Advance Care Planning and End-Of-Life Communications: Practical Tips for Oncology Advanced Practitioners

Acceptability and usability of the Planning Advance Care Together (PACT) website for improving patients' engagement in advance care planning

Objectives

Most prior advance care planning (ACP) interventions lack integration of the social context of patients' ACP process, which patients indicate is critically important. The current study developed the Planning Advance Care Together (PACT) website to foster inclusion of loved ones in the ACP process.

Methods

To provide feedback about the PACT website, patients with advanced cancer (N = 11), their caregivers (N = 11), and experts (N = 10) participated in semi-structured interviews. Patients and caregivers also completed standardized ratings of acceptability and usability.

Results

Overall, patient (n = 11) and caregiver (n = 11) ratings of acceptability and usability of the website exceeded benchmark cut-offs (≥24 on the Acceptability E-Scale and ≥ 68 on the System Usability Scale). Patients, caregivers, and experts liked the topic of ACP but felt that it could be emotionally challenging. They recommended focusing more on planning and less on end of life. They appreciated being able to include loved ones and recommended adding resources for caregivers.

Conclusions

Study findings support the preliminary usability and acceptability of the PACT website. Findings will be used to inform a modified prototype of the PACT website that is interactive and ready for field testing with patients with advanced cancer and their loved ones.

Innovation

We utilized a novel application of the shared mind framework to support patients with advanced cancer in engaging their loved ones in the ACP process.

A cross-sectional study on advance care planning documentation attitudes during national advance care planning week in a South-East Asian country

BACKGROUND

Through advocacy initiatives such as roadshows during "National ACP Week", the Agency for Integrated Care (AIC) had increased advance care planning (ACP) engagement since 2011. Project Happy Apples (PHA), a community initiative project led by medical students from the National University of Singapore, also conducted a public exhibition to raise ACP awareness during this period. This study aimed to investigate and identify predictors of attitudes towards ACP documentation among 'ACP Week' respondents which may be used to formulate strategies to increase ACP documentation in Singapore.

METHODS

A cross-sectional study on ACP documentation attitudes of 262 respondents during local roadshows were conducted. Multiple logistic regression models were built to investigate the associations between demographic variables and attitudes toward ACP documentation.

RESULTS

The mean age was 43.5 years (SD = 17.4), 79 (30.15%) were males and 49 (18.7%) were healthcare professionals (HCP). 117 (44.66%) respondents had prior experience with serious illness and 116 (44.27%) had heard of ACP. Age was a significant predictor of readiness to sign official papers naming nominated healthcare spokesperson (NHS) (OR = 1.04, 95%CI: 1.02-1.07). Experience with serious illness was a significant predictor of readiness to discuss end-of-life (EOL) care with healthcare professionals (HCP) (OR = 3.65, 95%CI: 1.36-11.61). Being female was a significant predictor for readiness to speak to their nominated healthcare spokesperson about EOL care (OR = 7.33, 95%CI: 2.06-46.73). Subgroup analyses revealed that those aged 20-39 were less likely to speak to their healthcare professional about or sign official papers regarding EOL care. We also found that being a healthcare professional does not necessitate better or worse attitudes.

CONCLUSION

Advocacy programs tailored to targeting respondents of different age groups and prior experience with serious illness may improve the efficacy of advocacy efforts.

Matters We Metric Vs. Metrics that Matter

Introduction

Geriatric fracture is a pressing global health issue, marked by elevated mortality and morbidity rates and escalating health care costs. The evolving health care system from fee-for-service to quality-based reimbursement has led to externally driven reward and reimbursement systems that may not account for the complexity of caring for older adults with fracture.

Significance

The aim of this review is to highlight the need for a shift towards meaningful metrics that impact geriatric fracture care and to issue a call to action for all medical societies to advocate for national reimbursement and ranking systems that focus on metrics that truly matter.

