Dataset Information

Utilising advance care planning videos to empower perioperative cancer patients and families: a study protocol of a randomised controlled trial.

ABSTRACT: INTRODUCTION:Despite positive health outcomes associated with advance care planning (ACP), little research has investigated the impact of ACP in surgical populations. Our goal is to evaluate how an ACP intervention video impacts the patient centredness and ACP of the patient-surgeon conversation during the presurgical consent visit. We hypothesise that patients who view the intervention will engage in a more patient-centred communication with their surgeons compared with patients who view a control video. METHODS AND ANALYSIS:Randomised controlled superiority trial of an ACP video with two study arms (intervention ACP video and control video) and four visits (baseline, presurgical consent, postoperative 1?week and postoperative 1?month). Surgeons, patients, principal investigator and analysts are blinded to the randomisation assignment. SETTING:Single, academic, inner city and tertiary care hospital. Data collection began July 16, 2015 and continues to March 2017. PARTICIPANTS:Patients recruited from nine surgical oncology clinics who are undergoing major cancer surgery. INTERVENTIONS:In the intervention arm, patients view a patient preparedness video developed through extensive engagement with patients, surgeons and other stakeholders. Patients randomised to the control arm viewed an informational video about the hospital surgical programme. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES:Primary Outcome: Patient centredness and ACP of patient-surgeon conversations during the presurgical consent visit as measured through the Roter Interaction Analysis System. SECONDARY OUTCOMES:patient Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale score; patient goals of care; patient, companion and surgeon satisfaction; video helpfulness; medical decision maker designation; and the frequency patients watch the video. Intent-to-treat analysis will be used to assess the impact of video assignment on outcomes. Sensitivity analyses will assess whether there are differential effects contingent on patient or surgeon characteristics. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION:This study has been approved by the Johns Hopkins School of Medicine institutional review board and is registered on clinicaltrials.gov (NCT02489799, First received: July 1, 2015). TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER:clinicaltrials.gov, NCT02489799.

SUBMITTER: Aslakson RA

PROVIDER: S-EPMC5726140 | biostudies-literature | 2017 Jun

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Utilising advance care planning videos to empower perioperative cancer patients and families: a study protocol of a randomised controlled trial.

Aslakson Rebecca A RA Isenberg Sarina R SR Crossnohere Norah L NL Conca-Cheng Alison M AM Yang Ting T Weiss Matthew M Volandes Angelo E AE Bridges John F P JFP Roter Debra L DL

BMJ open 20170606 5

<h4>Introduction</h4>Despite positive health outcomes associated with advance care planning (ACP), little research has investigated the impact of ACP in surgical populations. Our goal is to evaluate how an ACP intervention video impacts the patient centredness and ACP of the patient-surgeon conversation during the presurgical consent visit. We hypothesise that patients who view the intervention will engage in a more patient-centred communication with their surgeons compared with patients who vie ...[more]

PMID: 28592584

Similar Datasets

Project description:IntroductionPatients in intensive care units (ICUs) may transition into an end-of-life phase during treatment. Advance care planning (ACP) for this population has not been studied comprehensively, and support for its implementation is insufficient.ObjectiveThis study aims to clarify the ACP support needs among critical perioperative patients.MethodsIn this qualitative descriptive study, semistructured interviews were conducted with patients previously admitted to the ICU. The survey was conducted from September to November 2019. Participants comprised 13 individuals, who were admitted to the ICU for a period of 3 months to 2 years after surgery.ResultsThe average age of the participants was 63.8 years. The average mechanical ventilation duration following surgery was 24.5 h. The interviews focused on the ACP needs from the preoperative period to discharge. About 90% of the patients thought about the possibility of death before surgery and considered giving advance orders (e.g., "I don't want life-sustaining treatment"). The participants discussed inheritance, work-related matters, and household issues with their families but rarely spoke about treatment and care. Although they examined the content of the advance directives, the medical staff was not informed about them. Patients revealed that they wanted to understand the distinction between life-prolonging and life-saving treatments and discuss it with the medical staff, apart from being educated on ACP. Many patients previously admitted to the ICU are unclear about the difference between life-prolonging and life-saving treatments; this is also true for medical staff.ConclusionPatients who had been admitted to the ICU after high-risk surgery thought they needed help with ACP before surgery. Therefore, patients have the right to know about treatment risks; however, medical staff believes that this is difficult to communicate. Thus, medical staff should consider ways to communicate clearly with patients, including discussing the risks associated with surgery.

Project description:Background and objectivesMore than 90,000 patients with ESRD die annually in the United States, yet advance care planning (ACP) is underutilized. Understanding patients' and families' diverse needs can strengthen systematic efforts to improve ACP.Design, setting, participants, & measurementsIn-depth interviews were conducted with a purposive sample of patients and family/friends from dialysis units at two study sites. Applying grounded theory, interviews were audiotaped, professionally transcribed, and analyzed in an iterative process. Emergent themes were identified, discussed, and organized into major themes and subthemes.ResultsThirteen patients and nine family/friends participated in interviews. The mean patient age was 63 years (SD 14) and five patients were women. Participants identified as black (n=1), Hispanic (n=4), Native American (n=4), Pacific Islander (n=1), white (n=11), and mixed (n=1). Three major themes with associated subthemes were identified. The first theme, "Prior experiences with ACP," revealed that these discussions rarely occur, yet most patients desire them. A potential role for the primary care physician was broached. The second theme, "Factors that may affect perspectives on ACP," included a desire for more of a connection with the nephrologist, positive and negative experiences with the dialysis team, disenfranchisement, life experiences, personality traits, patient-family/friend relationships, and power differentials. The third theme, "Recommendations for discussing ACP," included thoughts on who should lead discussions, where and when discussions should take place, what should be discussed and how.ConclusionsMany participants desired better communication with their nephrologist and/or their dialysis team. A number expressed feelings of disenfranchisement that could negatively impact ACP discussions through diminished trust. Life experiences, personality traits, and relationships with family and friends may affect patient perspectives regarding ACP. This study's findings may inform clinical practice and will be useful in designing prospective intervention studies to improve patient and family experiences at the end of life.

