Search

Background: Advance care planning (ACP) is a process which enables patients to communicate wishes, values, fears, and preferences for future medical care. Despite patient interest in ACP, the frequency of discussions remains low. Barriers to ACP may be mitigated by involving non-physician clinic staff, preparing patients ahead of visits, and using tools to structure visits. An ACP care pathway incorporating these principles was implemented in longitudinal generalist outpatient care, including primary care/family medicine and general internal medicine, in two Canadian provinces. This study aims to understand clinician experiences implementing the pathway., Methods: The pathway was implemented in one family practice in Alberta, two family practices in British Columbia (BC), and one BC internal medicine outpatient clinic. Physicians and allied health professionals delivered structured pathway visits based on the Serious Illness Conversation Guide. Twelve physicians and one social worker participated in interviews or focus groups at the end of the study period. Qualitative data were coded inductively using an iterative approach, with regular meetings between coders., Results: Clinicians described experiences with the ACP care pathway, impact at the clinician level, and impact at the patient level. Within each domain, clinicians described barriers and facilitators experienced during implementation. Clinicians also reflected candidly about potential for future implementation and the sustainability of the pathway., Conclusions: While the pathway was implemented slightly differently between provinces, core experiences were that implementation of the pathway, and integration with current practice, were feasible. Across settings, similar themes recurred regarding usefulness of the pathway structure and its tools, impact on clinician confidence and interactions with patients, teamwork and task delegation, compatibility with existing workflow, and patient preparation and readiness. Clinicians were supportive of ACP and of the pathway., Trial Registration: The study was prospectively registered with clinicaltrials.gov (NCT03508557). Registered April 25, 2018. https://classic., Clinicaltrials: gov/ct2/show/NCT03508557 ., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

Objective: Community-led approaches can increase public engagement in Advance Care Planning (ACP). Better understanding of the experiences and perspectives of community staff and volunteers who host and facilitate community-led, peer-facilitated ACP workshops is valuable when considering the spread of these approaches., Methods: Content analysis of qualitative data from community-based hospice societies delivering ACP workshops to the public in British Columbia: one-on-one interviews with 5 organizational representatives and focus groups with 13 peer facilitators., Results: Three main categories emerged: 1) ACP is about 'Living well'; 2) Transitioning focus from legal forms to conversations; 3) Benefits to all involved., Conclusions: Community staff and volunteers acknowledge the role they could play in promoting ACP in their communities. They recognize the benefits to the facilitators and public participants from following a community-led approach that emphasizes the importance of ACP conversations over the completion of relevant legal forms. Additional potential benefits of this approach, as reported by the organizational representatives, are increased volunteer engagement, more community partnerships, and an enhanced organizational profile., Practice Implications: This community-led model can be a meaningful and approachable way to engage the public in ACP. Hospice societies are well positioned in the community to incorporate ACP workshops into their programming., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest All authors declare that they do not have any competing interests., (Copyright © 2023 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Background: Advance care planning (ACP) is a process intended to help ensure people receive medical care that is consistent with their values, goals, and preferences during serious and chronic illness. Barriers to implementing ACP in primary care settings exist. Community-led ACP initiatives exist in British Columbia to engage the public directly. These initiatives may help prepare people for conversations with their primary care providers. The objectives of this study were to elicit primary care providers' perceptions of the utility and desired content of community-led ACP activities and suggestions for integrating community-led ACP activities with primary care., Methods: We conducted an online cross-sectional survey of primary care providers practicing in British Columbia, Canada in 2021. Both quantitative and qualitative survey questions addressed ACP engagement in practice, the perceived role and desired outcomes of community-led ACP activities, and ways to integrate community-led ACP activities with primary care., Results: Eighty-one providers responded. Over 80% perceived a moderate or greater potential impact of community-led ACP activities. The most common reasons for not referring a patient to a community-led ACP activity were lack of awareness of the option locally (62.1%) and in general (44.8%). Respondents wanted their patients to reflect on their values, wishes and preferences for care, to have at least thought about their goals of care and to have chosen a substitute decision maker in the community. They indicated a desire for a summary of their patient's participation and a follow-up discussion with them about their ACP. They suggested ways to integrate referral to programs into existing health care system structures., Conclusions: Community-led ACP activities were perceived to be useful to engage and prepare patients to continue ACP discussions with clinicians. Efforts should be made to establish and integrate community-based ACP initiatives within existing primary care systems to ensure awareness and uptake., (© 2023. BioMed Central Ltd., part of Springer Nature.)

