The PREPARE for Your Care program increases advance care planning engagement among diverse older adults with cancer

Colorectal Cancer Patients' Reported Frequency, Content, and Satisfaction with Advance Care Planning Discussions

(1) Background: This observational cohort study describes the frequency, content, and satisfaction with advance care planning (ACP) conversations with healthcare providers (HCPs), as reported by patients with advanced colorectal cancer. (2) Methods: The patients were recruited from two tertiary cancer centers in Alberta, Canada. Using the My Conversations survey with previously validated questions, the patients were asked about specific ACP elements discussed, with which HCPs these elements were discussed, their satisfaction with these conversations, and whether they had a goals of care designation (GCD) order. We surveyed and analyzed data from the following four time points: enrollment, months 1, 2, and 3. (3) Results: In total, 131 patients were recruited. At enrollment, 24% of patients reported discussing at least one ACP topic. From enrollment to month 3, patients reported a high frequency of discussions (80.2% discussed fears, 71.0% discussed prognosis, 54.2% discussed treatment preferences at least once); however, only 44.3% of patients reported discussing what is important to them in considering health care preferences. Patients reported having ACP conversations most often with their oncologists (84.7%) and cancer clinic nurses (61.8%). Patients reported a high level of satisfaction with their ACP conversations, with over 80% of patients reported feeling heard and understood. From enrollment to month 3, there was an increase in the number of patients with a GCD order from 53% to 74%. (4) Conclusions: Patients reported more frequent conversations compared to the literature and clinical documentation. While the satisfaction with these conversations is high, there is room for quality improvement, particularly in eliciting patients' personal goals for their treatment.

Advance Care Planning conversations: What constitutes best practice and the way forward: Advance Care Planning-Gespräche: Was Best Practice ausmacht und wie es weitergehen kann

BACKGROUND

Advance Care Planning (ACP) conversations are a cornerstone of modern health care and need to be supported. However, research indicates that the uptake thereof is limited, regardless of various campaigns. ACP conversations are complex and specific elements thereof should be discussed at various timepoints during the illness trajectory.

OBJECTIVE

This narrative review delineates what ACP conversation should entail, and a way forward.

METHODS

A PEO (Population, Exposure, Outcome) search was performed using relevant keywords, and 615 articles were identified. Through screening and coding, this number was reduced to 24 articles. All the authors were involved in the final selection of the articles.

RESULTS

Various themes developed throughout the review which include timing early on in the disease trajectory; incorporating beliefs and culturally relevant contexts; conversations needing to be iterative and short; involving surrogates and family; applying various media formats.

DISCUSSION

ACP conversations are relevant. ACP is not static and needs to be dynamic as patients' illness trajectories and goals change. The care team needs to guard themselves against having ACP conversations to satisfy a metric and should instead be guided by the patient's expressed values and wishes. A system-wide operational plan will help alleviate common barriers in having appropriate ACP conversations.

Effectiveness of health literacy interventions on anxious and depressive symptomatology in primary health care: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Background

Affective disorders are a debilitating and very prevalent problem throughout the world. Often these are associated with the onset of comorbidities or a consequence of chronic diseases. Anxiety and depression are associated with poor social and personal relationships, compromised health. We aimed to synthesize evidence from studies measuring the impact of a health literacy (HL) intervention on the improvement of affective disorders.

Methods

For this systematic review and meta-analysis, we searched PubMed/MEDLINE, Embase, Web of Science, Ibecs, Cuiden, Scielo, Science Direct and Dialnet for exclusively randomized controlled trial studies (RCTs) published between 1 Jan 2011, and 31 May 2022. The search terms employed were "health literacy," "health knowledge," "anxiety," "anxiety disorder," "depression," "depressive disorder," and "adult." The risk of bias assessment was performed using the Cochrane Collaboration Revised Risk of Bias tool (RoB2). We conducted random-effects meta-analyses and explored heterogeneity using meta-regression and a stratified survey.

Results

Of 2,863 citations found through the initial screening, 350 records were screened by the title and abstract for their themes and relevance. Finally, nine studies complied with the inclusion criteria for the meta-analysis. 66.66% of studies (n = 6) were rated as having a low risk of bias and 33.33% (n = 3) were judged to raise some concerns. The health literacy interventions were associated with -1.378 reduction in depression and anxiety questionnaires scores [95% CI (-1.850, -0.906)]. Low mood disorder scores are associated with better mental health and wellbeing.

Conclusion

Our findings demonstrate that an HL intervention in relation to the symptoms associated with affective disorders improves the emotional state of patients in PHC, with a moderately positive effect in reducing depression and anxiety.

Patients From Distressed Communities Who Undergo Surgery for Hip Fragility Fractures Are Less Likely to Have Advanced Care Planning Documents in Their Electronic Medical Record

BACKGROUND

Advanced care planning documents provide a patient's healthcare team and loved ones with guidance on patients' treatment preferences when they are unable to advocate for themselves. A substantial proportion of patients will die within a few months of experiencing a hip fracture, but despite the importance of such documents, patients undergoing surgery for hip fracture seldom have discussions documented in the medical records regarding end-of-life care during their surgical admission. To the best of our knowledge, the proportion of patients older than 65 years treated with surgery for hip fractures who have advanced care planning documents in their electronic medical record (EMR) has not been explored, neither has the association between socioeconomic status and the presence of those documents in the EMR. Determining this information can help to identify opportunities to promote advanced care planning.

QUESTIONS/PURPOSES

(1) What percentage of patients older than 65 years who undergo hip fracture surgery have completed advanced care planning documents uploaded in the EMR before or during their surgical hospitalization, or at any timepoint (before admission, during admission, and after admission)? (2) Are patients from distressed communities less likely to have advanced care planning documents in the EMR than patients from wealthier communities, after controlling for economic well-being as measured by the Distressed Communities Index? (3) What percentage of patients older than 65 years with hip fractures who died during their hospitalization for hip fracture surgery had advanced care planning documents uploaded in the EMR?

METHODS

This was a retrospective, comparative study conducted at two geographically distinct hospitals: one urban Level I trauma center and one suburban Level II trauma center. Between 2017 and 2021, these two centers treated 850 patients for hip fractures. Among those patients, we included patients older than 65 years who were treated with open reduction and internal fixation, intramedullary nailing, hemiarthroplasty, or THA for a fragility fracture of the proximal femur. Based on that, 83% (709 of 850) of patients were eligible; a further 6% (52 of 850) were excluded because they had codes other than ICD-9 820 or ICD-10 S72.0, and another 2% (17 of 850) had incomplete datasets, leaving 75% (640 of 850) for analysis here. Most patients with incomplete datasets were in the prosperous Distressed Communities Index category. Among patients included in this study, the average age was 82 years, 70% (448 of 640) were women, and regarding the Distressed Communities Index, 32% (203 of 640) were in the prosperous category, 25% (159 of 640) were in the comfortable category, 15% (99 of 640) were in the mid-tier category, 5% (31 of 640) were in the at-risk category, and 23% (145 of 640) were in the distressed category. The primary outcome included the presence of advanced care planning documents (advanced directives, healthcare power of attorney, or physician orders for life-sustaining treatment) in the EMR before surgery, during the surgical admission, or at any time. The Distressed Communities Index was used to indicate economic well-being, and patients were identified as being in one of five Distressed Communities Index categories (prosperous, comfortable, mid-tier, at-risk, and distressed) based on ZIP Code. An exploratory analysis was conducted to determine variables associated with the presence of advanced care planning documents in the EMR. A multivariate regression was then performed for patients who did or did not have advanced care planning documents in their medical record at any time. The results are presented as ORs with the associated 95% confidence interval (CI).

RESULTS

Nine percent (55 of 640) of patients had advanced care planning documents in the EMR preoperatively or during their surgical admission, and 22% (142 of 640) of patients had them in the EMR at any time. After controlling for potential confounding variables such as age, laterality (left or right hip), hospital type, and American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) classification, we found that patients in Distressed Communities Index categories other than prosperous had ORs lower than 0.7, with patients in the distressed category (OR 0.4 [95% CI 0.2 to 0.7]; p < 0.01) and comfortable category (OR 0.5 [95% CI 0.3 to 0.9]; p = 0.01) having a substantially lower odds of having advanced care planning documents in their EMR. Patients aged 86 to 95 years (OR 1.9 [95% CI 1.1 to 3.4]), those 96 years and older (OR 4.0 [95% CI 1.7 to 9.5]), and those with a higher ASA classification (OR 1.6 [95% CI 1.1 to 2.3]) had a higher odds of having advanced care planning documents in the EMR at any time. Among 14 patients who experienced in-hospital mortality, two had advanced care planning documents uploaded into their EMR, whereas 12 of 14 who died in the hospital did not have advanced care planning documents uploaded into their EMR.

CONCLUSION

Orthopaedic surgeons should counsel patients regarding the risk for postoperative complications after fragility hip fracture surgery and engage in shared decision-making regarding advanced care planning documents with patients or, if the patients are unable, with their families. Additionally, implementing virtual education about advanced care planning documents and using easy-to-read forms may facilitate the completion of advanced care planning documents by patients older than 65 years, especially patients with low economic well-being. Limitations of this study include having a restricted number of patients in the at-risk and mid-tier Distressed Communities Index categories and a restricted number of patients identifying as non-White races/ethnicities. Future research should evaluate the effect of advanced care document presence in the EMR on end-of-life care intensity in patients treated for fragility hip fractures.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level III, therapeutic study.

The SHARE Study: Pilot Study of a Communication Intervention Designed to Elicit Advanced-Stage Cancer Patients' Preferences and Goals

Background: Helping seriously ill cancer patients identify and communicate their care preferences improves outcomes. Objective: The aim of this study was to pilot test the feasibility and acceptability of an intervention designed to elicit patients' preferences and goals of care and share them with their oncology teams. Design: A single-arm pilot study of a 2.5-minute video, 3-page brief questionnaire, and a wallet card with question prompts was conducted. Primary outcomes were feasibility (≥60% approach-to-consent ratio, ≥60% participants rated the intervention positively) and acceptability (≥60% recommended the intervention). Secondary outcomes, measured pre- and post-intervention, included patient anxiety and distress, hope, quality of life, and therapeutic alliance. Setting/subjects: The study subjects were advanced-stage cancer patients and their clinicians at a U.S. academic and community oncology practice. Results: Among 59 potentially eligible patients, 53 agreed to participate (90% approach-to-consent ratio); 4 were nonevaluable due to death. Overall, 45 of 49 patients (92%) rated their experience as excellent, very good, or good. Participants (mean age = 63 years, range 40-86) agreed or strongly agreed that they would recommend the video (83%), brief questionnaire (88%), and wallet card (63%). However, only 34% of participants reported reviewing the questionnaire with their oncologist. There were no increases in patient anxiety or distress associated with the intervention or reductions in hope or therapeutic alliances with oncologists (all p > 0.05); quality of life was better post-intervention (p = 0.02). Conclusions: This communication intervention that combined a video, questionnaire, and wallet card was both feasible and acceptable for helping advanced cancer patients identify their care preferences and goals and should be tested in a future randomized clinical trial. Clinical Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03392090.