Project description:INTRODUCTION:Patients with multimorbidity plus additional impairments (eg, mobility limitations, disability, cognitive impairments or frailty) are at the highest risk for poor healthcare outcomes. Advanced care planning (ACP) provides patients and their surrogates the opportunity to discuss their goals, values and priorities for healthcare-particularly in the context of end-of-life care. ACP discussions promote more person-centred care; however, it is currently underused. There is a tremendous need for systematic, scalable approaches to individualised ACP that promotes patient and family engagement. Here we describe the study protocol for a randomised effectiveness trial of a nurse navigator and informatics intervention designed to improve the documentation and quality of ACP discussions. METHODS AND ANALYSIS:This is a randomised, pragmatic, effectiveness trial; patients aged 65 years and older who have multimorbidity plus impairments in either physical function (eg, mobility limitations or disability) or cognition, and/or frailty within an affiliated Accountable Care Organization were eligible. The electronic health record was used to develop an automatic prescreening system for eligible patients (n=765) and participants were randomised in a 1:1 ratio to either the nurse navigator-led ACP pathway or usual care. Our primary outcomes are documentation of ACP discussions within the EHR along with the quality of ACP discussions. Secondary outcomes include a broad range of ACP actions (eg, usage of ACP billing codes, choosing a surrogate decision-maker and advance directive documentation). Outcomes will be measured over 12 months of follow-up. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION:This study has been approved by the appropriate Institutional Review Boards and is guided by input from patient and clinical advisory boards. The results of this study will inform a scalable solution to ACP discussions throughout our healthcare system and statewide. TRIALS REGISTRATION NUMBER:NCT03609658.

Project description:BackgroundTo assure patient-centred end-of-life care, palliative interventions need to account for patients' preferences. Advance care planning (ACP) is a structured approach that allows patients, relatives and physicians to discuss end-of-life decisions. Although ACP can improve several patient related outcomes, the implementation of ACP remains difficult. The col-ACP-study (collaborative advance care planning) will investigate a new ACP procedure (col-ACP-intervention (German: Hand-in-Hand Intervention)) in palliative cancer patients and their relatives that addresses individual values and targets barriers of communication before an ACP process.MethodsIn a randomised controlled trial, 270 cancer patients without curative treatment options and their relatives will receive either 1) col-ACP 2) a supportive intervention (active control group) or 3) standard medical care (TAU). col-ACP comprises two steps: a) addressing various barriers of patients and relatives that discourage them from discussing end-of-life issues followed by b) a regular, structured ACP procedure. The col-ACP-intervention consists of 6 sessions. Primary endpoint is the patients' quality of life 16 weeks after randomisation. Secondary endpoints include measurements of distress; depression; communication barriers; caregivers' quality of life; existence of ACP or advance directives; the consistence of end of life care; and others. Patients will be followed up for 13 months. Multivariate analyses will be carried out. Qualitative evaluation of the intervention will be conducted.DiscussionAugmentation of a regular ACP program by a structured psycho-oncological intervention is an innovative approach to target barriers of communication about end-of-life issues. Study findings will help to understand the value of such a combined intervention in palliative care.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03387436 (Date of registration: 01/02/2018, retrospectively registered.

Project description:INTRODUCTION:Advance care planning (ACP) is a key component of high-quality end-of-life care but is underused. Interventions based on models of behaviour change may fill an important gap in available programmes to increase ACP engagement. Such interventions are designed for broad outreach and flexibility in delivery. The purpose of the Sharing and Talking about My Preferences study is to examine the efficacy of three behaviour change approaches to increasing ACP engagement through two related randomised controlled trials being conducted in different settings (Veterans Affairs (VA) medical centre and community). METHODS AND ANALYSIS:Eligible participants are 55 years or older. Participants in the community are being recruited in person in primary care and specialty outpatient practices and senior living sites, and participants in the VA are recruited by telephone. In the community, randomisation is at the level of the practice or site, with all persons at a given practice/site receiving either computer-tailored feedback with a behaviour stage-matched brochure (computer-tailored intervention (CTI)) or usual care. At the VA, randomisation is at the level of the participant and is stratified by the number of ACP behaviours completed at baseline. Participants are randomised to one of four groups: CTI, motivational interviewing, motivational enhancement therapy or usual care. The primary outcome is completion of four key ACP behaviours: identification of a surrogate decision maker, communication about goals, completing advance directives and ensuring documents are in the medical record. Analysis will be conducted using mixed effects models, taking into account the clustered randomisation for the community study. ETHICS AND RANDOMISATION:The studies have been approved by the appropriate Institutional Review Boards and are being overseen by a Safety Monitoring Committee. The results of these studies will be disseminated to academic audiences and leadership in in the community and VA sites. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBERS:NCT03137459 and NCT03103828.

Dataset Information

Utilising advance care planning videos to empower perioperative cancer patients and families: a study protocol of a randomised controlled trial.

Publications

Utilising advance care planning videos to empower perioperative cancer patients and families: a study protocol of a randomised controlled trial.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets