Integrating Advance Care Planning Videos into Surgical Oncologic Care: A Randomized Clinical Trial

Effectiveness of initiating advance care planning among older outpatients through intervention by physicians trained in a model discussion video: A randomized controlled trial

AIM

This study aimed to assess the impact of a physician-led intervention on advance care planning (ACP) introduction among older outpatients using a model discussion video.

METHODS

This prospective interventional study included Japanese general practice outpatients aged ≥65 years. All participants received an ACP leaflet. Co-researchers were trained using a model discussion video based on the "Serious Illness Conversation Guide," and provided ACP introduction explanations to the intervention group to ensure intervention content consistency. The control group received the ACP leaflet only, with no standardized explanations. The primary outcome was ACP discussion occurrence. Secondary outcomes included ACP engagement (assessed through the 4-item ACP Engagement Survey), engagement score for advance directives acquisition and score for surrogate decision-maker identification, and anxiety incidence (assessed through Generalized Anxiety Disorder-7).

RESULTS

This study included 48 participants: 25 (52.1%) in the intervention group and 23 (47.9%) in the control group. Regarding primary outcome, the intervention group had significantly more ACP discussions compared with the control group (92.0% vs 26.1%, adjusted odds ratio 50.2, P = 0.0012). Regarding secondary outcomes, the intervention group showed greater readiness (mean scores for the 4-item Engagement Survey [P = 0.0001], engagement score for advance directives acquisition [P = 0.01] and score for surrogate decision-maker determination [P = 0.03]) than the control group, without increasing anxiety.

CONCLUSIONS

This physician-led ACP introduction for older patients in a Japanese general practice setting enhanced ACP readiness and stimulated discussions, without increasing anxiety. The model discussion video for ACP introduction might effectively train physicians in general practice settings. Geriatr Gerontol Int 2024; ••: ••-••.

Enhanced perioperative communication elevates patients' understanding, perception, and satisfaction for anesthesia services: Insights from a survey study

Background and Aims

Anesthesiologists' services extend to many critical areas of any healthcare setup. However, there needs to be more understanding among the public regarding their crucial role. Preanesthesia evaluation (PAE) visits can disseminate information about anesthesiologists and services. We aimed to evaluate patient's knowledge and the impact of interview-based surveys on increasing knowledge about anesthesiologists and anesthesia services.

Methodology

It was a single-center, cross-sectional survey involving 550 patients aged 18-65 undergoing elective surgeries. Pre- and postoperative interviewer-assisted questionnaires were administered to assess patients' baseline knowledge and perception of anesthesia and anesthesiologists. Statistical analysis focused on demographic, educational, and previous anesthesia exposure among subgroups; a P-value <0.05 was considered significant.

Results

Less than half comprehended anesthesia's role as a specialist in inducing unconsciousness. 55.3% were unaware of general anesthesia, and 69.6% were unaware of regional anesthesia as a technique. Higher education and previous anesthesia exposure correlated with better awareness with regard to the perioperative role of anesthesiologists and their fields of work (P < 0.05). The postoperative survey indicated good satisfaction with anesthesiologists' services, which might be attributable to the survey-based interaction.

Conclusion

A significant need for more understanding regarding anesthesia and anesthesiologists' roles still prevails. Interview-based effective communication during PAE visits, perioperative period, and shared decision-making (SDM) improves patients' knowledge, comprehension, and satisfaction.

