"I decide myself"- A qualitative exploration of end of life decision making processes of patients and caregivers through Advance Care Planning

What makes advance care planning discussion so difficult? A systematic review of the factors of advance care planning in healthcare settings

OBJECTIVES

Existing systematic reviews related to advance care planning (ACP) largely focus on specific groups and intervention efficacy or are limited to contextual factors. This research aims to identify the modifiable factors perceived by different users of ACP in healthcare settings and inform healthcare professionals about the factors affecting ACP practice.

METHODS

Five English-language databases (ProQuest, PubMed, CINAHL Plus, Scopus, and Medline) and two Chinese-language databases (CNKI and NCL) were searched up to November 2022. Empirical research identifying factors related to ACP in healthcare settings was included. ACP is defined as a discussion process on future end-of-life care. Thematic synthesis was performed on all included studies.

RESULTS

A total of 1871 unique articles were screened; the full texts of 193 were assessed by 4 reviewers, and 45 articles were included for analysis. Twenty-two (54%) studies were qualitative, 15 (33%) were quantitative, and 6 (13%) used mixed methods. Foci varied from 28 (62%) studies on a single subject group (either patient, family, or physician), 11 (25%) on 2 subject groups (either patient and family or patient and healthcare professional), and 6 (13%) covered 3 subject groups (patient, family, and healthcare professional). Among the 17 studies involving more than 1 subject group, only 2 adopted a dyadic lens in analysis. Complex interwoven factors were categorized into (1) intrapersonal factors, (2) interpersonal factors, and (3) socio-environmental factors, with a total of 11 themes: personal belief, emotions, the burden on others, timing, responsiveness, relationship, family dynamics, experience, person taking the lead, culture, and support.

SIGNIFICANCE OF RESULTS

Patients, families, and healthcare professionals are the essential stakeholders of ACP in healthcare settings. Factors are interweaved among the intrapersonal, interpersonal, and socio-environmental dimensions. Research is warranted to examine the dynamic interactions of the 3 essential stakeholders from a multidimensional perspective, and the mechanism of the interweaving of factors.

Personal legacy and treatment choices for serious illness: a scoping review

BACKGROUND

Legacy-how one hopes to be remembered after death-is an unexplored and important dimension of decision-making for people facing serious illness.

OBJECTIVES

We conducted a scoping review to answer the following research questions: (1) How do people making treatment choices conceive of legacy? and (2) What treatment choices do people make with legacy in mind?

ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA

Participants included people facing serious illness who discussed how they wanted to be remembered after their own death, or how they hoped to impact others, as they made treatment choices. Studies in English published between 1990 and 2022 were included.

SOURCES OF EVIDENCE

We conducted searches in electronic databases including Medline/PubMed, CINAHL, PsycInfo, SocialWork, AnthropologyPlus, Web of Science, ProQuest and EMBASE databases.

DATA SYNTHESIS

We used an electronic screening tool to screen abstracts and review full-text articles suitable for inclusion. We analysed included articles using Atlas.ti. We constructed tables and narratively synthesised the findings.

RESULTS

We identified three major intersecting legacy goals that influence choices people facing serious illness make about their treatment and health behaviours, and the types of choices people make with legacy in mind. The three legacy goals are: remembrance of the individual self, remembrance of the social self and impact on others' well-being.

CONCLUSIONS

We identify the importance of legacy to patient treatment choices. Understanding for whom this construct is important, what types of legacy goals people hold and how those goals impact treatment choices is necessary to provide patient-centred whole-person care to people facing serious illness.

Intrinsic Traits Such as Personality and Decision-Making Style are Predictive of Stress in Surrogate Decision-Makers

Introduction: Despite its prominence in psychology, little is known about how personality traits play a role in the stress experiences of surrogate decision-makers. We tested the hypothesis that intrinsic traits (personality and decision-making styles) would be related to surrogates' stress in order to learn whether screening or tailoring interventions based on personality traits could help support surrogate decision-makers. Methods: This pre-specified secondary analysis evaluated data from an interventional study with dyads of patients with advanced chronic illness and their spokespersons. Measures included stress after decision-making or patient death (Impact of Events-Revised), personality (Big Five Index; BFI) and decision-making style (maximization and regret scales). Multivariate linear regressions explored the impact of personality on the stress experience; linear regressions independently modeled the impact of maximization and regret on the stress experience. Results: Of 38 spokespersons, 89.5% were women, 97.4% non-Hispanic, and 29.0% had a college degree or higher. In univariate analyses, total stress was correlated with neuroticism (r = .56, P < .01), higher scores on the regret (r = .55, P < .01) and maximization (r = .48, P < .05). In adjusted models, BFI was significantly associated with total stress (R² = 27.08, P = .02). However, only neuroticism was independently associated with total stress. Conclusions: Personality traits, particularly neuroticism, and decision-making styles predicted heightened stress in spokespersons of patients with advanced chronic illness. If ACP interventions are intended to reduce spokesperson stress, personality and decision-making style scales may help identify spokespersons most likely to benefit from ACP interventions.

Complexity of implementing a nationwide advance care planning program: results from a qualitative evaluation

BACKGROUND

We evaluated Singapore's national advance care planning (ACP) program to understand challenges to its implementation within multiple clinical settings.

METHODS

We conducted focus group discussions (FGDs) with a purposive sample of health care professionals (HCPs) involved in ACP program delivery within acute care hospitals, primary care clinics and nursing homes. FGDs were stratified into three categories based on HCPs' role within the ACP framework-leaders versus facilitators and advocates versus nursing home heads. Using NVivo 11, we analysed data using thematic analysis and Conceptual Framework for Implementation Research.

RESULTS

A total of 107 HCPs from 25 organisations participated in 22 FGDs. Findings revealed wide variation in ACP implementation among organisations and identified 12 themes organized within four domains-outer setting (lack of public awareness, shortcomings in inter-organisational partnerships, performance driven policies), inner setting (lack of commitment from organisational leadership, paucity of dedicated resources, absence of an institution-wide ACP culture, lack of physician engagement), characteristics of HCPs (language barriers) and process (inadequate training, complexity of conversations and documentations, challenges to retrieving ACP documents, absence of comprehensive monitoring and evaluation).

CONCLUSION

ACP program implementation is complex and faces multiple health care system challenges. To integrate ACP within routine clinical care, ACP processes should be simplified, training framework be strengthened, physicians be engaged and an ACP supportive culture be created within and outside organisations. Findings will be used to guide ACP implementation within the country and globally.