Background: Despite the established benefits of Advance Care Planning (ACP), engagement remains low in British Columbia. Since 2016, a growing number of community-based nonprofits have offered ACP education. To date, no study has focused on the perspectives of nonprofits on ACP in British Columbia., Objective: This study aimed to identify barriers and facilitating actions to ACP as perceived by British Columbian nonprofits., Design: A mixed-methods design was used. Data were collected through online surveys and telephone interviews., Setting and Participants: Staff and volunteers from British Columbian nonprofits that are providing or interested in providing public education on ACP were recruited for this study., Results: The lack of public awareness of ACP, the emotional difficulty of the conversation, the complicated ACP process, the belief that ACP is synonymous with completing a medical order form, the challenge of introducing ACP in different cultural contexts and the siloed approach to ACP education were rated as the most important barriers to ACP engagement. The most important facilitating actions were developing clear messages, improving ACP literacy, reframing ACP as part of life planning, simplifying ACP documentation and transfer, integrating ACP conversations into clinical practice and better collaboration between the health system and nonprofits., Discussion: This study identifies numerous opportunities to improve ACP engagement in British Columbia from a community lens. To maximize ACP engagement, community-led ACP education should be offered in coordination with the health system., Conclusion: Community-led ACP education as well as collaboration and consultation with nonprofits are part of the solution to the low ACP engagement in British Columbia., Public Contribution: Study participants, including staff and volunteers at nonprofits, are members of the public., (© 2021 The Authors. Health Expectations published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

This paper reports findings from a modified World Café conducted at a palliative care professional conference in 2019, where input on tools to support advance care planning (ACP) was solicited from healthcare practitioners, managers and family members of patients. Barriers to ACP tool use included insufficient structures and resources in healthcare, death-avoidance culture and inadequate patient and family member engagement. Recommendations for tool use included clarification of roles and processes, training, mandates and monitoring, leadership support, greater reflection of diversity in tools and methods for public engagement. This paper illuminates factors to consider when implementing ACP tools in healthcare., (Copyright © 2021 Longwoods Publishing.)

Background: Tools for advance care planning (ACP) are advocated to help ensure patient values guide healthcare decisions. Evaluation of the effect of tools introduced to patients in clinical settings is needed., Objective: To evaluate the effect of the Canadian Speak Up Campaign tools on engagement in advance care planning (ACP), with patients attending outpatient clinics. Patient involvement: Patients were not involved in the problem definition or solution selection in this study but members of the public were involved in development of tools. The measurement of impacts involved patients., Methods: This was a prospective pre-post study in 15 primary care and two outpatient cancer clinics. The outcome was scores on an Advance Care Planning Engagement Survey measuring Behavior Change Process on 5-point scales and Actions (0-21-point scale) administered before and six weeks after using a tool, with reminders at two or four weeks., Results: 177 of 220 patients (81%) completed the study (mean 68 years of age, 16% had cancer). Mean Behavior Change Process scores were 2.9 at baseline and 3.5 at follow-up (mean change 0.6, 95% confidence interval 0.5 to 0.7; large effect size of 0.8). Mean Action Measure score was 3.7 at baseline and 4.8 at follow-up (mean change 1.1, 95% confidence interval 0.6-1.5; small effect size of 0.2)., Practical Value: Publicly available ACP tools may have utility in clinical settings to initiate ACP among patients. More time and motivation may be required to stimulate changes in patient behaviors related to ACP., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest The authors report no declarations of interest., (Copyright © 2020 The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Background: People who engage in advance care planning (ACP) are more likely to receive health care that is concordant with their goals at the end of life. Little discussion of ACP occurs in primary care., Objective: The objective of this study was to describe primary care clinicians' perspectives on having ACP conversations with their patients., Methods: We conducted a survey of family physicians and non-physician clinicians in primary care in 2014-2015. We compared family physicians and non-physician clinicians on willingness, confidence, participation and acceptability for other clinicians to engage in six aspects of ACP (initiating, exchanging information, decision coaching, finalizing plans, helping communicate plans with family members and other health professionals) on scales from 0 = not at all/extremely unacceptable to 6 = very/all the time/extremely acceptable., Results: The response rate was 72% (n = 117) among family physicians and 69% (n = 64) among non-physician clinicians. Mean ratings (standard deviation [SD]) of willingness were high (4.5 [1.4] to 5.0 [1.2] for physicians; 3.4 [1.8] to 4.6 [1.6] non-physician clinicians). There was little participation (mean ratings 2.4 [1.7] to 2.7 [1.6] for physicians, 1.0 [1.5] to 1.4 [1.7] for non-physician clinicians). Non-physician clinicians rated confidence statistically significantly lower than physicians for all ACP aspects. Acceptability for non-physician clinician involvement was high in both groups (mean acceptability ratings greater than 4)., Conclusion: Current engagement of primary care clinicians in ACP is low. Given the high willingness and acceptability for non-physician clinician involvement, increasing the capacity of non-physician clinicians could enable uptake of ACP in primary care., (© The Author(s) 2019. Published by Oxford University Press.)

