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...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , |
---|---|
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 |