scholarly journals Implementing advance care planning in early dementia care: results and insights from a pilot interventional trial

2021 ◽  
Vol 21 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Francesca Bosisio ◽  
Anca-Cristina Sterie ◽  
Eve Rubli Truchard ◽  
Ralf J. Jox

Abstract Background Advance care planning (ACP) is particularly appropriate for persons with early dementia (PWED) since it promotes conversations about dementia-specific illness scenarios, addresses inconsistencies between advance directives and patients’ observed behavior, emphasizes prospective and relational autonomy, and may be generally consistent with older persons’ decision-making needs. However, despite evidence of its benefits, ACP is yet to become widely used among PWED. In this paper, we present a dementia-specific tool developed in Western Switzerland, discuss results of a pilot trial designed to promote ACP among PWED and their relatives, and discuss the feasibility and acceptability of the intervention and the study protocol in prevision of a large scale trial. Methods This one-arm pre-post pilot trial consisted of four visits, with visits 2 and 3 being the ACP intervention. Quantitative outcome measures during visit 1 and 4 assessed the aptitude of the intervention to support PWED autonomy and relatives’ knowledge of PWED’s preferences. Feasibility was explored according to how the recruitment procedure unfurled and based on the necessary revisions to the study protocol and healthcare providers’ reason for excluding a PWED from the study. Acceptability was assessed according to pre-post evaluations, difficulties regarding the intervention or trial participation, and pre-post qualitative interviews regarding participants’ reasons to participate to the study, satisfaction with the tool and difficulties perceived. Results The ACP intervention itself was well received by PWED and their relatives that expressed satisfaction with the procedure, especially regarding the opportunity to discuss a sensitive topic with the help of a facilitator. Five main challenges in terms of feasibility were 1) to locate eligible patients, 2) to tailor recruitment procedures to recruitment locations, 3) to adapt inclusion criteria to clinical routines, 4) to engage PWED and their relatives in ACP, and 5) to design a trial that does not burden PWED. Despite these challenges, the intervention increased the number of advance directives, the concordance between PWED’s preferences and relatives’ decision on their behalf, and relatives’ perceived control over healthcare decisions. Conclusion Misconceptions about dementia and ACP, in the patient, relatives, and healthcare providers, combined with structural and institutional challenges, have the power to impede research and implementation of ACP in dementia care. For this reason, we conclude that a large scale trial to test a dementia-specific tool of ACP is currently not feasible in Western Switzerland and should be endorsed in a systemic approach of ACP. Trial registration This trial was registered in the database clinicaltrial.gov with the number NCT03615027.

2021 ◽  
pp. 60-76
Author(s):  
Jeffrey D. Myers

Physician assistant (PA) training is rooted in treating the whole patient and developing a trusting and collaborative partnership with patients and their families. This foundation is critical in the advance care planning (ACP) process for patients who are seriously or terminally ill. Understanding the ACP process, the components and reasons behind them, and the tools for successful discussions and decision-making is a key skill set for all healthcare providers, including PAs. This chapter examines the components of ACP, including advance directives, the POLST paradigm, decision-makers, prognostication, documentation, and legacy planning. ACP is key in capturing what is most important to our patients in terms of their health, their life, and their goals related to both.


2020 ◽  
Vol 30 (3) ◽  
pp. 402-408
Author(s):  
Jill M. Steiner ◽  
Erwin N. Oechslin ◽  
Gruschen Veldtman ◽  
Craig S. Broberg ◽  
Karen Stout ◽  
...  

ABSTRACTBackground:Advance care planning and palliative care are gaining recognition as critical care components for adults with CHD, yet these often do not occur. Study objectives were to evaluate ACHD providers’ 1) comfort managing patients’ physical symptoms and psychosocial needs and 2) perspectives on the decision/timing of advance care planning initiation and palliative care referral.Methods:Cross-sectional study of ACHD providers. Six hypothetical patients were described in case format, followed by questions regarding provider comfort managing symptoms, initiating advance care planning, and palliative care referral.Results:Fifty providers (72% physicians) completed surveys. Participants reported low levels of personal palliative care knowledge, without variation by gender, years in practice, or prior palliative care training. Providers appeared more comfortable managing physical symptoms and discussing prognosis than addressing psychosocial needs. Providers recognised advance directives as important, although the percentage who would initiate advance care planning ranged from 18 to 67% and referral to palliative care from 14 to 32%. Barriers and facilitators to discussing advance care planning with patients were identified. Over 20% indicated that advance care planning and end-of-life discussions are best initiated with the development of at least one life-threatening complication/hospitalisation.Conclusions:Providers noted high value in advance directives yet were themselves less likely to initiate advance care planning or refer to palliative care. This raises the critical questions of when, how, and by whom discussion of these important matters should be initiated and how best to support ACHD providers in these endeavours.


