Dataset Information

Fidelity and Feasibility of a Brief Emergency Department Intervention to Empower Adults With Serious Illness to Initiate Advance Care Planning Conversations.

ABSTRACT: CONTEXT:Emergency department (ED) visits provide opportunities to empower patients to discuss advance care planning with their outpatient clinicians, but systematically developed, feasible interventions do not currently exist. Brief negotiated interview (BNI) interventions, which allow ED clinicians to efficiently motivate patients, have potential to meet this need. OBJECTIVES:We developed a BNI ED intervention to empower older adults with life-limiting illness to formulate and communicate medical care goals to their primary outpatient clinicians. This study assessed the fidelity and feasibility of this intervention in a high-volume ED. METHODS:We enrolled adult patients with serious illnesses (advanced cancer, congestive heart failure, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, chronic kidney disease on dialysis, predicted survival <12 months) in an urban, tertiary care academic medical center ED. All participants received the BNI intervention. We video-recorded the encounters. Two reviewers assessed the recordings for intervention fidelity based on adherence to the BNI steps (Part I) and communication skills (Part II). RESULTS:We reviewed 46 video recordings. The mean total adherence score was 21.07/27 (SD 3.68) or 78.04%. The Part I mean adherence score was 12.07/15 (SD 2.07) or 80.47%. The Part II mean adherence score was 9.0/12 (SD 2.51) or 75%. The majority (75.6%) of recordings met the prespecified threshold for high intervention fidelity. CONCLUSION:ED clinicians can deliver a BNI intervention to increase advance care planning conversations with high fidelity. Future research is needed to study the intervention's efficacy in a wider patient population.

SUBMITTER: Leiter RE

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6289886 | biostudies-literature | 2018 Dec

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Fidelity and Feasibility of a Brief Emergency Department Intervention to Empower Adults With Serious Illness to Initiate Advance Care Planning Conversations.

Leiter Richard E RE Yusufov Miryam M Hasdianda Mohammad Adrian MA Fellion Lauren A LA Reust Audrey C AC Block Susan D SD Tulsky James A JA Ouchi Kei K

Journal of pain and symptom management 20180914 6

<h4>Context</h4>Emergency department (ED) visits provide opportunities to empower patients to discuss advance care planning with their outpatient clinicians, but systematically developed, feasible interventions do not currently exist. Brief negotiated interview (BNI) interventions, which allow ED clinicians to efficiently motivate patients, have potential to meet this need.<h4>Objectives</h4>We developed a BNI ED intervention to empower older adults with life-limiting illness to formulate and co ...[more]

PMID: 30223014

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundAdvance care planning (ACP) conversations are associated with improved end-of-life healthcare outcomes and patients want to engage in ACP with their healthcare providers. Despite this, ACP conversations rarely occur in primary care settings. The objective of this study was to implement ACP through adapted Serious Illness Care Program (SICP) training sessions, and to understand primary care provider (PCP) perceptions of implementing ACP into practice.MethodsWe conducted a quality improvement project guided by the Normalization Process Theory (NPT), in an interprofessional academic family medicine group in Hamilton, Ontario, Canada. NPT is an explanatory model that delineates the processes by which organizations implement and integrate new work. PCPs (physicians, family medicine residents, and allied health care providers), completed pre- and post-SICP self-assessments evaluating training effectiveness, a survey evaluating program implementability and sustainability, and semi-structured qualitative interviews to elaborate on barriers, facilitators, and suggestions for successful implementation. Descriptive statistics and pre-post differences (Wilcoxon Sign-Rank test) were used to analyze surveys and thematic analysis was used to analyze qualitative interviews.Results30 PCPs participated in SICP training and completed self-assessments, 14 completed NoMAD surveys, and 7 were interviewed. There were reported improvements in ACP confidence and skills. NoMAD surveys reported mixed opinions towards ACP implementation, specifically concerning colleagues' abilities to conduct ACP and patients' abilities to participate in ACP. Physicians discussed busy clinical schedules, lack of patient preparedness, and continued discomfort or lack of confidence in having ACP conversations. Allied health professionals discussed difficulty sharing patient prognosis and identification of appropriate patients as barriers.ConclusionsTraining in ACP conversations improved PCPs' individual perceived abilities, but discomfort and other barriers were identified. Future iterations will require a more systematic process to support the implementation of ACP into regular practice, in addition to addressing knowledge and skill gaps.

