Up to 40% of seriously ill patients develop a (temporary) desire to die which can lead to requests for assisted dying. Health professionals often feel uncertain about addressing these topics, while informal caregivers may feel guilty and left out. Open and respectful communication proves beneficial. It remains unclear how this communication ideal realizes within the lived experience of all 3 parties. Therefore, we conducted in-depth analysis of communication strategies about desire to die from triangulated perspectives of patients, informal caregivers, and health professionals.

We conducted semi-structured interviews with purposefully sampled triads consisting of seriously ill patients, their respective informal caregivers and health professionals. Interviews were part of the qualitative evaluation of a 3-phase mixed-methods study on the effects of communication about desire to die on seriously ill patients. We followed a framework analysis approach to build communication types.

From the N = 13 patients, 54% suffered from oncological diseases. Health professionals (N = 13) were multiprofessional. Informal caregivers (N = 13) were partners, children, or another relation. All in all, we conducted N = 14 interview triads (n = 3 incomplete; N = 39 individual interviews).

Four key themes emerged from analysis: (a) how open communication was perceived, (b) whether participants reported shared reality, (c) how they talked about death, and (d) their communication strategies.

Ultimately, 3 communication types were inductively derived at from these key themes. Type 1 “Between the Lines,” type 2 “Past each Other” and type 3 “Matter of Fact” show differing expressions on the key themes, especially on (b) shared reality. Specific type characteristics produce suggestions for health professionals’ communicative practice.

Awareness of typical communication strategies is necessary to foresee potential pitfalls such as loss of information or acting on unchecked assumptions. To reduce distress and increase information flow, health professionals should actively approach informal caregivers for desire to die conversations.

The aim of this study was to explore elderly patients’ and general practitioners’ (GPs’) perceptions of communication about polypharmacy, medication safety and approaches for empowerment.

To manage polypharmacy, GPs need to know patients’ real medication consumption. However, previous research has shown that patients do not always volunteer all information about their medication regimen, for example, such as the intake of over-the-counter medication or the alteration or discontinuation of prescribed medication.

A qualitative interview study including patients of at least 65 years old with polypharmacy (⩾5 medications) and their GPs in a German Primary Healthcare Centre. The transcripts from the semi-structured interviews (n=6 with patients; n=3 with GPs) were analysed using a framework analytical approach.

We identified three themes: differing medication plans: causes?; dialogue concerning medication: whose responsibility?; supporting patients’ engagement: how? While GPs stated that patients do not always report or might even conceal information, all patients reported that they could speak openly about everything with their GPs. In this context, trust might act as a double-edged sword, as it can promote open communication but also prevent patients from asking questions. Both GPs and patients could name very few ways in which patients could be supported to become more informed and active in communication concerning polypharmacy and medication safety.

This study shows that patients’ awareness of the significance of their active role in addressing polypharmacy needs to be increased. This includes understanding that trusting the doctor does not preclude asking questions or seeking more information. Thus, interventions which improve patients’ communication skills and address specific issues of polypharmacy, particularly in elderly patients, should be designed. GPs might support patients by ‘inviting’ their contribution.