Perspectives of Health-Care Providers Toward Advance Care Planning in Patients With Advanced Cancer and Congestive Heart Failure

2016 ◽  
Vol 34 (5) ◽  
pp. 423-429 ◽  
Author(s):  
Manisha Chandar ◽  
Bruce Brockstein ◽  
Alan Zunamon ◽  
Irwin Silverman ◽  
Sarah Dlouhy ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Heart Failure ◽  
Congestive Heart Failure ◽  
Advance Care Planning ◽  
Online Survey ◽  
Analysis Tool ◽  
Care Planning ◽  
Care Providers ◽  
Major Barrier ◽  
Medical Diagnoses ◽  
Advance Care

Background: Advance care planning (ACP) discussions afford patients and physicians a chance to better understand patients’ values and wishes regarding end-of-life care; however, these conversations typically take place late in the course of a disease. The goal of this study was to clarify attitudes of oncologists, cardiologists, and primary care physicians (PCPs) toward ACP and to identify persistent barriers to timely ACP discussion following a quality improvement initiative at our health system geared at improvement in ACP implementation. Methods: A 20-question, cross-sectional online survey was created and distributed to cardiologists, oncologists, PCPs, and cardiology and oncology support staff at the NorthShore University HealthSystem (NorthShore) from February to March 2015. A total of 117 individuals (46% of distributed) completed the surveys. The results were compiled using an online survey analysis tool (SurveyMonkey, Inc., Palo Alto, California, USA). Results: Only 15% of cardiologists felt it was their responsibility to conduct ACP discussions with their patients having congestive heart failure (CHF). In contrast, 68% of oncologists accepted this discussion as their responsibility in patients with terminal cancer ( P < .01). These views were mirrored by PCPs, as 68% of PCPs felt personally responsible for ACP discussion with patients having CHF, while only 34% felt the same about patients with cancer. Reported documentation of these discussions in the electronic health record was inconsistent between specialties. Among all surveyed specialties, lack of time was the major barrier limiting ACP discussion. Perceived patient discomfort and discomfort of the patient’s family toward these discussions were also significant reported barriers. Conclusion: Attitudes toward ACP implementation vary considerably by medical specialty and medical condition, with oncologists in this study tending to feel more personal responsibility for these discussions with patients having cancer than cardiologists with their patients having heart failure. Robust implementation of ACP across the spectrum of medical diagnoses is likely to require a true collaboration between office-based PCPs and specialists in both the inpatient and the ambulatory settings.

Variability of physician perspectives toward advance care planning for patients with incurable cancer and congestive heart failure.

2015 ◽  
Vol 33 (29_suppl) ◽  
pp. 12-12
Author(s):  
Manisha Chandar ◽  
Bruce Brockstein ◽  
Alan Zunamon ◽  
Irwin Silverman ◽  
Sarah Dlouhy ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Heart Failure ◽  
Primary Care ◽  
Congestive Heart Failure ◽  
Cancer Patients ◽  
Advance Care Planning ◽  
Primary Care Physicians ◽  
Online Survey ◽  
Care Planning ◽  
Incurable Cancer ◽  
Advance Care

12 Background: Advance Care Planning (ACP) discussions afford patients and physicians a chance to better understand patients’ values and wishes regarding end-of-life care; however these conversations typically take place late in the course of a disease, or not at all. The goal of this study was to understand attitudes of oncologists, cardiologists, and primary care physicians (PCPs) towards ACP. We also aimed to identify persistent barriers to timely ACP discussion following a quality improvement initiative at our health system aimed at improving ACP completion rate. Methods: A 23-question cross-sectional online survey was created and distributed to cardiologists, oncologists, primary care physicians and cardiology and oncology support staff at the NorthShore University Health System (NorthShore) from February-March 2015. A total of 117 individuals (46% of distributed) completed the surveys. The results were compiled using an online survey analysis tool. Results: Only 15% of cardiologists felt it was their responsibility to conduct ACP with their congestive heart failure (CHF) patients. In contrast, 68% of oncologists accepted responsibility for ACP in incurable cancer patients. Sixty-eight percent of PCPs felt personally responsible for conducting ACP discussions with CHF patients, while only 34% felt the same about cancer patients. Documentation of ACP in the electronic health record (EHR) was inconsistent among specialties. Among all surveyed specialties, lack of time was the major barrier limiting ACP discussion. Perceived patient discomfort and discomfort of the patient’s family towards these discussions were also significant reported barriers. Conclusions: Attitudes toward ACP implementation vary considerably by medical specialty and medical condition, with oncologists in this study feeling more personal responsibility for carrying out these discussions with cancer patients than cardiologists with their heart failure patients. Robust implementation of ACP across the spectrum of medical illnesses is likely to require a true collaboration between office-based PCPs and specialists in both the inpatient and ambulatory settings.

Advance care planning in chronic disease: finding the known in the midst of the unknown

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Karen Detering ◽  
Elizabeth Sutton ◽  
Scott Fraser
Keyword(s):  
Heart Failure ◽  
Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease ◽  
Advance Care Planning ◽  
Chronic Obstructive ◽  
Care Planning ◽  
Health Care Teams ◽  
Management Options ◽  
Medical Decisions ◽  
Obstructive Pulmonary Disease ◽  
Advance Care

People are living longer lives with a greater burden of disease. Diseases which contribute significantly to this burden are chronic kidney disease; chronic obstructive pulmonary disease and heart failure. Technologies exist that can sustain life for patients with these disease, however patients and their families/loved ones need to know the likely outcome of their disease, its course, and all management options. Advance care planning (ACP) can assist with this process as well as ensuring that patients, families, and health care teams are aware of what treatment a patient wants—or does not want. ACP also enables the appointment of a decision maker to act on behalf of the patient should they lose capacity to make medical decisions. This chapter discusses the benefits of ACP and why it needs to be introduced early in the course of any life-limiting illness.

Association between religious beliefs and discussions regarding advance care planning: A nationwide survey

2021 ◽  
pp. 026921632110295
Author(s):  
Jun Miyashita ◽  
Sayaka Shimizu ◽  
Shunichi Fukuhara ◽  
Yosuke Yamamoto
Keyword(s):  
Health Care Providers ◽  
Advance Care Planning ◽  
Religious Beliefs ◽  
Nationwide Survey ◽  
Care Planning ◽  
Care Providers ◽  
Logistic Regression Models ◽  
Japanese Buddhism ◽  
Advance Care ◽  
Quota Sampling

Background: The relationship between advance care planning and religious beliefs, which are important for palliative care, is controversial in Western countries and has not been verified in Asian countries. Aim: To investigate the association between advance care planning discussions and religious beliefs in Japan. Design: A nationwide survey conducted in 2016 using a quota sampling method to obtain a representative sample of Japan’s general population. Setting/participants: We analyzed responses from 3167 adults aged 20–84 years (mean age ± standard deviation, 50.9 ± 16.8 years). The outcome was measured by asking whether the respondents had ever discussed advance care planning, and the main exposure by whether they had any religious beliefs or affiliations, and if so, their degree of devoutness. We analyzed religious beliefs, affiliations, and devoutness in relation to the occurrence of discussions using multivariable logistic regression models adjusted for possible sociodemographic covariates. Results: Compared with respondents without, those with religious beliefs had significantly higher odds of having had discussions (adjusted odds ratio: 1.45, 95% confidence interval: 1.22–1.73). The devoutness of religious belief was proportional to the propensity of the occurrence of discussions ( p for trend < 0.001). In addition, Buddhists and Christians had higher odds of having had discussions than did nonbelievers. Conclusion: The results suggest that holding religious beliefs, especially in Japanese Buddhism and Christianity, facilitates advance care planning discussions among Japanese adults, and thus, may help health-care providers identify those prioritized for facilitating engagement in advance care planning, especially in palliative and spiritual care settings.

