Cargando…

Exploration of the acceptability and usability of advance care planning tools in long term care homes

OBJECTIVES: Despite known benefits, advance care planning (ACP) is rarely a component of usual practice in long-term care (LTC). A series of tools and workbooks have been developed to support ACP uptake amongst the generable population. Yet, their potential for improving ACP uptake in LTC has yet to...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Sussman, Tamara, Kaasalainen, Sharon, Bimman, Rennie, Punia, Harveer, Edsell, Nathaniel, Sussman, Jess
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7756921/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33243203
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12904-020-00689-9
_version_ 1783626647051698176
author Sussman, Tamara
Kaasalainen, Sharon
Bimman, Rennie
Punia, Harveer
Edsell, Nathaniel
Sussman, Jess
author_facet Sussman, Tamara
Kaasalainen, Sharon
Bimman, Rennie
Punia, Harveer
Edsell, Nathaniel
Sussman, Jess
author_sort Sussman, Tamara
collection PubMed
description OBJECTIVES: Despite known benefits, advance care planning (ACP) is rarely a component of usual practice in long-term care (LTC). A series of tools and workbooks have been developed to support ACP uptake amongst the generable population. Yet, their potential for improving ACP uptake in LTC has yet to be examined. This study explored if available ACP tools are acceptable for use in LTC by (a) eliciting staff views on the content and format that would support ACP tool usability in LTC (b) examining if publicly available ACP tools include content identified as relevant by LTC home staff. Ultimately this study aimed to identify the potential for existing ACP tools to improve ACP engagement in LTC. METHODS: A combination of focus group deliberations with LTC home staff (N = 32) and content analysis of publicly available ACP tools (N = 32) were used to meet the study aims. RESULTS: Focus group deliberations suggested that publicly available ACP tools may be acceptable for use in LTC if the tools include psychosocial elements and paper-based versions exist. Content analysis of available paper-based tools revealed that only a handful of ACP tools (32/611, 5%) include psychosocial content, with most encouraging psychosocially-oriented reflections (30/32, 84%), and far fewer providing direction around other elements of ACP such as communicating psychosocial preferences (14/32, 44%) or transforming preferences into a documented plan (7/32, 22%). CONCLUSIONS: ACP tools that include psychosocial content may improve ACP uptake in LTC because they elicit future care issues considered pertinent and can be supported by a range of clinical and non-clinical staff. To increase usability and engagement ACP tools may require infusion of scenarios pertinent to frail older persons, and a better balance between psychosocial content that elicits reflections and psychosocial content that supports communication.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7756921
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2020
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-77569212020-12-28 Exploration of the acceptability and usability of advance care planning tools in long term care homes Sussman, Tamara Kaasalainen, Sharon Bimman, Rennie Punia, Harveer Edsell, Nathaniel Sussman, Jess BMC Palliat Care Research Article OBJECTIVES: Despite known benefits, advance care planning (ACP) is rarely a component of usual practice in long-term care (LTC). A series of tools and workbooks have been developed to support ACP uptake amongst the generable population. Yet, their potential for improving ACP uptake in LTC has yet to be examined. This study explored if available ACP tools are acceptable for use in LTC by (a) eliciting staff views on the content and format that would support ACP tool usability in LTC (b) examining if publicly available ACP tools include content identified as relevant by LTC home staff. Ultimately this study aimed to identify the potential for existing ACP tools to improve ACP engagement in LTC. METHODS: A combination of focus group deliberations with LTC home staff (N = 32) and content analysis of publicly available ACP tools (N = 32) were used to meet the study aims. RESULTS: Focus group deliberations suggested that publicly available ACP tools may be acceptable for use in LTC if the tools include psychosocial elements and paper-based versions exist. Content analysis of available paper-based tools revealed that only a handful of ACP tools (32/611, 5%) include psychosocial content, with most encouraging psychosocially-oriented reflections (30/32, 84%), and far fewer providing direction around other elements of ACP such as communicating psychosocial preferences (14/32, 44%) or transforming preferences into a documented plan (7/32, 22%). CONCLUSIONS: ACP tools that include psychosocial content may improve ACP uptake in LTC because they elicit future care issues considered pertinent and can be supported by a range of clinical and non-clinical staff. To increase usability and engagement ACP tools may require infusion of scenarios pertinent to frail older persons, and a better balance between psychosocial content that elicits reflections and psychosocial content that supports communication. BioMed Central 2020-12-22 /pmc/articles/PMC7756921/ /pubmed/33243203 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12904-020-00689-9 Text en © The Author(s). 2020 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.
spellingShingle Research Article
Sussman, Tamara
Kaasalainen, Sharon
Bimman, Rennie
Punia, Harveer
Edsell, Nathaniel
Sussman, Jess
Exploration of the acceptability and usability of advance care planning tools in long term care homes
title Exploration of the acceptability and usability of advance care planning tools in long term care homes
title_full Exploration of the acceptability and usability of advance care planning tools in long term care homes
title_fullStr Exploration of the acceptability and usability of advance care planning tools in long term care homes
title_full_unstemmed Exploration of the acceptability and usability of advance care planning tools in long term care homes
title_short Exploration of the acceptability and usability of advance care planning tools in long term care homes
title_sort exploration of the acceptability and usability of advance care planning tools in long term care homes
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7756921/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33243203
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12904-020-00689-9
work_keys_str_mv AT sussmantamara explorationoftheacceptabilityandusabilityofadvancecareplanningtoolsinlongtermcarehomes
AT kaasalainensharon explorationoftheacceptabilityandusabilityofadvancecareplanningtoolsinlongtermcarehomes
AT bimmanrennie explorationoftheacceptabilityandusabilityofadvancecareplanningtoolsinlongtermcarehomes
AT puniaharveer explorationoftheacceptabilityandusabilityofadvancecareplanningtoolsinlongtermcarehomes
AT edsellnathaniel explorationoftheacceptabilityandusabilityofadvancecareplanningtoolsinlongtermcarehomes
AT sussmanjess explorationoftheacceptabilityandusabilityofadvancecareplanningtoolsinlongtermcarehomes