Dataset Information

The importance of living well now and relationships: A qualitative study of the barriers and enablers to engaging frail elders with advance care planning.

ABSTRACT:

Background

The population of frail elders is growing, and due to their vulnerability to sudden deterioration, advance care planning is particularly important. However, advance care planning is uncommon for multiple reasons, some of which are linked to the perceptions of frail elders and their families.

Aim

To explore the barriers and enablers to advance care planning engagement with frail elders.

Design

Qualitative in-depth interviews with thematic analysis.

Setting/participants

Purposive sample of 10 frail elders and 8 nominated family members using a community-based older persons' service run by a large urban UK hospice. Frail elders had capacity, were ⩾65 (median 85, range 71-95), scored 6 or 7 (median 6.5) on the Clinical Frailty Scale, and 70% were female.

Results

Key barriers were: Advance care planning is unclear, in terms of meaning and the language used; Lack of relevance, with frail elders preferring to focus on living well now; and the Importance of family, relationships and home, and the influence of relationship on end of life decision-making. Engagement strategies included preparing the frail elder for advance care planning conversations and using a gentle, honest, individualised approach.

Conclusions

Essential enablers for frail elders are understanding what advance care planning is and why it may be relevant to them. For professionals, enablers include recognising the importance of living well now and relational decision-making. To further support advance care planning, recommendations include early engagement and re-conceptualising advance care planning as an ongoing process which encompasses current and future care. Further research is needed in different cultures and care contexts.

SUBMITTER: Combes S

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8189003 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:Advance planning for end-of-life care has gained acceptance, but actual end-of-life care is often incongruent with patients' previously stated goals. We assessed the flow of advance care planning information from patients to medical records in a community sample of older adults to better understand why advance care planning is not more successful.Our study used structured interview and medical record data from community-dwelling older patients in two previous studies: Assessing Care of Vulnerable Elders (ACOVE)-1 (245 patients age > or = 65 years and screened for high risk of death/functional decline in 1998-1999) and ACOVE-2 (566 patients age > or = 75 who screened positive for falls/mobility disorders, incontinence, and/or dementia in 2002-2003). We compared interview data on patients' preferences, advance directives, and surrogate decision-makers with findings from the medical record.In ACOVE-1, 38% of surveyed patients had thought about limiting the aggressiveness of medical care; 24% of surveyed patients stated that they had spoken to their doctor about this. The vast majority of patients (88%-93%) preferred to die rather than remain permanently in a coma, on a ventilator, or tube fed. Regardless of patients' specific preferences, 15%-22% of patients had preference information in their medical record. Among patients who reported that they had completed an advance directive and had given it to their health-care provider, 15% (ACOVE-1) and 47% (ACOVE-2) had advance directive information in the medical record. Among patients who had not completed an advance directive but had given surrogate decision-maker information to their provider, 0% (ACOVE-1) and 16% (ACOVE-2) had documentation of a surrogate decision-maker in the medical record.Community-dwelling elders' preferences for end-of-life care are not consistent with documentation in their medical records. Electronic health records and standardized data collection for end-of-life care could begin to ameliorate this problem.

Project description:BackgroundAdvance care planning (ACP) conversations support people to think about, discuss and document their beliefs, values and preferences regarding future care. This process means that should the person loose capacity in the future, care can be provided, consistent with their personal values and beliefs. The ACP process is particularly relevant for older people living with frailty (frail elders) as they are vulnerable to sudden deterioration. However, ACP is rarely undertaken by frail elders. The aim of this study was to develop an intervention to increase multidisciplinary health and social care professionals' (H&SCPs) engagement of cognitively able, domestic-dwelling frail elders with ACP.MethodsIntervention development was guided by the Medical Research Council framework for complex interventions and the Behaviour Change Wheel. Multiple methods were used to understand ACP barriers and enablers: a systematic integrative review, a survey (n = 73 H&SCPs), and semi-structured interviews (n = 10 frail elders, n = 8 family members). A conceptual model, developed from the integrative review, underpinned data collection for the survey and interviews. Synthesis of this data, including patient and public involvement, was then used to identify H&SCPs behaviours that needed to change for ACP to be implemented and decide content and implementation for the intervention.ResultsFollowing the Behaviour Change Wheel system, and based on the findings of the review, survey and interviews, the prototype intervention, Conversations on Living and Dying (CLaD), was developed. The CLaD prototype consisted of one 3.5-hour educational skills session for H&SCPs supported by a toolkit. Content focussed on the relevance of ACP for frail elders, experience of ACP by frail elders, and strategies H&SCPs could adopt to encourage frail elders' engagement with ACP. Strategies include recognising the importance of relationships and living well now, preparing frail elders for ACP conversations and starting ACP early. Participants who took part in initial prototype refinement reported that the intervention helped them think differently about ACP and encouraged them to engage with frail elders.ConclusionsThe use of behavioural theory enabled the development of CLaD, an evidence-based, theory-driven, person-centred intervention to support ACP engagement with frail elders. While feasibility testing is required, initial prototype refinement demonstrated that H&SCPs found the intervention to be acceptable, engaging, and clinically valuable in their practice with frail elders and their families.

