Experiences and perspectives of healthcare professionals implementing advance care planning for people suffering from life-limiting illness: a systematic review and meta-synthesis of qualitative studies

Unlocking timely palliative care: assessing referral practices and barriers at a ghanaian teaching hospital

BACKGROUND

The need for primary care physicians to be heavily involved in the provision of palliative care is growing. International agencies and practice standards advocate for early palliative care and the use of specialized palliative care services for patients with life-threatening illnesses. This study was conducted to investigate physicians' referral practices and perceived barriers to timely referral at the Korle Bu Teaching Hospital.

METHODS

A cross-sectional study design was employed using a convenience sampling technique to recruit 153 physicians for the study. Data on socio-demography, referral practices, timing and perceived barriers were collected using a structured questionnaire. Binary Logistic regression using crude and adjusted odds was performed to determine the factors associated with late referral. Significance was set at p < 0.05.

RESULTS

The prevalence of late referral was reported to be 68.0%. There were poor referral practices among physicians to palliative care services, and the major barriers to late referral were attributed to the perception that referring to a palliative care specialist means that the physician has abandoned his patient and family members' decisions and physicians' personnel choices or opinions on palliative care.

CONCLUSION

The healthcare system needs tailored interventions targeted at improving physicians' knowledge and communication strategies, as well as tackling systemic deficiencies to facilitate early and appropriate palliative care referrals. It is recommended that educational programs be implemented, palliative care training be integrated into medical curricula and culturally sensitive approaches be developed to address misconceptions surrounding end-of-life care.

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.

Application of motivational interviewing to group: Teaching advance care planning via group visits for clinical professionals

OBJECTIVE

Advance Care Planning (ACP) via Group Visits (ACP-GV) is an innovative patient-centered intervention used in the United States Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) healthcare system. The goal of ACP-GV is to spread ACP to veterans and caregivers in medically underserved rural areas. Veterans, caregivers and those they trust participate in a group led by clinicians in Veterans Health Administration healthcare and/or community-based settings. To learn how to facilitate ACP-GV, clinicians attend ACP-GV training. The training teaches the ACP-GV group model and the theoretical components of Motivational Interviewing (MI) (Rollnick & Miller, 1995), which are used to empower participants to have conversations about their healthcare values and preferences. Therefore, the aim is to describe the specific MI techniques utilized by group facilitators in the innovative ACP-GV intervention.

DISCUSSION

We provide exemplars for how group facilitators apply the MI techniques to the group discussion with participants. Lastly, we provide a scripted case example of a coded MI-concordant session of ACP-GV delivered with veterans in a healthcare setting that can be used in future training and education for clinicians interested in facilitating ACP using a group modality.

CONCLUSION

MI is a key aspect of delivering ACP-GV, a high-quality, patient-centered intervention for veterans, caregivers and those they trust.

Reliability and Validity of the Chinese Version of Advance Care Planning Self-efficacy Scale for Physicians

Background: Chinese patients prefer physicians to initiate advance care planning (ACP) conversations, but there is no appropriate tool to evaluate physicians' ACP self-efficacy level in mainland China. This study aimed to translate the ACP self-efficacy scale into Chinese (ACP-SEc) and measure its psychometric properties among clinical physicians. Method: The original scale was translated by literal translation, synthesis, and reverse translation, according to Brislin's translation model. Seven experts were invited to further revise the scale and evaluate the content validity. 348 physicians were conveniently sampled to evaluate the reliability and validity of the scale from May to June 2021 in 7 tertiary hospitals. Results: The ACP-SEc contained 17 items, 1 dimension, with a total score of 17 to 85 points. In this study, the critical ratios of the items ranged from 12.533 to 23.306, the item-total correlation coefficients ranged from 0.619 to 0.839. The item-content validity index ranged from 0.86 to 1.00, and the average scale-level content validity index was 0.98. In total, 75.507% of the total variance was explained by 1 common factor. The results of confirmatory factor analysis showed that the fitting indices of the modified model were desirable. The ACP-SEc was moderately correlated with General Self-Efficacy Scale (r = 0.675, P < .001), and it differentiated between physician groups based on the knowledge level of ACP, palliative care or ACP-related training experience, attitude toward ACP, willingness to initiate ACP discussions with patients, and experience of discussing ACP with family and friends, willingness to initiate ACP discussions with family and friends (P <.05). The total Cronbach's α and test-retest reliability of the scale were .960 and .976, respectively. Conclusion: The ACP-SEc shows good reliability and validity, and it can be used to assess the ACP self-efficacy level of physicians.

End-of-Life Discussions From the Perspective of Social Care and Healthcare Professionals in Palliative Care

This study describes the state of end-of-life discussions in Finland. A qualitative descriptive study with thematic interviews was conducted. Data were gathered from palliative care unit nurses, physicians and social workers. Inductive content analysis was used. According to interviewees (n = 33), the state of end-of-life discussion included three main categories. First, optimal end-of-life discussion time included early end-of-life discussion, end-of-life discussion at different phases of severe illness, and flexibility and challenges in scheduling end-of-life discussion. Second, end-of-life discussion initiators included both healthcare professionals and non-healthcare professionals. Third, social care and healthcare professionals' experiences of end-of-life discussion consisted of the importance and challenge of end-of-life discussion, end-of-life communication skills development in multiprofessional care context, and end-of-life communication in multi-cultural care context. The results can be used to justify the need of a national strategy and systematic implementation on Advance Care Planning (ACP), considering the multiprofessional, multicultural and internationalizing operating environment.