Tools for tomorrow: a scoping review of patient-facing tools for advance care planning

Advance care planning (ACP) supports individuals in aligning their medical care with personal values and preferences in the face of serious illness. The variety of ACP tools available reflects diverse strategies intended to facilitate these critical conversations, yet evaluations of their effectiveness often show mixed results. Following the Arskey and O'Malley framework, this scoping review aims to synthesize the range of ACP tools targeted at patients and families, highlighting their characteristics and delivery methods to better understand their impact and development over time. Studies included focused on patient-facing ACP tools across all settings and mediums. Exclusions were applied to studies solely targeting healthcare providers or those only aiming at completion of advance directives without broader ACP discussions. Searches were conducted across PubMed, Embase, CINAHL, The Cochrane Library, and Web of Science. Data were extracted using a predesigned spreadsheet, capturing study population, setting, intervention modality, and intervention theme. Tools were categorized by delivery method and further analyzed through a year-wise distribution to track trends and developments. We identified 99 unique patient-facing tools, with those focusing on counseling (31) and video technologies (21) being the most prevalent while others incorporated online platforms, print materials, games, or some combination of different delivery methods. Over half the tools were designed for specific patient groups, especially for various diseases and racial or ethnic communities. Recent years showed a surge in tool variety and innovation, including integrated patient portals and psychological techniques. The review demonstrates a broad array of innovative ACP tools that facilitate personalized and effective ACP. Our findings contribute to an enhanced understanding of their utilization and potential impacts, offering valuable insights for future tool development and policy making in ACP.

"It Gives Me Peace of Mind So I Can Focus on Healing": Views on Advance Care Planning for Older Surgical Patients

Introduction: The period of time before an elective operation may be an opportune time to engage older adults in advance care planning (ACP). Past interventions have not been readily incorporated into surgical workflows leaving a need for ACP tools that are generalizable, easy to implement, and effective. Design: This is a qualitative study. Setting and Subjects: Older adults with a history of cancer and a recent major operation were recruited through their surgical oncologist at a tertiary medical center in the United States. Interviews were conducted to determine how to adapt the validated PrepareForYourCare.org ACP program with electronic health record prompts for the perioperative setting and openness to introducing ACP during a presurgical visit. We used qualitative content analysis to determine themes. Results: Eight themes were identified: (1) ACP as static and private, (2) people expected a prompt, (3) family trusted to do the "right" thing, (4) lack of relationship or comfort with providers, (5) a team-based approach can be helpful, (6) surgeon's expertise (e.g., prognosis and surgical risk), (7) ACP belongs on the surgical checklist, and (8) patients would welcome a conversation starter. Discussion: Older surgical patients are interested in engaging with ACP, particularly if prompted, and believe it has a place on the preoperative "checklist." Conclusions: To effectively engage patients with ACP, a combination of routine prompts by the health care team and patient-centered follow-up may be required.

Views of health care professionals on the implementation of preoperative advance care planning in older patients with head and neck cancer: Q methodology

Objective

To investigate the views of health care professionals in a head and neck surgical department toward the implementation of advance care planning prior to surgery for older patients with head and neck cancer.

Method

Q methodology was used to explore and analyze participants' views by combining quantitative and qualitative methods. Participants were asked to rank 35 Q statements generated via semi-structured interviews and a literature review and to explain the reasons for their ranking in subsequent interviews. The data was then analyzed and used to develop a factor series to illustrate participants' views.

Results

This study surveyed 15 health care professionals, including eight doctors and seven nurses. The views of health care professionals toward preoperative implementation of advance care planning discussions were varied and could be categorized into three types: defending the autonomy of patients, patients' knowledge and the Chinese traditional cultural context hinder the implementation of preoperative advance care planning, and lack of confidence in performing preoperative advance care planning.

Conclusions

Although the health care professionals in the head and neck surgical department in this study recognized the benefits of preoperative discussions regarding advance care planning, patients' knowledge level, traditional Chinese values, inadequate capacity among health care professionals, and unsound legal policies have caused these professionals to have misgivings about preoperative counseling and discussing advance care planning with patients. Further studies should be conducted, and strategies to overcome barriers to discussions of preoperative advance care planning should be developed.