Results

Traditional metrics, while easier to capture, may not necessarily represent high quality care and may even have unintentional adverse consequences. For example, the focus on reducing length of stay may lead to older patients being discharged too early, without adequately addressing pain, constipation, or delirium. In addition, a focus on mortality may miss the opportunity to deliver compassionate end-of-life care. Existing geriatric fracture care metrics have expanded beyond traditional metrics to include assessment by geriatricians, fracture prevention, and delirium assessments. However, there is a need to further consider and develop patient-focused metrics. The Age-Friendly Health Initiative (4 Ms), which includes Mobility, Medication, Mentation, and what Matters is an evidence-based framework for assessing and acting on critical issues in the care of older adults. Additional metrics that should be considered include an assessment of nutrition and secondary fracture prevention.

Conclusion

In the realm of geriatric fracture care, the metrics currently employed often revolve around adherence to established guidelines and are heavily influenced by financial considerations. It is crucial to shift the paradigm towards metrics that truly matter for geriatric fracture patients, recognizing the multifaceted nature of their care and the profound impact these fractures have on their lives.

Clinicians' Perspectives on the Telehealth Serious Illness Care Program for Older Adults With Myeloid Malignancies: Single-Arm Pilot Study

BACKGROUND

Serious illness conversations may help patients avoid unwanted treatments. We previously piloted the telehealth Serious Illness Care Program (SICP) for older adults with acute myeloid leukemia and myelodysplastic syndrome.

OBJECTIVE

In this study, we aimed to understand the experience of the telehealth SICP from the clinician's perspective.

METHODS

We studied 10 clinicians who delivered the telehealth SICP to 20 older adults with acute myeloid leukemia or myelodysplastic syndrome. Quantitative outcomes included confidence and acceptability. Confidence was measured using a 22-item survey (range 1-7; a higher score is better). Acceptability was measured using an 11-item survey (5-point Likert scale). Hypothesis testing was performed at α=.10 (2-tailed) due to the pilot nature and small sample size. Clinicians participated in audio-recorded qualitative interviews at the end of the study to discuss their experience.

RESULTS

A total of 8 clinicians completed the confidence measure and 7 clinicians completed the acceptability measure. We found a statistically significant increase in overall confidence (mean increase of 0.5, SD 0.6; P=.03). The largest increase in confidence was in helping families with reconciliation and goodbye (mean 1.4, SD 1.5; P=.04). The majority of clinicians agreed that the format was simple (6/7, 86%) and easy to use (6/7, 86%). Clinicians felt that the telehealth SICP was effective in understanding their patients' values about end-of-life care (7/7, 100%). A total of three qualitative themes emerged: (1) the telehealth SICP deepened relationships and renewed trust; (2) each telehealth SICP visit felt unique and personal in a positive way; and (3) uninterrupted, unrushed time optimized the visit experience.

CONCLUSIONS

The telehealth SICP increased confidence in having serious illness conversations while deepening patient-clinician relationships.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04745676; https://www.clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT04745676.

Advance Care Planning and Goals of Care Discussion: Barriers from the Perspective of Medical Residents

BACKGROUND

Advance care planning (ACP) and goals of care discussion involve the exploration of what is most important to a person to prepare for health-care decision making. Despite their well-established benefits, they are still not frequently performed in clinical oncology practice. This study aims to describe the barriers to discussion goals of care with oncology patients from the perspective of medical residents.

METHODS

This cross-sectional and qualitative study applied the "Decide-Oncology" questionnaire, adapted to Portuguese language, to assess barriers to goals of care discussion among medical residents from three university hospitals in Brazil. Residents were asked to rank the importance of various barriers to discuss goals of care (ranging from 1-extremely unimportant to 7-extremely important).

RESULTS

Twenty-nine residents answered the questionnaire (30.9%). The most reported barriers were related to patients and their families' difficulty in understanding and accepting the diagnosis and the prognosis as well as patients' desire to receive full active treatment. Furthermore, the physician and external factors such as lack of training and lack of time to have these conversations were also very important barriers. The identification of the key barriers that limit the discussion of ACP and early palliative care referrals can certainly help to prioritize the next steps for future studies aimed at improving ACP and goals of care discussions.

Advance care planning and goals of care discussion: the perspectives of Brazilian oncologists

BACKGROUND

Advance care planning (ACP) and goals of care discussions are important instruments that enable respect for patient autonomy, especially in patients with a life-threatening disease, such as cancer. Despite their well-established benefits, ACP and goals of care discussions are still not frequently performed in clinical oncology practice. Understanding the barriers to this topic is the first step toward developing future interventions that are more likely to improve professional practice and patient satisfaction with care.