Project description:BackgroundSerious illness conversations may lead to care consistent with patients' goals near the end of life. The emergency department could serve as an important time and location for these conversations.AimTo determine the feasibility of an emergency department-based, brief motivational interview to stimulate serious illness conversations among seriously ill older adults by trained nurses.DesignA pre-/post-intervention study.Settings/participantsIn an urban, tertiary care, academic medical center and a community hospital from January 2021 to January 2022, we prospectively enrolled adults ⩾50 years of age with serious illness and an expected prognosis <1 year. We measured feasibility outcomes using the standardized framework for feasibility studies. In addition, we also collected the validated 4-item Advance Care Planning Engagement Survey (a 5-point Likert scale) at baseline and 4-week follow-up and reviewing the electronic medical record for documentation related to newly completed serious illness conversations.ResultsAmong 116 eligible patients who were willing and able to participate, 76 enrolled (65% recruitment rate), and 68 completed the follow-up (91% retention rate). Mean patient age was 64.4 years (SD 8.4), 49% were female, and 58% had metastatic cancer. In all, 16 nurses conducted the intervention, and all participants completed the intervention with a median duration of 27 min. Self-reported Advance Care Planning Engagement increased from 2.78 pre to 3.31 post intervention (readiness to "talk to doctors about end-of-life wishes," p < 0.008). Documentation of health care proxy forms increased (62-70%) as did Medical Order for Life Sustaining Treatment (1-11%) during the 6 months after the emergency department visit.ConclusionA novel, emergency department-based, nurse-led brief motivational interview to stimulate serious illness conversations is feasible and may improve advance care planning engagement and documentation in seriously ill older adults.

Project description:BackgroundAlthough it is often recommended that general practitioners (GPs) initiate advance care planning (ACP), little is known about their experiences with ACP. This study aimed to identify GP experiences when conducting ACP conversations with palliative patients, and what factors influence these experiences.MethodsDutch GPs (N = 17) who had participated in a training on timely ACP were interviewed. Data from these interviews were analysed using direct content analysis.ResultsFour themes were identified: ACP and society, the GP's perceived role in ACP, initiating ACP and tailor-made ACP. ACP was regarded as a 'hot topic'. At the same time, a tendency towards a society in which death is not a natural part of life was recognized, making it difficult to start ACP discussions. Interviewees perceived having ACP discussions as a typical GP task. They found initiating and timing ACP easier with proactive patients, e.g. who are anxious of losing capacity, and much more challenging when it concerned patients with COPD or heart failure. Patients still being treated in hospital posed another difficulty, because they often times are not open to discussion. Furthermore, interviewees emphasized that taking into account changing wishes and the fact that not everything can be anticipated, is of the utmost importance. Moreover, when patients are not open to ACP, at a certain point it should be granted that choosing not to know, for example about where things are going or what possible ways of care planning might be, is also a form of autonomy.ConclusionsACP currently is a hot topic, which has favourable as well as unfavourable effects. As GPs experience difficulties in initiating ACP if patients are being treated in the hospital, future research could focus on a multidisciplinary ACP approach and the role of medical specialists in ACP. Furthermore, when starting ACP with palliative patients, we recommend starting with current issues. In doing so, a start can be made with future issues kept in view. Although the tension between ACP's focus on the patient's direction and the right not to know can be difficult, ACP has to be tailored to each individual patient.