Reliability and Validation Study of Advance Care Planning Practice Scale among Health and Social Care Professionals

Advance care planning (ACP) is a crucial process in clinical practice, enabling individuals to articulate their care preferences and goals, with significant implications for future healthcare. However, ACP practice of health and social care professionals (HSCPs) concerning patients, or their family members are rarely explored. The objective of the study was to adapt and validate a four-item scale assessing ACP practices of HSCPs toward patients or their family members. The ACP Practice Scale was evaluated through a cross-sectional online survey administered to HSCPs in Macao, assessing its factor structure, validity, and reliability. Based on a sample of 186 valid responses, the ACP Practice Scale demonstrated satisfactory levels of validity and reliability among HSPCs in Macao. The four-item scale explained 65.87% of the variance in ACP practice and exhibited strong internal consistency, with Cronbach's alpha and McDonald's omega coefficients of 0.82. Furthermore, item factor loadings ranged from 0.71 to 0.90. The ACP Practice Scale provides reliable and valid measurements of ACP practice among HSCPs. This instrument can help to enhance our understanding of ACP practices in clinical settings and support the advancement of advance care planning.

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.

Effect of Perioperative Palliative Care on Health-Related Quality of Life Among Patients Undergoing Surgery for Cancer: A Randomized Clinical Trial

Importance

Involvement of palliative care specialists in the care of medical oncology patients has been repeatedly observed to improve patient-reported outcomes, but there is no analogous research in surgical oncology populations.

Objective

To determine whether surgeon-palliative care team comanagement, compared with surgeon team alone management, improves patient-reported perioperative outcomes among patients pursuing curative-intent surgery for high morbidity and mortality upper gastrointestinal (GI) cancers.

Design, Setting, and Participants

From October 20, 2018, to March 31, 2022, a patient-randomized clinical trial was conducted with patients and clinicians nonblinded but the analysis team blinded to allocation. The trial was conducted in 5 geographically diverse academic medical centers in the US. Individuals pursuing curative-intent surgery for an upper GI cancer who had received no previous specialist palliative care were eligible. Surgeons were encouraged to offer participation to all eligible patients.

Intervention

Surgeon-palliative care comanagement patients met with palliative care either in person or via telephone before surgery, 1 week after surgery, and 1, 2, and 3 months after surgery. For patients in the surgeon-alone group, surgeons were encouraged to follow National Comprehensive Cancer Network-recommended triggers for palliative care consultation.

Main Outcomes and Measures

The primary outcome of the trial was patient-reported health-related quality of life at 3 months following the operation. Secondary outcomes were patient-reported mental and physical distress. Intention-to-treat analysis was performed.

Results

In total, 359 patients (175 [48.7%] men; mean [SD] age, 64.6 [10.7] years) were randomized to surgeon-alone (n = 177) or surgeon-palliative care comanagement (n = 182), with most patients (206 [57.4%]) undergoing pancreatic cancer surgery. No adverse events were associated with the intervention, and 11% of patients in the surgeon-alone and 90% in the surgeon-palliative care comanagement groups received palliative care consultation. There was no significant difference between study arms in outcomes at 3 months following the operation in patient-reported health-related quality of life (mean [SD], 138.54 [28.28] vs 136.90 [28.96]; P = .62), mental health (mean [SD], -0.07 [0.87] vs -0.07 [0.84]; P = .98), or overall number of deaths (6 [3.7%] vs 7 [4.1%]; P > .99).

Conclusions and Relevance

To date, this is the first multisite randomized clinical trial to evaluate perioperative palliative care and the earliest integration of palliative care into cancer care. Unlike in medical oncology practice, the data from this trial do not suggest palliative care-associated improvements in patient-reported outcomes among patients pursuing curative-intent surgeries for upper GI cancers.

Trial Registration

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03611309.

Video tools in pediatric goals of care communication: A systematic review

•Goals of Care resources are primarily in written format and for adult patients.•Video tools can support families of pediatric patients facing prognostic uncertainty.•Videos represent an effective but underutilized Goals of Care communication tool.

What is the evidence for efficacy of advance care planning in improving patient outcomes? A systematic review of randomised controlled trials

Objectives

To conduct an up-to-date systematic review of all randomised controlled trials assessing efficacy of advance care planning (ACP) in improving patient outcomes, healthcare use/costs and documentation.

Design

Narrative synthesis conducted for randomised controlled trials. We searched electronic databases (MEDLINE/PubMed, Embase and Cochrane databases) for English-language randomised or cluster randomised controlled trials on 11 May 2020 and updated it on 12 May 2021 using the same search strategy. Two reviewers independently extracted data and assessed methodological quality. Disagreements were resolved by consensus or a third reviewer.

Results

We reviewed 132 eligible trials published between 1992 and May 2021; 64% were high-quality. We categorised study outcomes as patient (distal and proximal), healthcare use and process outcomes. There was mixed evidence that ACP interventions improved distal patient outcomes including end-of-life care consistent with preferences (25%; 3/12 with improvement), quality of life (0/14 studies), mental health (21%; 4/19) and home deaths (25%; 1/4), or that it reduced healthcare use/costs (18%; 4/22 studies). However, we found more consistent evidence that ACP interventions improve proximal patient outcomes including quality of patient–physician communication (68%; 13/19), preference for comfort care (70%; 16/23), decisional conflict (64%; 9/14) and patient-caregiver congruence in preference (82%; 18/22) and that it improved ACP documentation (a process outcome; 63%; 34/54).

Conclusion

This review provides the most comprehensive evidence to date regarding the efficacy of ACP on key patient outcomes and healthcare use/costs. Findings suggest a need to rethink the main purpose and outcomes of ACP.

PROSPERO registration number

CRD42020184080.

Changing Rates of Goals of Care Designations in Patients With Advanced Pancreatic Cancer During a Multifactorial Advanced Care Planning Initiative: A Real-World Evidence Study

PURPOSE

Goals of care (GoC) designations are an important part of advanced care planning (ACP) for patients with incurable cancers. Studies of outpatient oncology records show that most patients do not have GoC documented. We performed a retrospective analysis of changes in GoC designations in patients with advanced pancreatic cancer in Northern Alberta, Canada, during a system-wide ACP quality improvement initiative.

METHODS

Four hundred seventy-one patients with newly diagnosis of advanced, non-neuroendocrine pancreatic cancer between 2010 and 2015 in Northern Alberta, Canada, were included. The ACP initiation launched April 2014, and included educational materials for patients and families, and a coded system of GoC designations describing care philosophies and preferences for resuscitation and medical interventions. Data sources included the Alberta Cancer Registry and oncology-specific electronic medical records.

RESULTS

25.5% of patients had a documented GoC, which increased over the study period (Mantel-Haenszel test-of-trend P < .001; increased from 7.8% in 2010 to 50.0% in 2015). GoC designations occurred later in patients who received palliative chemotherapy versus those who did not (median 130 days from diagnosis [95% CI, 76.019 to 183.981] v 36 days [95% CI, 28.107 to 43.893]; P < .001), and coincided with the end of treatment (median 4.5 days from last treatment). 64.8% of GoC designations were documented by palliative care physicians, but the proportion documented by medical oncologists increased with time (Mantel-Haenszel test-of-trend P = .020; increased from 0% in 2010 to 52.1% in 2015).

CONCLUSION

GoC documentation increased in the outpatient records of patients with advanced pancreatic cancer during the system-wide, multifactorial ACP initiative. GoC documentation by medical oncologists also increased. These data provide real-world evidence supporting the impact of a specific ACP initiative to improve rates of GoC designation in patients with advanced cancer.

How could perioperative anxiety be addressed via surgical team communication approaches? Findings from a scoping review

OBJECTIVES

Surgical patients and their families experience high rates of perioperative anxiety, which determine a negative impact on their surgery-related outcomes. Understanding what communicational aspects positively impact perioperative anxiety may help promote more efficient, patient-centered communication approaches which could address this issue. The aim of this scoping review was to synthesize published research on communication between surgical employees and adult patients and their relatives, and its role in managing perioperative anxiety.

