Development and Pilot Testing of a Motivational Interview for Engagement in Advance Care Planning

Effect of Computer-Tailored Print Feedback, Motivational Interviewing, and Motivational Enhancement Therapy on Engagement in Advance Care Planning: A Randomized Clinical Trial

Importance

There is a tension between clinician-led approaches to engagement in advance care planning (ACP), which are effective but resource-intensive, and self-administered tools, which are more easily disseminated but rely on ability and willingness to complete.

Objective

To examine the efficacy of computer-tailored print feedback (CTPF), motivational interviewing (MI), and motivational enhancement therapy (MET) on completion of a set of ACP activities, each as compared with usual care.

Design, Setting, and Participants

This randomized clinical trial was conducted from October 2017 to December 2020 via telephone contact with primary care patients at a single VA facility; 483 veterans aged 55 years or older were randomly selected from a list of patients with a primary care visit in the prior 12 months, with oversampling of women and people from minoritized racial and ethnic groups. Statistical analysis was performed from January to June 2022.

Interventions

Mailed CTPF generated in response to a brief telephone assessment of readiness to engage in and attitudes toward ACP; MI, an interview exploring ambivalence to change and developing a change plan; and MET, MI plus print feedback, delivered by telephone at baseline, 2, and 4 months.

Main Outcome and Measures

Self-reported completion of 4 ACP activities: communicating about views on quality vs quantity of life, assignment of a health care agent, completion of a living will, and submitting documents for inclusion in the electronic health record at 6 months.

Results

The study included 483 persons, mean (SD) age 68.3 (8.0) years, 18.2% women and 31.1% who were people from minoritized racial and ethnic groups. Adjusting for age, education, race, gender, and baseline stage of change for each ACP, predicted probabilities for completing the ACP activities were: usual care 5.7% (95% CI, 2.8%-11.1%) for usual care, 17.7% (95% CI, 11.8%-25.9%; P = .003) for MET, 15.8% (95% CI, 10.2%-23.6%; P = .01) for MI, P = .01, and 10.0% (95% CI, 5.9%-16.7%; P = .18) for CTPF.

Conclusions and Relevance

This randomized clinical trial found that a series of 3 MI and MET counseling sessions significantly increased the proportion of middle-aged and older veterans completing a set of ACP activities, while print feedback did not. These findings suggest the importance of clinical interaction for ACP engagement.

Trial Registration

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03103828.

Decision Aid Interventions for Family Caregivers of Persons With Advanced Dementia in Decision-Making About Feeding Options: A Scoping Review

OBJECTIVES

We provided an overview of the literature on decision aid interventions for family caregivers of older adults with advanced dementia regarding decision making about tube feeding. We synthesized (1) the use of theory during the development, implementation, and evaluation of decision aids; (2) the development, content, and delivery of decision aid interventions; (3) caregivers' experience with decision aid interventions; and (4) the effect of decision aid interventions on caregivers' quality of decision-making about feeding options.

DESIGN

Scoping review.

METHODS

We conducted a scoping review of peer-reviewed studies published January 1, 2000-June 30, 2022, in MEDLINE, EMBASE, The Cochrane Library, CINAHL, and Web of Science databases. The process was guided by Arksey and O'Malley's methodological framework, which includes identifying the research question, choosing related studies, charting the data, and summarizing results. Empirical articles concerning the decision aid interventions about feeding options were selected.

RESULTS

Six publications reporting 4 unique decision aid interventions were included. All the interventions targeted caregivers of older adults with advanced dementia. Three decision aids were culturally adapted from existing decision aids. The Ottawa Decision Support Framework and the International Patient Decision Aid Standards Framework were used in these 6 publications. Interventions aimed to improve decision making regarding tube feeding for caregivers through static delivery methods. Caregivers rated these decision aids as helpful and acceptable. Decisional conflict and knowledge of feeding options were the most common outcomes evaluated. Reduction in decisional conflict and increase in knowledge were consistently found among dementia caregivers, but no intervention effects were found on preferences for the use of tube feeding.

CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS

Decision aid interventions effectively improve decision-making regarding tube feeding among the target population. Cultural adaptation of an existing decision aid intervention is the main strategy. However, the lack of guidance of a cultural adaptation framework in this process may lead to difficulties explaining caregivers' behavioral changes. Moreover, merely providing information is not enough to change caregivers' preferences or behavior of use of tube feeding. A systematic approach to cultural adaptation and interactive intervention is needed in future studies.