Project description:ObjectivesHow advance care planning (ACP) is conceptualised in Australia including when, where and how ACP is best initiated, is unclear. It has been suggested that healthcare delivered in general practice provides an optimal setting for initiation of ACP discussions but uptake remains low. This systematic review and critical interpretive synthesis sought to answer two questions: (1) What are the barriers and enablers to uptake of ACP in general practice? (2) What initiatives have been used to increase uptake of ACP in general practice?DesignA systematic review and critical interpretive synthesis of the peer-reviewed literature was undertaken. A socioecological framework was used to interpret and map the literature across four contextual levels of influence including individual, interpersonal, provider and system levels within a general practice setting.SettingPrimary care general practice settings DATA SOURCES: Searches were undertaken from inception to July 2019 across Ovid Medline, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, Scopus, ProQuest and Cochrane Library of systematic reviews.ResultsThe search yielded 4883 non-duplicate studies which were reduced to 54 studies for synthesis. Year of publication ranged from 1991 to 2019 and represented research from nine countries. Review findings identified a diverse and disaggregated body of ACP literature describing barriers and enablers to ACP in general practice, and interventions testing single or multiple mechanisms to improve ACP generally without explicit consideration for level of influence. There was a lack of cohesive guidance in shaping effective ACP interventions and some early indications of structured approaches emerging.ConclusionFindings from this review present an opportunity to strategically apply the ACP research evidence across targeted levels of influence, and with an understanding of mediators and moderators to inform the design of new and enhanced ACP models of care in general practice.Prospero registration numberCRD42018088838.

Project description:Older adults recently discharged from hospital are at high risk of functional decline and falls. A tailored fall prevention education provided at hospital discharge aimed to improve the capacity of older adults to engage in falls prevention activities. What remains unknown are the factors affecting behaviour change after hospital discharge. This study identified the perceived barriers and enablers of older adults to engagement in fall prevention activities during the 6-month period post-discharge. An exploratory approach using interpretative phenomenological analysis focused on the lived experience of a purposive sample (n = 30) of participants. All were recruited as a part of an RCT (n = 390) that delivered a tailored fall prevention education program at three hospital rehabilitation wards in Perth, Australia. Data were collected at 6-month post-discharge using semi-structured telephone surveys. Personal stories confirmed that some older adults have difficulty recovering functional ability after hospital discharge. Reduced physical capability, such as experiences of fatigue, chronic pain and feeling unsteady when walking were barriers for participants to safely return to their normal daily activities. Participants who received the tailored fall education program reported positive effects on knowledge and motivation to engage in fall prevention. Participants who had opportunities to access therapy or social supports described more positive experiences of recovery compared to individuals who persevered without assistance. A lack of physical and social support was associated with apprehension and fear toward adverse events such as falls, injuries, and hospital readmission. The lived experience of participants following hospital discharge strongly suggested that they required more supports from both healthcare professionals and caregivers to ensure that their needs were met. Further research that evaluates how to assist this population to engage in programs that will mitigate the high risk of falls and hospital readmissions is required.

Project description:ImportanceAdvance care planning improves the receipt of medical care aligned with patients' values; however, it remains suboptimal among diverse patient populations. To mitigate literacy, cultural, and language barriers to advance care planning, easy-to-read advance directives and a patient-directed, online advance care planning program called PREPARE For Your Care (PREPARE) were created in English and Spanish.ObjectiveTo compare the efficacy of PREPARE plus an easy-to-read advance directive with an advance directive alone to increase advance care planning documentation and patient-reported engagement.Design, setting, and participantsA comparative efficacy randomized clinical trial was conducted from February 1, 2014, to November 30, 2017, at 4 safety-net, primary-care clinics in San Francisco among 986 English-speaking or Spanish-speaking primary care patients 55 years or older with 2 or more chronic or serious illnesses.InterventionsParticipants were randomized to PREPARE plus an easy-to-read advance directive (PREPARE arm) or the advance directive alone. There were no clinician-level or system-level interventions. Staff were blinded for all follow-up measurements.Main outcomes and measuresThe primary outcome was documentation of new advance care planning (ie, legal forms and/or documented discussions) at 15 months. Patient-reported outcomes included advance care planning engagement at baseline, 1 week, 3 months, 6 months, and 12 months using validated surveys. Intention-to-treat analyses were performed using mixed-effects logistic and linear regression, controlling for time, health literacy, and baseline advance care planning, clustering by physician, and stratifying by language.ResultsAmong the 986 participants (603 women and 383 men), the mean (SD) age was 63.3 (6.4) years, 387 of 975 (39.7%) had limited health literacy, and 445 (45.1%) were Spanish speaking. No participant characteristic differed between the 2 groups, and retention was 85.9% (832 of 969) among survivors. Compared with the advance directive alone, PREPARE resulted in a higher rate of advance care planning documentation (unadjusted, 43.0% [207 of 481] vs 33.1% [167 of 505]; P < .001; adjusted, 43.0% vs 32.0%; P < .001) and higher self-reported increased advance care planning engagement scores (98.1% vs 89.5%; P < .001). Results remained significant among English speakers and Spanish speakers.Conclusions and relevanceThe patient-facing PREPARE program and an easy-to-read advance directive, without clinician-level or system-level interventions, increased documentation of advance care planning and patient-reported engagement, with statistically higher gains for PREPARE vs advance directive alone. These tools may mitigate literacy and language barriers to advance care planning, allow patients to begin planning on their own, and could substantially improve the process for diverse English-speaking and Spanish-speaking populations.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov identifiers: NCT01990235 and NCT02072941.