A letter to your care providers: implementation and analysis of a letter-based advance care planning initiative for gynecologic oncology patients

2021 ◽  
Vol 162 ◽  
pp. S76
Author(s):  
Catherine Zivanov ◽  
Anne Coogan ◽  
Robin Lane ◽  
Marc Robinson ◽  
Molly Williams ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Advance Care Planning ◽  
Gynecologic Oncology ◽  
Care Planning ◽  
Care Providers ◽  
Oncology Patients ◽  
Advance Care

Enabling Advance Care Planning in Dementia Care: A Primary Care Approach

2020 ◽  
pp. 082585972097393
Author(s):  
Linda Lee ◽  
Loretta M. Hillier ◽  
Stephanie K. Lu ◽  
Donna Ward
Keyword(s):  
Primary Care ◽  
Advance Care Planning ◽  
Health Professionals ◽  
Online Survey ◽  
Ease Of Use ◽  
Depth Information ◽  
Care Planning ◽  
Care Approach ◽  
Memory Clinics ◽  
Advance Care

Background: Lack of tools to support advance care planning (ACP) has been identified as a significant barrier to implementing these discussions. Aim: We pilot tested an ACP framework tool for use with persons living with dementia (PLWD) in primary care-based memory clinics and an Adult Day Program; this study describes user and recipient experiences with this framework. Methods: We used a mixed methods approach. Health professionals completed an online survey following pilot testing and PLWD and substitute decision makers (SDM) completed survey immediately following the ACP discussion assessing their satisfaction (5-point scale) with the framework and exploring potential outcomes. Interviews with health professionals, PLWD, and SDM were conducted to gather more in-depth information on their perceptions of the ACP framework/ discussion. Results: Surveys were completed by 12 health professionals, 13 PLWD, and 16 SDM. While PLWD and SDM were satisfied with the ACP discussion (M = 4.0/5), health professionals were minimally satisfied with the ease of use of the framework (M = 2.0/5), acceptability for patients (M = 2.4/5) and feasibility in practice (M = 1.9/5). Sixteen interviews were completed with 8 health professionals, 1 PLWD, and 7 SDM. While health professionals valued ACP, lack of time and training were identified barriers to framework use. SDM felt better prepared for future decisions and PLWD were put at ease, knowing that their wishes for care were understood. Conclusion: PLWD and SDM value the opportunity for ACP, and although health professionals identified some concerns with framework administration, they acknowledge the value and importance of ACP. Continuing efforts to refine ACP processes are justified.

Health-Care Provider Personal Religious Preferences and Their Perspectives on Advance Care Planning With Patients

2018 ◽  
Vol 35 (12) ◽  
pp. 1565-1571
Author(s):  
Marjorie Bowman ◽  
Sarah St. Cyr ◽  
Adrienne Stolf i
Keyword(s):  
Health Care ◽  
Health Care Providers ◽  
Advance Care Planning ◽  
Religious Affiliation ◽  
Living Will ◽  
Care Planning ◽  
Care Providers ◽  
Power Of Attorney ◽  
Religious Preference ◽  
Advance Care

Objective: To understand how health-care providers’ (HCPs) religious preferences influence their willingness to undertake advance care planning (ACP) with patients and their acceptance of other HCP’s involvement. Methods: Online anonymous survey distributed to HCPs in hospital, ambulatory offices, and hospice settings in Dayton, Ohio. We evaluated the associations of HCP religion with their personal ACP, willingness to facilitate ACP, and acceptance of other HCPs’ ACP participation. Results: 704 respondents: nurses (66.2%), physicians (18.8%), other HCPs (15.0%), white (88.9%), and primarily Catholic (23.3%) or Protestant (32.0%). “No religion” was marked by 13.9%. Respondents were favorable to ACP with patients. Religious respondents were more likely to have a living will ( P = .035) and health-care power of attorney ( P = .007) and more accepting of clergy as ACP decision coaches ( P = .030). HCP’s religion was not associated with willingness to facilitate ACP discussions. There were minor differences between Catholics and Protestants. Conclusions: Personal religious preference is associated with HCP’s own ACP but had little relationship with their willingness to facilitate ACP conversations with patients or acceptance of other professional types of HCPs involvement in ACP conversations. Regardless of religious affiliation, HCPs have interest in undertaking ACP and endorse other HCPs ACP involvement. As results of this study suggest that personal religious affiliation is not a barrier for HCPs engaging in ACP with patients, attempts to overcome barriers to increasing ACP should be directed to other factors.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document