Cargando…

A mixed method feasibility study of a patient- and family-centred advance care planning intervention for cancer patients

BACKGROUND: Advance care planning (ACP) is a process whereby values and goals are sensitively explored and documented to uphold patients’ wishes should they become incompetent to make decisions in the future. Evidenced-based, effective approaches are needed. This study sought to assess the feasibili...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Michael, Natasha, O’Callaghan, Clare, Baird, Angela, Gough, Karla, Krishnasamy, Mei, Hiscock, Nathaniel, Clayton, Josephine
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2015
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4456060/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25981642
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12904-015-0023-1
_version_ 1782374800876896256
author Michael, Natasha
O’Callaghan, Clare
Baird, Angela
Gough, Karla
Krishnasamy, Mei
Hiscock, Nathaniel
Clayton, Josephine
author_facet Michael, Natasha
O’Callaghan, Clare
Baird, Angela
Gough, Karla
Krishnasamy, Mei
Hiscock, Nathaniel
Clayton, Josephine
author_sort Michael, Natasha
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Advance care planning (ACP) is a process whereby values and goals are sensitively explored and documented to uphold patients’ wishes should they become incompetent to make decisions in the future. Evidenced-based, effective approaches are needed. This study sought to assess the feasibility and acceptability of an ACP intervention informed by phase 1 findings and assessed the suitability of measures for a phase 3 trial. METHODS: Prospective, longitudinal, mixed methods study with convenience sampling. A skilled facilitator conducted an ACP intervention with stage III/IV cancer patients and invited caregivers. It incorporated the vignette technique and optional completion/integration of ACP documents into electronic medical records (EMR). Quantitative and qualitative data were collected concurrently, analysed separately, and the two sets of findings converged. RESULTS: Forty-seven percent consent rate with 30 patients and 26 caregivers completing the intervention. Ninety percent of patient participants had not or probably not written future care plans. Compliance with assessments was high and missing responses to items low. Small- to medium-sized changes were observed on a number of patients and caregiver completed measures, but confidence intervals were typically wide and most included zero. An increase in distress was reported; however, all believed the intervention should be made available. Eleven documents from nine patients were incorporated into EMR. ACP may not be furthered because of intervention inadequacies, busy lives, and reluctance to plan ahead. CONCLUSIONS: In this phase 2 study we demonstrated feasibility of recruitment and acceptability of the ACP intervention and most outcome measures. However, patient/family preferences about when and whether to document ACP components need to be respected. Thus flexibility to accommodate variability in intervention delivery, tailored to individual patient/family preferences, may be required for phase 3 research. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12904-015-0023-1) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4456060
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2015
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-44560602015-06-05 A mixed method feasibility study of a patient- and family-centred advance care planning intervention for cancer patients Michael, Natasha O’Callaghan, Clare Baird, Angela Gough, Karla Krishnasamy, Mei Hiscock, Nathaniel Clayton, Josephine BMC Palliat Care Research Article BACKGROUND: Advance care planning (ACP) is a process whereby values and goals are sensitively explored and documented to uphold patients’ wishes should they become incompetent to make decisions in the future. Evidenced-based, effective approaches are needed. This study sought to assess the feasibility and acceptability of an ACP intervention informed by phase 1 findings and assessed the suitability of measures for a phase 3 trial. METHODS: Prospective, longitudinal, mixed methods study with convenience sampling. A skilled facilitator conducted an ACP intervention with stage III/IV cancer patients and invited caregivers. It incorporated the vignette technique and optional completion/integration of ACP documents into electronic medical records (EMR). Quantitative and qualitative data were collected concurrently, analysed separately, and the two sets of findings converged. RESULTS: Forty-seven percent consent rate with 30 patients and 26 caregivers completing the intervention. Ninety percent of patient participants had not or probably not written future care plans. Compliance with assessments was high and missing responses to items low. Small- to medium-sized changes were observed on a number of patients and caregiver completed measures, but confidence intervals were typically wide and most included zero. An increase in distress was reported; however, all believed the intervention should be made available. Eleven documents from nine patients were incorporated into EMR. ACP may not be furthered because of intervention inadequacies, busy lives, and reluctance to plan ahead. CONCLUSIONS: In this phase 2 study we demonstrated feasibility of recruitment and acceptability of the ACP intervention and most outcome measures. However, patient/family preferences about when and whether to document ACP components need to be respected. Thus flexibility to accommodate variability in intervention delivery, tailored to individual patient/family preferences, may be required for phase 3 research. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12904-015-0023-1) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users. BioMed Central 2015-05-16 /pmc/articles/PMC4456060/ /pubmed/25981642 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12904-015-0023-1 Text en © Michael et al. 2015 This article is published under license to BioMed Central Ltd. This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly credited. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.
spellingShingle Research Article
Michael, Natasha
O’Callaghan, Clare
Baird, Angela
Gough, Karla
Krishnasamy, Mei
Hiscock, Nathaniel
Clayton, Josephine
A mixed method feasibility study of a patient- and family-centred advance care planning intervention for cancer patients
title A mixed method feasibility study of a patient- and family-centred advance care planning intervention for cancer patients
title_full A mixed method feasibility study of a patient- and family-centred advance care planning intervention for cancer patients
title_fullStr A mixed method feasibility study of a patient- and family-centred advance care planning intervention for cancer patients
title_full_unstemmed A mixed method feasibility study of a patient- and family-centred advance care planning intervention for cancer patients
title_short A mixed method feasibility study of a patient- and family-centred advance care planning intervention for cancer patients
title_sort mixed method feasibility study of a patient- and family-centred advance care planning intervention for cancer patients
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4456060/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25981642
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12904-015-0023-1
work_keys_str_mv AT michaelnatasha amixedmethodfeasibilitystudyofapatientandfamilycentredadvancecareplanninginterventionforcancerpatients
AT ocallaghanclare amixedmethodfeasibilitystudyofapatientandfamilycentredadvancecareplanninginterventionforcancerpatients
AT bairdangela amixedmethodfeasibilitystudyofapatientandfamilycentredadvancecareplanninginterventionforcancerpatients
AT goughkarla amixedmethodfeasibilitystudyofapatientandfamilycentredadvancecareplanninginterventionforcancerpatients
AT krishnasamymei amixedmethodfeasibilitystudyofapatientandfamilycentredadvancecareplanninginterventionforcancerpatients
AT hiscocknathaniel amixedmethodfeasibilitystudyofapatientandfamilycentredadvancecareplanninginterventionforcancerpatients
AT claytonjosephine amixedmethodfeasibilitystudyofapatientandfamilycentredadvancecareplanninginterventionforcancerpatients
AT michaelnatasha mixedmethodfeasibilitystudyofapatientandfamilycentredadvancecareplanninginterventionforcancerpatients
AT ocallaghanclare mixedmethodfeasibilitystudyofapatientandfamilycentredadvancecareplanninginterventionforcancerpatients
AT bairdangela mixedmethodfeasibilitystudyofapatientandfamilycentredadvancecareplanninginterventionforcancerpatients
AT goughkarla mixedmethodfeasibilitystudyofapatientandfamilycentredadvancecareplanninginterventionforcancerpatients
AT krishnasamymei mixedmethodfeasibilitystudyofapatientandfamilycentredadvancecareplanninginterventionforcancerpatients
AT hiscocknathaniel mixedmethodfeasibilitystudyofapatientandfamilycentredadvancecareplanninginterventionforcancerpatients
AT claytonjosephine mixedmethodfeasibilitystudyofapatientandfamilycentredadvancecareplanninginterventionforcancerpatients