Purpose: Online programs may help to engage patients in advance care planning in outpatient settings. We sought to implement an online advance care planning program, PREPARE (Prepare for Your Care; http://www.prepareforyourcare.org), at home and evaluate the changes in advance care planning engagement among patients attending outpatient clinics., Methods: We undertook a prospective before-and-after study in 15 primary care clinics and 2 outpatient cancer centers in Canada. Patients were aged 50 years or older (primary care) or 18 years or older (cancer care) and free of cognitive impairment. They used the PREPARE website over 6 weeks, with reminders sent at 2 or 4 weeks. We used the 55-item Advance Care Planning Engagement Survey, which measures behavior change processes (knowledge, contemplation, self-efficacy, readiness) on 5-point scales and actions relating to substitute decision makers, quality of life, flexibility for the decision maker, and asking doctors questions on an overall scale from 0 to 21; higher scores indicate greater engagement., Results: In total, 315 patients were screened and 172 enrolled, of whom 75% completed the study (mean age = 65.6 years, 51% female, 35% had cancer). The mean behavior change process score was 2.9 (SD 0.8) at baseline and 3.5 (SD 0.8) at follow-up (mean change = 0.6; 95% CI, 0.49-0.73); the mean action measure score was 4.0 (SD 4.9) at baseline and 5.2 (SD 5.4) at follow-up (mean change = 1.2; 95% CI, 0.54-1.77). The effect size was moderate (0.75) for the former and small (0.23) for the latter. Findings were similar in both primary care and cancer care populations., Conclusions: Implementation of the online PREPARE program in primary care and cancer care clinics increased advance care planning engagement among patients., (© 2020 Annals of Family Medicine, Inc.)

Objective: To assess primary care patients' engagement in advance care planning (ACP) and predictors of engagement., Design: Cross-sectional survey using a revised version of a validated questionnaire., Setting: Alberta, Ontario, and British Columbia., Participants: Convenience sample of 20 family practices that provided a consecutive sample of 810 patients aged 50 years and older., Main Outcome Measures: Engagement in ACP activities, and sociodemographic and health-related predictors of having engaged in ACP activities., Results: Patients had a mean age of 66 years (55.6% women). Two-thirds of patients (68.5%; 555) had thought about the kinds of medical treatments they would want or not want if they were sick and in hospital, 52.8% (n = 428) had talked with someone about what they would want, 32.0% (n = 259) had written down their wishes, 50.4% (n = 408) had named someone to be their substitute decision maker, and 23.0% (n = 186) had engaged in all 4 key ACP activities. Of those patients who had talked to someone about medical treatments wanted or not, 17.5% (n = 75) had talked to their family doctors. Age (adjusted odds ratio per 10-year category of 1.55; 95% CI 1.26 to 1.90; P < .001) was significantly associated with having engaged in all ACP activities., Conclusion: Many patients have engaged in some ACP activities, but few have discussed ACP with their family physicians. Strategies should be implemented in primary care to reduce the barriers to discussing ACP., (Copyright© the College of Family Physicians of Canada.)

Objective: To identify barriers to and enablers of advance care planning (ACP) perceived by physicians and other health professionals in primary care., Design: Cross-sectional, self-administered survey., Setting: Ontario, Alberta, and British Columbia., Participants: Family physicians (n = 117) and other health professionals (n = 64) in primary care., Main Outcome Measures: Perceived barriers relating to the clinician, characteristics of patients, and system factors, rated on a 7-point scale from 0 (not at all) to 6 (an extreme amount), and enablers reported using an open-ended question., Results: Between November 2014 and June 2015, questionnaires were returned by 72.2% (117 of 162) of family physicians and 68.8% (64 of 93) of the other health professionals. Physicians rated insufficient time, inability to electronically transfer the advance care plan across care settings, decreased interaction with patients near the end of life owing to transfer of care, and patients' difficulty understanding limitations and complications of treatment options as the highest barriers. Other health professionals additionally identified their own lack of knowledge and difficulty accessing the physician as barriers. Themes identified as enablers included greater public engagement, clinician attitudes, creating capacity for clinicians, integrating ACP into practice, and system and policy supports., Conclusion: In primary care, there are barriers to engaging patients in ACP at the patient, provider, and system levels that could potentially be addressed through the informed development of multifaceted interventions., (Copyright© the College of Family Physicians of Canada.)

Background: Advance care planning (ACP) has the potential to increase patient-centred care, reduce caregiver burden, and reduce healthcare costs at the end of life. Current levels of public participation in ACP activities are unknown. The purpose of this study was to determine the level of engagement of average Canadians in ACP activities., Methods: Data come from an on-line opinion poll of a national sample of respondents who were asked five questions on ACP activities along with their sociodemographic characteristics., Results: Respondents were from all provinces of Canada, 52% were women, and 33% were between 45 years and 54 years of age. Of 1021 national sample respondents, 16% were aware of the term, ACP (95% CI 13% to 18%), 52% had discussions with their family or friends (95% CI 49% to 55%), and 10% had discussions with healthcare providers (95% CI 8% to 12%). Overall, 20% (95% CI 18% to 22%) of respondents had a written ACP and 47% (95% CI 44% to 50%) had designated a substitute decision maker. Being older was associated with significantly more engagement in ACP activities and there were significant differences in ACP engagement across Canada., Conclusions: Although only a small proportion of Canadians are aware of the formal term, ACP, a higher percentage of Canadians are actually engaged in ACP, through either having discussions or making decisions about end-of-life care. Older citizens are more likely to be engaged in ACP and there are geographic differences in the level of ACP engagement across Canada., (Published by the BMJ Publishing Group Limited. For permission to use (where not already granted under a licence) please go to http://group.bmj.com/group/rights-licensing/permissions.)

Importance: Advance care planning can improve patient-centered care and potentially reduce intensification of care at the end of life., Objectives: To inquire about patients' advance care planning activities before hospitalization and preferences for care from the perspectives of patients and family members, as well as to measure real-time concordance between expressed preferences for care and documentation of those preferences in the medical record., Design: Prospective study., Setting: Twelve acute care hospitals in Canada., Participants: Elderly patients who were at high risk of dying in the next 6 months and their family members., Main Outcome Measures: Responses to an in-person administered questionnaire and concordance of expressed preferences and orders of care documented in the medical record., Results: Of 513 patients and 366 family members approached, 278 patients (54.2%) and 225 family members (61.5%) consented to participate. The mean ages of patients and family members were 80.0 and 60.8 years, respectively. Before hospitalization, most patients (76.3%) had thought about end-of-life (EOL) care, and only 11.9% preferred life-prolonging care; 47.9% of patients had completed an advance care plan, and 73.3% had formally named a surrogate decision maker for health care. Of patients who had discussed their wishes, only 30.3% had done so with the family physician and 55.3% with any member of the health care team. Agreement between patients' expressed preferences for EOL care and documentation in the medical record was 30.2%. Family members' perspectives were similar to those of patients., Conclusions and Relevance: Many elderly patients at high risk of dying and their family members have expressed preferences for medical treatments at the EOL. However, communication with health care professionals and documentation of these preferences remains inadequate. Efforts to reduce this significant medical error of omission are warranted.

