PERCEPTIONS OF BENEFITS AND BARRIERS IN CONDUCTING ADVANCE CARE PLANNING: A CROSS-SECTIONAL SURVEY OF TRAINED ADVANCE CARE PLANNING FACILITATORS

Associations of Advance Directive Knowledge, Attitudes, and Barriers/Benefits With Preferences for Advance Treatment Directives Among Patients With Heart Failure and Their Caregivers

BACKGROUND

Patients with heart failure (HF) have not been considered as major beneficiaries of advance directives (ADs). We analyzed factors affecting the preferences for the adoption of ADs by patients with HF and their caregivers.

METHODS AND RESULTS

Seventy-one patient (mean age: 68 years)-caregiver (mean age: 55 years) dyads were enrolled during clinic visits for routine care at a single institution and completed questionnaires during in-person visits. Cohen's kappa coefficients and generalized estimating equation models were used to analyze the data. The agreement on dyadic perspectives for aggressive treatments was poor or fair, whereas agreement relative to hospice care was moderate (k = 0.42, 95% confidence interval = 0.087-0.754). Both patients and caregivers demonstrated poor knowledge of ADs and similar levels of perceived benefits and barriers to advance care planning. However, the caregivers had more positive attitudes toward ADs than patients. Patients and caregivers who were older and/or males had greater odds of preferring aggressive treatments and/or hospice care. Further, those with depressive symptoms had lower odds of preferring hospice care.

CONCLUSION

The dyadic agreement was moderately high only for hospice care preferences. Both patients and caregivers demonstrated knowledge of shortfalls regarding ADs. Timely AD discussions could increase dyadic agreement and enhance informed and shared decision-making regarding medical care.

The economic evidence for advance care planning: Systematic review of evidence

BACKGROUND

Advance care planning is a process of discussion and review concerning future care in the event of losing capacity. Aimed at improving the appropriateness and quality of care, it is also often considered a means of making better use of healthcare resources at the end of life.

AIM

To review and summarise economic evidence on advance care planning.

DESIGN

A systematic review of the academic literature.

DATA SOURCES

We searched for English language, peer-reviewed journal articles, 1990-2014, using relevant research databases: PubMed, ProQuest, CINAHL Plus with Full Text; EconLit, PsycINFO, SocINDEX with Full Text and International Bibliography of the Social Sciences. Empirical studies using statistical methods in which advance care planning and costs are variables were included.

RESULTS

There are no published cost-effectiveness studies. Included studies focus on healthcare savings, usually associated with reduced demand for hospital care. Advance care planning appears to be associated with healthcare savings for some people in some circumstances, such as people living with dementia in the community, people in nursing homes or in areas with high end-of-life care spending. There is no evidence that advance care planning is likely to be more expensive.

CONCLUSION

There is need for clearer articulation of the likely mechanisms by which advance care planning can lead to reduced care costs or improved cost-effectiveness, particularly for people who retain capacity. There is also a need to consider wider costs, including the costs of advance care planning facilitation or interventions and the costs of substitute health, social and informal care. Economic outcomes need to be considered in the context of quality benefits.