2010 ◽  
Vol 10 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Louise Robinson ◽  
Claire Bamford ◽  
Fiona Beyer ◽  
Alexa Clark ◽  
Claire Dickinson ◽  
...  

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Francesca Bosisio ◽  
Anca Sterie ◽  
Eve Rubli Truchard ◽  
Ralf J. Jox

Abstract Background: Advance care planning (ACP) is particularly appropriate for persons with dementia (PWD) since it fosters conversation about dementia-specific illness scenarios, addresses inconsistencies between advance directives and patients’ observed behaviour, emphasises prospective and relational autonomy, and may be generally consistent to elderly’s decision-making needs. However, despite the evidence of its benefits, ACP is yet to become widely used among PWD. In this paper, we present results regarding the feasibility and acceptability of a pilot intervention designed to foster ACP among PWD and their relative and explore future outcome measures in prevision of a randomized controlled trial. Methods: In order to assess pre-post variations, we used qualitative interviews and four psychometric scales: Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale, Questionnaire of Psychological Autonomy, Decisional conflict scale, and Zarit burden scale. We added two visual analog scales for perceived control over and perceived involvement in healthcare decisions, as well as two hypothetic scenarios to test concordance between PWD’s and surrogate’s decisions.Results: Five main challenges in terms of feasibility were 1) to locate eligible patients, 2) to tailor recruitment procedures to recruitment locations, 3) to adapt inclusion criteria to meet clinical routines, 4) to engage PWD and their relatives in ACP, and 5) to choose outcome criteria that do not burden PWD. Alongside with those expected challenges, we discuss substantial unanticipated gatekeeping by the research ethics committee and healthcare professionals. Despite the setbacks, the intervention was well received by PWD and their relatives that expressed satisfaction with the procedure, especially in regard to the opportunity to discuss a sensitive topic with the help of a facilitator. Relatives’ perceived control over healthcare decisions increased, as well as concordance between PWD’s preferences and relatives’ decision. Conclusion: Misconceptions about dementia and ACP, both in the patient, relatives, and healthcare providers, combined with structural institutional challenges, have the power to impede research and implementation of ACP in dementia care. For this reason, we advocate for a systemic approach of ACP and for the use of ACP tools and research adapted to PWD cognitive capacities.Trial registration: This trial was registered in the database clinicaltrial.gov with the number NCT03615027


2020 ◽  
Vol 34 (3) ◽  
pp. 300-308 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kerstin Hein ◽  
Kathrin Knochel ◽  
Vedrana Zaimovic ◽  
Daniel Reimann ◽  
Anna Monz ◽  
...  

Background: Although international guidelines recommend discussions about goals of care and treatment options for children with severe and life-limiting conditions, there are still few structured models of paediatric advance care planning. Aim: The study aimed at identifying key components of paediatric advance care planning through direct discussions with all involved parties. Design: The study had a qualitative design with a participatory approach. Participants constituted an advisory board and took part in two transdisciplinary workshops. Data were collected in discussion and dialogue groups and analysed using content analysis. Setting/participants: We included bereaved parents, health care providers and stakeholders of care networks. Results: Key elements were discussions, documentation, implementation, timing and participation of children and adolescents. Parents engage in discussions with facilitators and persons of trust to reach a decision. Documentation constitutes the focus of professionals, who endorse brief recommendations for procedures in case of emergencies, supplemented by larger advance directives. Implementation hindrances include emotional barriers of stakeholders, disagreements between parents and professionals and difficulties with emergency services. Discussion timing should take into account parental readiness. The intervention should be repeated at regular intervals, considering emerging needs and increasing awareness of families over time. Involving children and adolescents in advance care planning remains a challenge. Conclusion: A paediatric advance care planning intervention should take into account potential pitfalls and barriers including issues related to timing, potential conflicts between parents and professionals, ambiguity towards written advance directives, the role of non-medical carers for paediatric advance care planning implementation, the need to involve the child and the necessity of an iterative process.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document