[Changes in knowledge and carrying out the advance directives of patients admitted to internal medicine]

Why have Advance Directives failed in Spain?

Background

In Spain, there has been great effort by lawmakers to put Advance Directives (ADs) into practice since 2002. At the same time, the field of bioethics has been on the rise, a discipline that has spurred debate on the right of patients to exercise their autonomy. Despite all this, the implementation of ADs can be said to have failed in Spain, because its prevalence is very low, there is a great lack of knowledge about them and they have very little impact on clinical decisions. The purpose of this article is to analyze and discuss the main reasons for the failure of ADs in Spain.

Main body

The main reasons why ADs have no impact on clinical practice in Spain have been fundamentally four: (1) the training of health professionals about the end of life and AD is lacking; (2) there has been no public process to increase awareness about AD, and therefore people (with the exception of specific highly sensitized groups) know little about them; (3) the bureaucratic procedure to document and implement ADs is excessively complex and cumbersome, creating a significant barrier to their application; (4) in Spain, the remnants of a paternalistic medical culture continue to exist, which causes shared decision-making to be difficult.

Conclusion

Due to the four reasons mentioned above, AD have not been a useful tool to help honor patients’ autonomous decisions about their future care and, therefore, they have not achieved their objective. However, despite the difficulties and problems identified, it has also been observed that health care professionals and the Spanish public have a very positive view of AD. Having identified the problems which have kept AD from being successful, strategies must be developed to help improve their implementation into the future.

Evaluating the efficacy of an Advanced Care Planning Program for Health Decisions in patients with advanced heart failure: protocol for a Randomized Clinical Trial

Background

An Advanced Care Planning (ACP) program of health decisions is the result of a process of reflection and relationship-building between the patient, their relatives and health professionals. It is based on respect for patients’ autonomy, involving them in making decisions about their disease in a way that is shared between the medical team, the patient and their relatives. Up until now, the efficacy of an ACP has not been measured in the existing literature, and therefore it is unknown if these programs reach their goal. The main objective of our study is to evaluate the efficacy of an ACP program for decision-making in patients with advanced heart failure (HF) in comparison to usual follow up and care. This objective will be evaluated by the Patient Activation Measure test, which measures the participation and self-management of the patient in decision-making. Secondary objectives: to evaluate the effect of the program on quality of life, to know if the patients wishes expressed through the ACP program are fulfilled, to measure the impact of the program on patients’ caregivers, to determine the satisfaction of patients included in the program and to evaluate the effect on quality of death.

Methods

Randomized multicentre clinical trial at four hospitals in Madrid. Once they are included in the study, patients’ allocation to groups (control vs intervention) will be made by alternative sampling. ACP will be applied to the intervention group, whereas in the Control Group usual follow-up will be carried out in HF units. All patients will fulfil questionnaires and tests related to the objectives of the study again after a 12-month follow-up period in order to gauge the effect of ACP in patients with advanced HF.

Discussion

The characteristics of patients with advanced HF make them a model for designing ACP programs, given the high prevalence of this disease, the progressive increase in its incidence and it’s clinical characteristics. Until now, the efficacy of this type of program has not been measured, so this Clinical Trial can provide relevant data for future ACP projects.

Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04424680. Registered 9 June 2020. Retrospectively registered, https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04424680?term=NCT04424680&draw=2&rank=1.

The Use of Advance Directives in Specialized Care Units: A Focus Group Study With Healthcare Professionals in Madrid

Eight focus groups were conducted in four public hospitals in Madrid to explore healthcare professionals' perceptions of advance directives (ADs) in order to improve the understanding of their lack of success among physicians and patients. A purposive sample of sixty healthcare professionals discussed ADs and reasons for their infrequent use. Three main themes were identified: perceptions about their meaning, appraisals of their use in clinical practice, and decision-making about them. Healthcare professionals perceived a lack of clarity about their definition and implementation. There is insufficient awareness of their efficacy in improving the quality of clinical relationships and decision-making, and they are often perceived only as a bureaucratic procedure. Advance directives are not integrated in the clinical practice of Madrid's healthcare specialist services because their application is exceedingly complex, because of insufficient education about them (for both professionals and citizens), and because of lack of procedural clarity. Consequently, healthcare professionals are not aware of how ADs could improve clinical decision-making, of when and for whom their use is appropriate, and of who has responsibility for providing ADs-related information to patients. These circumstances contribute to patients' lack of interest in completing these documents and to physicians' sceptical views about their usefulness.

Do Spanish Hospital Professionals Educate Their Patients About Advance Directives? : A Descriptive Study in a University Hospital in Madrid, Spain

It is unknown whether hospital-based medical professionals in Spain educate patients about advance directives (ADs). The objective of this research was to determine the frequency of hospital-based physicians' and nurses' engagement in AD discussions in the hospital and which patient populations merit such efforts. A short question-and-answer-based survey of physicians and nurses taking care of inpatients was conducted at a university hospital in Madrid, Spain. In total, 283 surveys were collected from medical professionals, of whom 71 per cent were female, with an average age of thirty-four years. Eighty-four per cent had never educated patients about ADs because of lack of perceived responsibility, time, or general knowledge of ADs. Patient populations that warranted AD discussions included those with terminal illnesses (77 per cent), chronic diseases (61 per cent), and elderly patients (43 per cent). Regarding degree of AD understanding in medical professionals: 57 per cent of medical professionals claimed sufficient general knowledge of ADs, 19 per cent understood particulars regarding AD document creation, and 16 per cent were aware of AD regulatory policies. Engagement in AD discussions was considered important by 83 per cent of medical professionals, with 79 per cent interested in participating in such discussions themselves. The majority of hospital physicians and nurses do not educate their patients about ADs, despite acknowledging their importance. Patient populations of highest priority included those with terminal diseases or chronic illness or who are of advanced age.

[Advance directives. Representatives' opinions]

INTRODUCTION

The use and usefulness of Advance Directives has led to a lot of controversy about their validity and effectiveness. Those areas are unexplored in our country from the perspective of representatives.

OBJECTIVE

To determine the opinion of the representatives appointed in a registered Statement of Advance Directives (SAD) on the use of this document.

METHODS

Telephone survey of representatives of 146 already dead people and who, since February 2012, had registered a SAD document.

RESULTS

More the two-thirds (98) of respondents recalled that the SAD was consulted, with 86 (58.9%) saying that their opinion as representative was consulted, and 120 (82.1%) believe that the patient's will was respected. Of those interviewed, 102 (69.9%) believe that patients who had previously planned their care using a SAD had a good death, with 33 (22.4%) saying it could have been better, and 10 (6.9%) believe they suffered greatly.

CONCLUSION

The SAD were mostly respected and consulted, and possibly this is related to the fact that most of the representatives declare that the death of those they represented was perceived as comfortable. It would be desirable to conduct further studies addressed at health personnel in order to know their perceptions regarding the use of Advance Directives in the process of dying.