METHODS

A scoping review approach was used across four international databases to search for publications detailing communicational interventions and approaches employed in surgical contexts and their impact on surgical patients' and their caregivers' perioperative anxiety levels. Results were narratively synthesized.

RESULTS

Twenty-two studies were included in this scoping review, which were grouped according to their communication intervention into one of five categories: technology-assisted interventions, interpersonal communication, educational programs, tools for facilitating exchange of information and theory-derived communication strategies. Records reported mixed results in terms of reducing perioperative anxiety. Facilitating and hindering factors in interpersonal communication in this context were further synthesized.

CONCLUSION

A multitude of communicational approaches and their effect on anxiety have been investigated within surgical settings, with varying results. Existing evidence suggests that it is vital to address surgical patients' anxiety through personalized empathetic communication, tailored to an individual's case, preferences, and needs. Key aspects of patient-healthcare professional communication which may impact perioperative anxiety were identified and may be utilized in future trainings for communication skills among surgical teams.

Promoting advance care planning via mediated health resources: A systematic mixed studies review

OBJECTIVE

This systematic review aims (a) to analyze the message design of mediated advance care planning (ACP) interventions targeted at adults from a social marketing and health communication perspective, (b) to identify associations between message design and ACP outcomes, and (c) to illuminate gaps in the literature and highlight needs for future research.

METHODS

A systematic mixed studies review was conducted. Empirical articles on mediated ACP interventions were systematically searched by using nine scientific databases with keywords related to ACP and mediated health communication. Data were synthesized using a sequential explanatory approach.

RESULTS

A total of 11,824 titles were identified, of which 36 studies were included. Interventions disseminated ACP messages via video (36%), digital channels (22%), print (19%), a combination of channels (19%), and mass media (3%). The interventions used generic (42%), targeted (33%), and tailored (25%) communication. Overall, the evidence suggests that mediated ACP resources positively impact ACP Process and Action outcomes.

CONCLUSION

This study has shown that mediated ACP interventions use various contents, formats, and structures to influence patient-centered ACP outcomes. Most message design techniques were associated with positive ACP outcomes.

PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS

Mediated ACP resources are a promising approach to encourage ACP among adults.

Advance care planning in patients undergoing surgery to resect pancreatic adenocarcinoma: Underlying tension between balancing hope and realism

BACKGROUND

The timing and the dose of Advanced Care Planning in patients with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma undergoing curative-intent resection are generally dictated by the surgeon performing the operation.

METHODS

A qualitative investigation using 1:1 interviews with 40 open-ended questions was conducted with a convenience sample of 10 high-volume pancreatic surgeons from across the country. The grounded theory approach was used for data analysis.

RESULTS

A total of 10 interviews were conducted with expert pancreatic surgeons-6 males and 4 females. During preoperative counseling, all surgeons attempt to motivate patients by emphasizing hope, optimism, and the fact that surgery offers the only opportunity for cure. All surgeons discuss the possibility of recurrence as well as postoperative complications; however, a majority perceived that patients do not fully appreciate the likelihood of recurrence or postoperative complications. All surgeons acknowledged the importance of end-of-life conversations when death is imminent. Seventy percent of surgeons had mixed opinions regarding benefits of preoperative Advanced Care Planning in the preoperative setting, while 20% felt it was definitely beneficial, particularly that delivery of care aligned with patient goals. All surgeons emphasized that Advanced Care Planning should be led by a physician who both knows the patient well and understands the nuances of pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma management. Most common barriers to in-depth Advanced Care Planning discussion reported by surgeons include taking away hope, lack of time, and concern for sending "mixed messages."

CONCLUSION

We identified that surgeons experience a fundamental tension between promoting realistic long-term goals and expectations versus focusing on hope and enabling an overly optimistic perception of prognosis.