Feasibility of a Brief Intervention to Facilitate Advance Care Planning Conversations for Patients with Life-Limiting Illness in the Emergency Department

Background: Advance care planning (ACP) conversations are an important intervention to provide care consistent with patient goals near the end of life. The emergency department (ED) could serve as an important time and location for these conversations. Objectives: To determine the feasibility of an ED-based, brief negotiated interview (BNI) to stimulate ACP conversations among seriously ill older adults. Methods: We conducted a pre/postintervention study in the ED of an urban, tertiary care, academic medical center. From November 2017 to May 2019, we prospectively enrolled adults ≥65 years of age with serious illness. Trained clinicians conducted the intervention. We measured patients' ACP engagement at baseline and follow-up (3 ± 1 weeks) and reviewed electronic medical record documentation of ACP (e.g., medical order for life-sustaining treatment [MOLST]). Results: We enrolled 51 patients (mean age = 71; SD 12), 41% were female, and 51% of patients had metastatic cancer. Median duration of the intervention was 11.8 minutes; few (6%) of the interventions were interrupted. We completed follow-up for 61% of participants. Patients' self-reported ACP engagement increased from 3.0 to 3.7 out of 5 after the intervention (p < 0.01). Electronic documentation of health care proxy forms increased (75%-94%, n = 48) as did MOLST (0%-19%, n = 48) during the six months after the ED visit. Conclusion: A novel, ED-based, BNI intervention to stimulate ACP conversations for seriously ill older adults is feasible and may improve ACP engagement and documentation.

Fidelity and Feasibility of a Brief Emergency Department Intervention to Empower Adults With Serious Illness to Initiate Advance Care Planning Conversations

CONTEXT

Emergency department (ED) visits provide opportunities to empower patients to discuss advance care planning with their outpatient clinicians, but systematically developed, feasible interventions do not currently exist. Brief negotiated interview (BNI) interventions, which allow ED clinicians to efficiently motivate patients, have potential to meet this need.

OBJECTIVES

We developed a BNI ED intervention to empower older adults with life-limiting illness to formulate and communicate medical care goals to their primary outpatient clinicians. This study assessed the fidelity and feasibility of this intervention in a high-volume ED.

METHODS

We enrolled adult patients with serious illnesses (advanced cancer, congestive heart failure, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, chronic kidney disease on dialysis, predicted survival <12 months) in an urban, tertiary care academic medical center ED. All participants received the BNI intervention. We video-recorded the encounters. Two reviewers assessed the recordings for intervention fidelity based on adherence to the BNI steps (Part I) and communication skills (Part II).

RESULTS

We reviewed 46 video recordings. The mean total adherence score was 21.07/27 (SD 3.68) or 78.04%. The Part I mean adherence score was 12.07/15 (SD 2.07) or 80.47%. The Part II mean adherence score was 9.0/12 (SD 2.51) or 75%. The majority (75.6%) of recordings met the prespecified threshold for high intervention fidelity.

CONCLUSION

ED clinicians can deliver a BNI intervention to increase advance care planning conversations with high fidelity. Future research is needed to study the intervention's efficacy in a wider patient population.

Increasing engagement in advance care planning using a behaviour change model: study protocol for the STAMP randomised controlled trials

INTRODUCTION

Advance care planning (ACP) is a key component of high-quality end-of-life care but is underused. Interventions based on models of behaviour change may fill an important gap in available programmes to increase ACP engagement. Such interventions are designed for broad outreach and flexibility in delivery. The purpose of the Sharing and Talking about My Preferences study is to examine the efficacy of three behaviour change approaches to increasing ACP engagement through two related randomised controlled trials being conducted in different settings (Veterans Affairs (VA) medical centre and community).

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

Eligible participants are 55 years or older. Participants in the community are being recruited in person in primary care and specialty outpatient practices and senior living sites, and participants in the VA are recruited by telephone. In the community, randomisation is at the level of the practice or site, with all persons at a given practice/site receiving either computer-tailored feedback with a behaviour stage-matched brochure (computer-tailored intervention (CTI)) or usual care. At the VA, randomisation is at the level of the participant and is stratified by the number of ACP behaviours completed at baseline. Participants are randomised to one of four groups: CTI, motivational interviewing, motivational enhancement therapy or usual care. The primary outcome is completion of four key ACP behaviours: identification of a surrogate decision maker, communication about goals, completing advance directives and ensuring documents are in the medical record. Analysis will be conducted using mixed effects models, taking into account the clustered randomisation for the community study.

ETHICS AND RANDOMISATION

The studies have been approved by the appropriate Institutional Review Boards and are being overseen by a Safety Monitoring Committee. The results of these studies will be disseminated to academic audiences and leadership in in the community and VA sites.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBERS

NCT03137459 and NCT03103828.