AIM

To explore Brazilian oncologists' barriers to discuss goals of care and advance care planning.

METHODS

A cross-sectional study was developed to identify Brazilian oncologists' barriers to discussing goals of care and ACP. The Decide-Oncology questionnaire was used to identify the importance of these barriers according to oncologists' perceptions. Participants were asked to rank the importance of various barriers to discussing goals of care, ranging from 1 (extremely unimportant) to 7 (extremely important). A quantitative analysis using descriptive statistics was used, including median and interquartile intervals and a qualitative analysis based on Bardin content analysis of the two open questions.

RESULTS

Sixty-six oncologists participated in this study. Most of them perceived the patient and family's related barriers as the most important, such as patients' difficulty in understanding their diagnosis and accepting their prognosis. Physician and external related factors, such as lack of training and lack of time for this conversation, were also described as important barriers. Participants with formal training regarding goals of care communication and with experience in palliative care perceived the lack of patients' advanced directives as a significant barrier and manifested more willingness to participate in decision-making about goals of care. The lack of access and of support for referral to palliative care was also considered a significant barrier for ACP and goals of care discussion.

CONCLUSION

The identification of barriers that limit the discussion of ACP and early palliative care referrals can certainly help to prioritise the next steps for future studies aimed at improving ACP and helping clinicians to better support patients through shared decision-making based on the patient's values and experiences.

Evaluation of an advance care planning training program for practice professionals in Japan incorporating shared decision making skills training: a prospective study of a curricular intervention

BACKGROUND

We developed a novel training program for health care professionals that incorporated shared decision making (SDM) skills training into an advance care planning (ACP) training course, the first in Japan. This study aimed to assess the training program's impact on health care professionals' knowledge, skill, attitudes, and confidence to initiate ACP.

METHODS

Using the novel Japanese educational program, we evaluated the effect of 8-month programs conducted eight community training sites of professionals who can practice ACP in a local area in Aichi Prefecture (the Aichi ACP Project). SDM skills training was provided during the workshops conducted in the ACP training course, and the participants' satisfaction and understanding of the training were assessed. After the completion of two workshops, information on SDM skill results from the training and submitted assignments were collected anonymously from the training sites.

RESULT

A total of 404 participants completed all education programs. After the first workshop, at least 95% of trainees stated that they were satisfied with the training and that it was useful for ACP practice. The evaluation of the results between the first and second workshops indicated improvement in SDM skills on some items of the SDM measures. In the second workshop, at least 90% of participants submitted implementation reports, and after the second workshop, a survey of confidence in ACP practice was administered, with responses indicating improvement. There were high levels of interest in education related to the ACP practices of oneself and others.

CONCLUSIONS

This educational program can be an effective for developing professionals who can practice ACP with SDM skills.

Understanding Factors That Predict Advance Directive Completion

Background

Advance care planning was designed for the purpose of ensuring that patients receive care at end of life (EOL) that is congruent with their wishes, goals, and values. Despite the evidence of the negative impact of not having advance directives (ADs), only one-third of adults in the United States have written ADs. Determining the patient's goals of care in the setting of metastatic cancer is vital to the delivery of high-quality healthcare. Although much is known about barriers to AD completion (e.g., the uncertainty of the disease process and trajectory, readiness of patient and family to have these discussions, and patient-provider communication barriers), little is known about the role of both patient and caregiver factors influencing AD completion.

Objective

This study aimed to understand the relationship between patient and family caregiver demographic characteristics, and processes, and their influence on AD completion.

Design

This study was a cross-sectional descriptive correlational design and employed secondary data analysis. The sample was composed of 235 patients with metastatic cancer and their caregivers.

Results

A logistic regression analysis was performed to analyze the relationship between predictor variables and the criterion variable of AD completion. Out of the 12 predictor variables, only 2 variables (patient age and race) predicted AD completion. Of those two predictor variables, patient age made a greater and unique contribution to explaining AD completion, compared with patient race.

Conclusion

There is a need for further research on cancer patients with historical low AD completion.