Project description:Advance care planning (ACP) is a process whereby patients prepare for medical decision-making. The traditional objective of ACP has focused on the completion of advance directives. We have developed a new paradigm of ACP focused on preparing patients and their loved ones for communication and informed medical decision-making. To operationalize this new paradigm of ACP, we created an interactive, patient-centered website called PREPARE ( www.prepareforyourcare.org ) designed for diverse older adults.This randomized controlled trial with blinded outcome assessment is designed to determine the efficacy of PREPARE to engage older Veterans in the ACP process. Veterans who are???60 years of age, have???two medical conditions, and have seen a primary care physician???two times in the last year are being randomized to one of two study arms. The PREPARE study arm reviews the PREPARE website and an easy-to-read advance directive. The control arm only reviews the advance directive. The primary outcome is documentation of an advance directive and ACP discussions. Other clinically important outcomes using validated surveys include ACP behavior change process measures (knowledge, contemplation, self-efficacy, and readiness) and a full range of ACP action measures (identifying a surrogate, identifying values and goals, choosing leeway or flexibility for the surrogate, communicating with clinicians and surrogates, and documenting one's wishes). We will also assess satisfaction with decision-making and Veteran activation within primary care visits by direct audio recording. To examine the outcomes at 1 week, 3 months, and 6 months between the two study arms, we will use mixed effects linear, Poisson, or negative binomial regression and mixed effects logistic regression.This study will determine whether PREPARE increases advance directive completion rates and engagement with the ACP process. If PREPARE is efficacious, it could prove to be an easy and effective intervention to help older adults engage in the ACP process within or outside of the medical environment. PREPARE may also help older adults communicate their medical wishes and goals to their loved ones and clinicians, improve medical decision-making, and ensure their wishes are honored over the life course.ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01550731 . Registered on 8 December 2011.

Project description:BackgroundFewer than half of the US population has an advance healthcare directive. Hospitalizations offer a key opportunity for clinicians to engage patients in advance care planning (ACP) conversations. Guidelines suggest screening for the presence of "serious illness" but do not further specify how to prioritize the 12.4 million patients hospitalized each year.ObjectiveTo establish a normative standard for prioritizing hospitalized patients for ACP conversations.Design and settingA modified Delphi study, with three iterative rounds of online surveys.ParticipantsMulti-disciplinary group of US-based clinicians with research and practical expertise in ACP.Main measuresIndirect and direct elicitation of short-term and 1-year risk of mortality that prompt experts to prioritize ACP conversations for hospitalized adults.Main resultsFifty-seven of 108 (52%) candidate panelists completed round 1, and 47 completed rounds 2 and 3. Panelists were primarily physicians (84%), with significant experience (mean years 23 [SD 9.8]), who either taught (55%) and/or performed research about ACP (55%). In round 1, > 70% of panelists agreed that all hospitalized adults ≥ 65 years should have an ACP conversation before discharge, but disagreed about the timing and content of the conversation. By round 3, > 70% of participants agreed that patients with either high (> 10%) short-term or high (≥ 34%) 1-year risk of mortality should have a goals of care conversation (i.e., focused on preferences for near-term treatment), while patients with low (≤ 10%) short-term and low (< 19%) 1-year risk of mortality warranted an ACP conversation (i.e., focused on preferences for future care) before discharge.LimitationsUse of case vignettes to elicit clinician judgment; response rate.ConclusionsPanelists agreed that clinicians should have an ACP conversation with all hospitalized adults over 65 years in an ACP conversation, adjusting the content and timing of the conversation conditional on the patient's risk of short-term and 1-year mortality.

Dataset Information

Fidelity and Feasibility of a Brief Emergency Department Intervention to Empower Adults With Serious Illness to Initiate Advance Care Planning Conversations.

Publications

Fidelity and Feasibility of a Brief Emergency Department Intervention to Empower Adults With Serious Illness to Initiate Advance Care Planning Conversations.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets