Search

ObjectiveVideo-based advanc care planning (ACP) tools have been studied in varied medical contexts; however, none have been developed for patients undergoing major surgery. Using a patient- and family-centredness approach, our objective was to implement human-centred design (HCD) to develop an ACP decision support video for patients and their family members when preparing for major surgery.Design and methodsThe study investigators partnered with surgical patients and their family members, surgeons and other health professionals to design an ACP decision support video using key HCD principles. Adapting Maguire’s HCD stages from computer science to the surgical context, while also incorporating Elwyn et al’s specifications for patient-oriented decision support tool development, we used a six-stage HCD process to develop the video: (1) plan HCD process; (2) specify where video will be used; (3) specify user and organisational requirements; (4) produce and test prototypes; (5) carry out user-based assessment; (6) field test with end users.ResultsOver 450 stakeholders were engaged in the development process contributing to setting objectives, applying for funding, providing feedback on the storyboard and iterations of the decision tool video. Throughout the HCD process, stakeholders’ opinions were compiled and conflicting approaches negotiated resulting in a tool that addressed stakeholders’ concerns.ConclusionsOur patient- and family-centred approach using HCD facilitated discussion and the ability to elicit and balance sometimes competing viewpoints. The early engagement of users and stakeholders throughout the development process may help to ensure tools address the stated needs of these individuals.Trial registration numberNCT02489799.

Background Advance care planning (ACP) aids can help prepare patients, family members, and physicians for in-the-moment medical decision-making. We wished to describe the content and approach of paper-based ACP aids in order to characterize existing aids and inform the development of a new ACP aid. Methods Paper-based ACP aids were identified through an environmental scan and screened for eligibility. ACP conceptual frameworks and data were gathered via stakeholder engagement and used to inform the coding framework that two investigators used to independently code each aid. A directed content analysis was conducted on these eligible aids. Aids were categorized through a deliberative process with an investigator abstracting general information for each aid. Results Fifteen aids met the eligibility criteria. They ranged in length from 6 to 78 pages with the average aid written at an eighth-grade reading level. The content analysis revealed that many aids encouraged choosing a surrogate decision maker and informed users about legal medical documents. Fewer than half of the aids facilitated patient clarification of values regarding quality of life issues. The authors identified and termed the following three categories of aids: informative; semi-action oriented; and action-oriented. It was often unclear whether patients contributed to the development or testing of the ACP aids reviewed. Conclusions Most existing paper-based ACP aids address legal matters such as completing an advance directive. Only a minority elicited patient values and it was unclear whether any were developed in partnership with patients. Future development of ACP aids should account for patient preferences with a goal of supporting in-the-moment medical decision-making.

John FP Bridges,1,2 Norah L Crossnohere,2 Anne L Schuster,1 Judith A Miller,3 Carolyn Pastorini,3,† Rebecca A Aslakson2,4,5 1Department of Health Policy and Management, The Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, MD, 2Department of Health, Behavior, and Society, The Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, MD, 3Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute (PCORI) Project, Baltimore, MD, 4Department of Anesthesiology and Critical Care Medicine, The Johns Hopkins School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, 5Armstrong Institute for Patient Safety and Quality, The Johns Hopkins School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA †Carolyn Pastorini passed away on August 24, 2015 Background: Despite a movement toward patient-centered outcomes, best practices on how to gather and refine patients’ perspectives on research endpoints are limited. Advanced care planning (ACP) is inherently patient centered and would benefit from patient prioritization of endpoints for ACP-related tools and studies.Objective: This investigation sought to prioritize patient-centered endpoints for the content and evaluation of an ACP video being developed for patients undergoing major surgery. We also sought to highlight an approach using complementary engagement and research strategies to document priorities and preferences of patients and other stakeholders.Materials and methods: Endpoints identified from a previously published environmental scan were operationalized following rating by a caregiver co-investigator, refinement by a patient co-investigator, review by a stakeholder committee, and validation by patients and family members. Finalized endpoints were taken to a state fair where members of the public who indicated that they or a loved one had undergone major surgery prioritized their most relevant endpoints and provided comments.Results: Of the initial 50 ACP endpoints identified from the review, 12 endpoints were selected for public prioritization. At the state fair, 359 individuals prioritized the endpoints, the highest ranking of which was having a meaningful conversation with a physician before surgery (57%).Conclusion: Using a novel combination of engagement and research techniques provided the opportunity to understand which endpoints were most important to patients and families and fostered framework development clarifying the differential contributions of engagement and research. Results from this study ultimately changed the content and evaluation of the ACP video. Keywords: patient preference, patient participation, community participation, research design&nbsp

This systematic review identifies possible decision aids that promote perioperative advance care planning (ACP) and synthesizes the available evidence regarding their use. Using PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane, SCOPUS, Web of Science, CINAHL, PsycINFO and Sociological Abstracts, researchers identified and screened articles for eligibility. Data were abstracted and risk of bias assessed for included articles. Thirty-nine of 5327 articles satisfied the eligibility criteria. Primarily completed in outpatient ambulatory populations, studies evaluated a variety of ACP decision aids. None were evaluated in a perioperative population. Fifty unique outcomes were reported with no head-to-head comparisons conducted. Findings are likely generalizable to a perioperative population and can inform development of a perioperative ACP decision aid. Future studies should compare the effectiveness of ACP decision aids.

