Related Experiment Video
Updated: Sep 19, 2025

Setting Up a Stroke Team Algorithm and Conducting Simulation-based Training in the Emergency Department - A Practical Guide
Published on: January 15, 2017
Comparing approaches to code status conversations between Thai and American emergency clinicians: a survey study
Thidathit Prachanukool1,2, Pongsakorn Atiksawedparit3, Suthasinee Senasu4
1Department of Emergency Medicine, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts, USA thidathit.pra@mahidol.ac.th.
Objectives:
Emergency clinicians conduct code status conversations as part of shared decision-making regarding the management of patients with serious life-limiting illnesses. Given that varying sociocultural norms and healthcare systems affect communication, we hypothesised that American and Thai emergency clinicians report different approaches to code status conversations.
Methods:
A cross-sectional survey study was conducted in one US hospital and four Thai hospitals from December 2021 to November 2022. Using a 5-point Likert Scale, the survey questions focused on clinical practice for procedure-based and value-based components of code status conversations. We developed the survey from a medical communication expert team and then reviewed, refined and validated the questions. Multiple logistic regression analysis was used to compare the asking in code status conversation among American and Thai emergency clinicians and controlled for potential confounding variables.
Results:
We received responses from 84 American and 81 Thai emergency clinicians (74% and 70%, respectively). Most of the participants had 6-10 years of clinical experience (n=71, 43%), had code status conversations more than twice each month (n=63, 38%), and had prior palliative care training (n=141, 86%). Over 50% of all emergency clinicians responded 'very likely' or 'somewhat likely' to incorporate all six procedure-based components but only one of the six value-based components. Compared with Thai emergency clinicians, American emergency clinicians were significantly more likely to ask one procedure-based component (restarting the patient's heart, adjusted OR (aOR) =9.3 (95% CI 3.2 to 26.8)), while less likely to ask another procedure-based component (the patient's preference for vasopressors, aOR=0.3 (95% CI 0.1 to 0.7)), and two value-based components (providing a recommendation, aOR=0.2 (95% CI 0.1 to 0.5), assessing the patient's baseline activity, aOR=0.2 (95% CI 0.1 to 0.4)).
Conclusion:
In the approaches to code status conversations, American and Thai emergency clinicians collectively report asking about procedures rather than personal values, while specific distinctions exist and potentially reflect different cultural approaches.
Related Concept Videos
Types of Reports III: Telephone and Verbal Reports
Here's an overview of each type:
Telephone Orders
Surveys
SBAR II: Application of SBAR
SBAR Report from a Nurse to a Health Care Provider
S: "Hello, Dr. Smith. This is Jane, RN, from the Med Surg unit. I am calling to tell you about Ms. White in Room 210, who is experiencing increased pain and redness at her incision site. Her recent...
Comparing the Survival Analysis of Two or More Groups
Barriers to Effective Communication II
Cultural barriers:
Differences in values, beliefs, religion, knowledge, and tradition can significantly impact communication. Awareness of nonverbal cues is critical, especially when conversing with a patient from a different culture. What appears appropriate in one culture may be inappropriate in another.
Semantic barriers:
As a result of their tendency to use...
SBAR I: Understanding the Concept
Standardized methods of communication have been developed to ensure that information is...