Evaluating health service outcomes of public involvement in health service design in high-income countries: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

Internationally, it is expected that health services will involve the public in health service design. Evaluation of public involvement has typically focused on the process and experiences for participants. Less is known about outcomes for health services. The aim of this systematic review was to a) identify and synthesise what is known about health service outcomes of public involvement and b) document how outcomes were evaluated.

METHODS

Searches were undertaken in MEDLINE, EMBASE, The Cochrane Library, PsycINFO, Web of Science, and CINAHL for studies that reported health service outcomes from public involvement in health service design. The review was limited to high-income countries and studies in English. Study quality was assessed using the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool and critical appraisal guidelines for assessing the quality and impact of user involvement in health research. Content analysis was used to determine the outcomes of public involvement in health service design and how outcomes were evaluated.

RESULTS

A total of 93 articles were included. The majority were published in the last 5 years, were qualitative, and were located in the United Kingdom. A range of health service outcomes (discrete products, improvements to health services and system/policy level changes) were reported at various levels (service level, across services, and across organisations). However, evaluations of outcomes were reported in less than half of studies. In studies where outcomes were evaluated, a range of methods were used; most frequent were mixed methods. The quality of study design and reporting was inconsistent.

CONCLUSION

When reporting public involvement in health service design authors outline a range of outcomes for health services, but it is challenging to determine the extent of outcomes due to inadequate descriptions of study design and poor reporting. There is an urgent need for evaluations, including longitudinal study designs and cost-benefit analyses, to fully understand outcomes from public involvement in health service design.

Efficacy of Advance Care Planning Videos for Patients: A Randomized Controlled Trial in Cancer, Heart, and Kidney Failure Outpatient Settings

Background

Patient videos about advance care planning (ACP; hereafter “Videos”), were developed to support uptake of provincial policy and address the complexity of patients’ decision-making process. We evaluate self-administered ACP Videos, compare the studies’ choice of outcomes, show correlations between the patients’ ACP actions, and discuss implications for health care policy.

Objective

To test the efficacy of the Videos on patients’ ACP/goals of care designation conversations with a health care provider.

Design, Setting, and Participants

Using a 2-arm, 1:1 randomized controlled trial, we recruited outpatients with a diagnosis of kidney failure, heart failure, metastatic lung, gastrointestinal, or gynecological cancer from 22 sites. Analysis followed the intention-to-treat principle.

Interventions

Videos describing the ACP process and illustrating the resuscitative, medical, and comfort levels of care.

Main Outcomes and Measures

The primary outcome was the proportion of participants who reported having an ACP/goals of care designation (GCD) conversation with a health care provider by 3 mo. Outcomes were measured using the Behaviours in Advance Care Planning and Actions Survey, an online survey capturing ACP attitudes, processes, and actions.

Results

We analyzed 241 and 217 participants at baseline and 3 mo, respectively. The proportion of participants who had an ACP/GCD conversation with a health care provider by 3 mo was significantly different between study arms (46% intervention; 32% control; adjusted odds ratio, 1.83; P = 0.032). Adjusted for the quality of conversations, there was no significant difference.

Conclusions

Videos as stand-alone tools do not engage individuals in high-quality ACP. Pragmatic trials are necessary to evaluate their impact on downstream outcomes when integrated into intentional, comprehensive conversations with a health care provider. Considering the strong correlation between 2 activities (physicians discussing options, patients telling health care providers preferences), policy should focus on empowering patients to initiate these conversations.

Anesthesiologist to Patient Communication: A Systematic Review

IMPORTANCE

Many patients are admitted to the intensive care unit following surgery, and some of them will experience incomplete recovery. For patients in this situation, preoperative discussions regarding patient values and preferences may direct care decisions. Existing literature shows that it is uncommon for surgeons to have these conversations preoperatively; it is unclear whether anesthesia professionals engage with patients on this topic prior to surgery.

OBJECTIVE

To review the literature on communication between patients and anesthesia professionals, with a focus on discussions related to postoperative critical care.