Project description:Background/objectivesAdvance care planning (ACP) rates are low in diverse, vulnerable older adults, yet little is known about the unique barriers they face and how these barriers impact ACP documentation rates.DesignValidated questionnaires listing patient, family/friend, and clinician/system-level ACP barriers and an open-ended question on ACP barriers.SettingTwo San Francisco public/Department of Veterans Affairs hospitals.ParticipantsOne thousand two hundred and forty-one English and Spanish-speaking patients, aged 55 and older, with two or more chronic conditions.MeasurementsThe open-ended question on ACP barriers was analyzed using content analysis. We conducted chart review for prior ACP documentation. We used chi-square/Wilcoxon rank-sum tests and logistic regression to assess associations between ACP barriers and demographic characteristics/ACP documentation.ResultsParticipant mean age was 65 ± 7.4 years; they were 74% from racial/ethnic minority groups, 36% Spanish-speaking, and 36% with limited health literacy. A total of 26 barriers were identified (15 patient, 4 family/friend, 7 clinician/system-level), and 91% reported at least one ACP barrier (mean: 5.6 ± 4.0). The most common barriers were: (patient-level) discomfort thinking about ACP (60%), wanting to leave health decisions to "God" (44%); (family/friend-level) not wanting to burden friends/family (33%), assuming friends/family already knew their preferences (31%); (clinician/system-level) assuming doctors already knew their preferences (41%), and mistrust (37%). Compared with those with no barriers, participants with at least one reported barrier were more likely to be from a racial/ethnic minority group (76% vs 53%), Spanish-speaking (39% vs 6%), with fair-to-poor health (48% vs 34%), and limited health literacy (39% vs 9%) (p < 0.001 for all). Participants who reported barriers were less likely to have ACP documentation (adjusted odds ratio = 0.64, 95% confidence interval [0.42, 0.98]).ConclusionEnglish- and Spanish-speaking older adults reported 26 unique barriers to ACP, with higher barriers among vulnerable populations, and barriers were associated with lower ACP documentation. Barriers must be considered when developing customized ACP interventions for diverse older adults.

Project description:BackgroundDue to the disease's progressive nature, advance care planning (ACP) is recommended for people with early stage dementia. General practitioners (GPs) should initiate ACP because of their longstanding relationships with their patients and their early involvement with the disease, however ACP is seldom applied.AimTo determine the barriers and facilitators faced by GPs related to ACP with people with dementia.Data sourcesWe systematically searched the relevant databases for papers published between January 1995 and December 2016, using the terms: primary healthcare, GP, dementia, and ACP. We conducted a systematic integrative review following Whittemore and Knafl's method. Papers containing empirical data about GP barriers and/or facilitators regarding ACP for people with dementia were included. We evaluated quality using the Mixed-Method-Appraisal-Tool and analyzed data using qualitative content analysis.ResultsTen qualitative, five quantitative, and one mixed-method paper revealed four themes: timely initiation of ACP, stakeholder engagement, important aspects of ACP the conversation, and prerequisites for ACP. Important barriers were: uncertainty about the timing of ACP, how to plan for an uncertain future, lack of knowledge about dementia, difficulties assessing people with dementia's decisional capacities, and changing preferences. Facilitators for ACP were: an early start when cognitive decline is still mild, inclusion of all stakeholders, and discussing social and medical issues aimed at maintaining normal life.ConclusionDiscussing future care is difficult due to uncertainties about the future and the decisional capacities of people with dementia. Based on the facilitators, we recommend that GPs use a timely and goal-oriented approach and involve all stakeholders. ACP discussions should focus on the ability of people with dementia to maintain normal daily function as well as on their quality of life, instead of end-of-life-discussions only. GPs need training to acquire knowledge and skills to timely initiate collaborative ACP discussions.