One of the key recommendations of the Institute of Medicine9s (IOM) report, To Err is Human , 15 years ago was for greater attention to incident reporting in healthcare, analogous to the role it has played in aviation and other high-risk industries. With the passage of time and maturation of the patient safety field, we conducted semistructured interviews with 11 international patient safety experts with knowledge of the US healthcare and meeting at least one of the following criteria: (1) involved in the development of the IOM9s recommendations, (2) responsible for the design and/or implementation of national or regional incident reporting systems, (3) conducted research on patient safety/incident reporting at a national level. Five key challenges emerged to explain why incident reporting has not reached its potential: poor processing of incident reports (triaging, analysis, recommendations), inadequate engagement of doctors, insufficient subsequent visible action, inadequate funding and institutional support of incident reporting systems and inadequate usage of evolving health information technology. Leading patient safety experts acknowledge the current challenges of incident reports. The future of incident reporting lies in targeted incident reporting, effective triaging and robust analysis of the incident reports and meaningful engagement of doctors. Incident reporting must be coupled with visible, sustainable action and linkage of incident reports to the electronic health record. If the healthcare industry wants to learn from its mistakes, miss or near miss events, it will need to take incident reporting as seriously as the health budget.

Objective To identify videos on YouTube concerning advance care planning (ACP) and synthesise existing video content and style elements. Methods Informed by stakeholder engagement, two researchers searched YouTube for ACP videos using predefined search terms and snowballing techniques. Videos identified were reviewed and deemed ineligible for analysis if they: targeted healthcare professionals; contained irrelevant content; focused on viewers under the age of 18; were longer than 7 min in duration; received fewer than 150 views; were in a language other than English; or were a duplicate version. For each video, two investigators independently extracted general information as well as video content and stylistic characteristics. Results The YouTube search identified 23 100 videos with 213 retrieved for assessment and 42 meeting eligibility criteria. The majority of videos had been posted to YouTube since 2010 and produced by organisations in the USA (71%). Viewership ranged from 171 to 10 642. Most videos used a documentary style and featured healthcare providers (60%) rather than patients (19%) or families (45%). A minority of videos (29%) used upbeat or hopeful music. The videos frequently focused on completing legal medical documents (86%). Conclusions None of the ACP videos on YouTube went viral and a relatively small number of them contained elements endorsed by stakeholders. In emphasising the completion of legal medical documents, videos may have failed to support more meaningful ACP. Further research is needed to understand the features of videos that will engage patients and the wider community with ACP and palliative and end-of-life care conversations.

Patient-centered outcomes research (PCOR) methods and social learning theory (SLT) require intensive interaction between researchers and stakeholders. Advance care planning (ACP) is valuable before major surgery, but a systematic review found no extant perioperative ACP tools. Consequently, PCOR methods and SLT can inform the development of an ACP educational video for patients and families preparing for major surgery.The objective is to develop and test acceptability of an ACP video storyline.The design is a stakeholder-guided development of the ACP video storyline. Design-thinking methods explored and prioritized stakeholder perspectives. Patients and family members evaluated storyboards containing the proposed storyline.The study was conducted at hospital outpatient surgical clinics, in-person stakeholder summit, and the 2014 Maryland State Fair.Measurements are done through stakeholder engagement and deidentified survey.Stakeholders evaluated and prioritized evidence from an environmental scan. A surgeon, family member, and palliative care physician team iteratively developed a script featuring 12 core themes and worked with a medical graphic designer to translate the script into storyboards. For 10 days, 359 attendees of the 2014 Maryland State Fair evaluated the storyboards and 87% noted that they would be "very comfortable" or "comfortable" seeing the storyboard before major surgery, 89% considered the storyboards "very helpful" or "helpful," and 89% would "definitely recommend" or "recommend" this story to others preparing for major surgery.Through an iterative process utilizing diverse PCOR engagement methods and informed by SLT, storyboards were developed for an ACP video. Field testing revealed the storyline to be highly meaningful for surgery patients and family members.

Background High-risk surgery patients may lose decision-making capacity as a result of surgical complications. Advance care planning prior to surgery may be beneficial, but remains controversial and is hindered by a lack of appropriate decision aids. This study sought to examine stakeholders’ views on the appropriateness of using decision aids, in general, to support advance care planning among high-risk surgery populations and the design of such a decision aid. Methods Key informants were recruited through purposive and snowball sampling. Semi-structured interviews were conducted by phone until data collected reached theoretical saturation. Key informants were asked to discuss their thoughts about advance care planning and interventions to support advance care planning, particularly for this population. Researchers took de-identified notes that were analyzed for emerging concordant, discordant, and recurrent themes using interpretative phenomenological analysis. Results Key informants described the importance of initiating advance care planning preoperatively, despite potential challenges present in surgical settings. In general, decision aids were viewed as an appropriate approach to support advance care planning for this population. A recipe emerged from the data that outlines tools, ingredients, and tips for success that are needed to design an advance care planning decision aid for high-risk surgical settings. Conclusions Stakeholders supported incorporating advance care planning in high-risk surgical settings and endorsed the appropriateness of using decision aids to do so. Findings will inform the next stages of developing the first advance care planning decision aid for high-risk surgery patients.