EVIDENCE REVIEW

MEDLINE and Web of Science were searched using specific search criteria from January 1980 to April 2020. Studies describing encounters between patients and anesthesia professionals were selected, and data regarding study objectives, study design, methodology, measures, outcomes, patient characteristics, and clinical setting were extracted and collated. The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) reporting guideline was followed.

FINDINGS

A total of 12 studies including 1284 individual patient encounters were eligible for inclusion in the review. These studies demonstrated that communication between patients and anesthesia professionals related to postoperative care is rare: only 2 studies reported communication regarding adverse postoperative events, and this communication behavior was reported in only 46 of 1284 consultations (3.6%) across all studies. Additional findings were that communication during these encounters is dominated by anesthetic planning and perioperative logistics, with variable discussion of perioperative risks vs benefits and infrequent elicitation of patient values and preferences. Some data suggest that patients wish to be involved in perioperative decision-making but are often limited by an incomplete understanding of risks and benefits.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

This systematic review found that communication in anesthesia is dominated by anesthetic planning and discussion of preoperative logistics, whereas postoperative critical care is rarely discussed. Most patients who are admitted to an intensive care unit after a major operation will not have had a discussion regarding goals of care specific to protracted recovery or prolonged intensive care with their anesthesiologist.

Deconstructing the Complexities of Advance Care Planning Outcomes: What Do We Know and Where Do We Go? A Scoping Review

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVES

Advance care planning (ACP) has shown benefit in some, but not all, studies. It is important to understand the utility of ACP. We conducted a scoping review to identify promising interventions and outcomes.

DESIGN

Scoping review.

MEASUREMENTS

We searched MEDLINE/PubMed, EMBASE, CINAHL, PsycINFO, and Web of Science for ACP randomized controlled trials from January 1, 2010, to March 3, 2020. We used standardized Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analyses methods to chart study characteristics, including a standardized ACP Outcome Framework: Process (e.g., readiness), Action (e.g., communication), Quality of Care (e.g., satisfaction), Health Status (e.g., anxiety), and Healthcare Utilization. Differences between arms of P < .05 were deemed positive.

RESULTS

Of 1,464 articles, 69 met eligibility; 94% were rated high quality. There were variable definitions, age criteria (≥18 to ≥80 years), diseases (e.g., dementia and cancer), and settings (e.g., outpatient and inpatient). Interventions included facilitated discussions (42%), video only (20%), interactive, multimedia (17%), written only (12%), and clinician training (9%). For written only, 75% of primary outcomes were positive, as were 69% for multimedia programs; 67% for facilitated discussions, 59% for video only, and 57% for clinician training. Overall, 72% of Process and 86% of Action outcomes were positive. For Quality of Care, 88% of outcomes were positive for patient-surrogate/clinician congruence, 100% for patients/surrogate/clinician satisfaction with communication, and 75% for surrogate satisfaction with patients' care, but not for goal concordance. For Health Status outcomes, 100% were positive for reducing surrogate/clinician distress, but not for patient quality of life. Healthcare Utilization data were mixed.

CONCLUSION

ACP is complex, and trial characteristics were heterogeneous. Outcomes for all ACP interventions were predominantly positive, as were Process and Action outcomes. Although some Quality of Care and Health Status outcomes were mixed, increased patient/surrogate satisfaction with communication and care and decreased surrogate/clinician distress were positive. Further research is needed to appropriately tailor interventions and outcomes for local contexts, set appropriate expectations of ACP outcomes, and standardize across studies.

The evidence supporting educational videos for patients and caregivers receiving hospice and palliative care: A systematic review

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this study is to explore the evidence surrounding educational videos for patients and family caregivers in hospice and palliative care. We ask three research questions: 1. What is the evidence for video interventions? 2. What is the quality of the evidence behind video interventions? 3. What are the outcomes of video interventions?

METHODS

The study is a systematic review, following Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) guidelines. Researchers systematically searched five databases for experimental and observational studies on the evidence supporting video education for hospice and palliative care patients and caregivers, published in 1969-2019.

