicians may ultimately use findings to facilitate earlier identification of and intervention for families who are at risk for poor end-of-life communication and outcomes.