Background: The core to successful advance care planning (ACP) facilitation is helping people determine their values, beliefs and wishes, and understand substitute decision-making. Recognizing the potential for community members to support public awareness and education we developed a model of ACP education, whereby peer facilitators associated with community organizations host workshops that educate and assist members of the public with ACP. Objectives: Describe the development and evaluation of the model for community-led peer-facilitated ACP workshops for the public. Design: Descriptive mixed methods. Methods: A training curriculum and program model were co-developed with two community organizations that had been successful in delivering ACP workshops independently in their communities. Herein we describe a mixed-methods evaluation of three cycles of implementation and improvement of the model. Results: The model centers on three key concepts; the right content (based around three steps Think, Talk, Plan), the right facilitator, and the right approach. A suite of tools was designed to support the three groups involved in the delivery of the ACP workshops: the public participants, the peer facilitators, and the community-based organizations. The peer-facilitator training addresses the facilitator's learning needs of ACP content knowledge, facilitation skills, and understanding change behavior. Training evaluation data from 106 facilitators confirmed that the curriculum prepared them to facilitate the workshops. Qualitative data revealed that support from organizations with established reputations in their community is critical, with mentoring from more experienced facilitators beneficial. Conclusion: Our model demonstrates the potential of community-led, peer-facilitated ACP initiatives to enhance the capacity of community to upstream ACP conversations. Reaching a broader audience and creating a supportive, inclusive environment for individuals to comfortably learn about ACP can drive the much-needed culture shift to normalize ACP. Meaningful community engagement, empowerment, and partnerships are essential for the successful development and widespread impact of these initiatives. Plain language summary: A model for community-led peer-facilitated advance care planning workshops for the public Why was this study done? Advance care planning (ACP) allows people to reflect on and share their personal values, goals and preferences as they relate to their future healthcare. Despite the benefits of doing ACP, the number of people who have engaged in ACP remains low. Traditionally, most ways of supporting people to engage in ACP have involved healthcare providers. In British Columbia, two community-based organizations had developed successful peer-facilitated workshops to engage and educate the public. In these workshops, non-expert members of the community (peer-facilitators) conduct interactive workshops that help members of the public understand and begin ACP. What did the researchers do? We partnered with these two organizations to develop a training curriculum and other materials required to spread this approach to other community organizations throughout the province. The model is based on three key concepts: the right content, the right facilitator, and the right approach. The materials include a suite of tools for three groups: the public participants, the peer-facilitators and the organizations. What did the researchers find? The training and suite of tools we developed successfully prepared community members ("peers") associated with community organizations to facilitate ACP workshops for the public. Support from community organizations is essential, and mentoring from more experienced facilitators is beneficial. What do the findings mean? As a provincial organization we were able to successfully partner with community organizations to develop a model and spread the workshops provincially and confirm they were acceptable and effective, improving public access to information about advance care planning. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Context The goal of end-of-life (EOL) communication and decision making is to create a shared understanding about a person’s values and treatment preferences that will lead to a plan of care that is consistent with these values and preferences. Improvements in communication and decision making at the EOL have been identified as a high priority from a patient and family point of view. Objectives The purpose of this study was to develop quality indicators related to EOL communication and decision making. Methods We convened a multidisciplinary panel of experts to develop definitions, a conceptual framework of EOL communication and decision making, and quality indicators using a modified Delphi method. We generated a list of potential items based on literature review and input from panel members. Panel members rated the items using a seven-point Likert scale (1 = very little importance to 7 = extremely important) over four rounds of review until consensus was achieved. Results About 24 of the 28 panel members participated in all four rounds of the Delphi process. The final list of quality indicators comprised 34 items, divided into the four categories of our conceptual framework: Advance care planning (eight items), Goals of care discussions (13 items), Documentation (five items), and Organization/System aspects (eight items). Eleven items were rated “extremely important” (median score). All items had a median score of five (moderately important) or greater. Conclusion We have developed definitions, a conceptual framework, and quality indicators that researchers and health care decision makers can use to evaluate and improve the quality of EOL communication and decision making. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]