RESULTS

The review identified 31 relevant articles with moderate-high quality of evidence. Most studies were experimental (74 %), came from the United States (84 %) and had a mean sample size of 139 participants. Studies showed that video interventions positively affect preferences of care and advance care planning, provide emotional support, and serve as decision and information aids.

CONCLUSION

A strong body of evidence has emerged for video education interventions in hospice and palliative care. Additional research assessing video interventions' impact on clinical outcomes is needed.

PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS

Videos are a promising tool for patient and family education in hospice and palliative care.

Randomized Controlled Trial of Advance Care Planning Video Decision Aid for the General Population

CONTEXT

Advance care planning (ACP) in a healthy general population could improve the quality of care when a health problem arises.

OBJECTIVES

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the efficacy of video decision support aid in increasing the intention to document ACP in the general healthy population.

METHODS

In this randomized controlled trial, we enrolled 250 members of the general population (aged 20 years and older and determined to be healthy), stratified by age and sex. The intervention was a video that provided information about ACP and end-of-life care options such as cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) and palliative care. An attention-control arm was given a booklet about advance directives. Primary outcome was a change in intention to document ACP. Secondary outcomes included the intention to refuse CPR at terminal status, CPR and palliative care knowledge score, and the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale.

RESULTS

About 250 participants were randomly assigned, half to the video-assisted intervention group and half to the attention-control group. Within one week postintervention, the intention to document ACP was significantly higher in the video-assisted intervention arm (68.0% vs. 39.2%; P < 0.001), and changes in the intention to document ACP were significantly greater in the video group than in the brochure group (P = 0.008; Δ = 14.4%). Palliative care knowledge score was also significantly increased in the video group (P = 0.036).

CONCLUSION

A well-constructed video decision support intervention can increase the intention to document ACP in the general population that presumably had little opportunity to discuss ACP with physicians.

A Multicenter, Randomized Controlled Trial of Perioperative Palliative Care Surrounding Cancer Surgery for Patients and Their Family Members (PERIOP-PC)

Background: Despite positive outcomes associated with specialist palliative care (PC) in diverse medical populations, little research has investigated specialist PC in surgical ones. Although cancer surgery is predominantly safe, operations can be extensive and unpredictable perioperative morbidity and mortality persist, particularly for patients with upper gastrointestinal (GI) cancers. Objectives and Hypotheses: Our objective is to complete a multicenter, randomized controlled trial comparing surgeon-PC co-management with surgeon-alone management among patients pursuing curative-intent surgery for upper GI cancers. We hypothesize that perioperative PC will improve patient postsurgical quality of life. This study and design are based on >8 years of engagement and research with patients, family members, and clinicians surrounding major cancer surgery and advance care planning/PC for surgical patients. Methods: Randomized controlled superiority trial with two study arms (surgeon-PC team co-management and surgeon-alone management) and five data collection points over six months. The principal investigator and analysts are blinded to randomization. Setting: Four, geographically diverse, academic tertiary care hospitals. Data collection began December 20, 2018 and continues to December 2020. Participants: Patients recruited from surgical oncology clinics who are undergoing curative-intent surgery for an upper GI cancer. Interventions: In the intervention arm, patients receive care from both their surgical team and a specialist PC team; the PC is provided before surgery, immediately after surgery, and at least monthly until three months postsurgery. Patients randomized to the usual care arm receive care from only the surgical team. Main Outcomes and Measures: Primary outcome: patient quality of life. Secondary outcomes: patient: symptom experience, spiritual distress, prognostic awareness, health care utilization, and mortality. Caregiver: quality of life, caregiver burden, spiritual distress, and prognostic awareness. Intent-to-treat analysis will be used. Ethics and Dissemination: This study has been approved by the institutional review boards of all study sites and is registered on clinicaltrials.gov (NCT03611309, First received: August 2, 2018).