Controversies About Advance Care Planning-Reply

What Clinicians and Researchers Should Know About the Evolving Field of Advance Care Planning: a Narrative Review

Advance care planning (ACP) has been recognized as crucial by patients, families, and clinicians; however, different definitions and measurements have led to inconsistencies in practice and mixed evidence in the literature. This narrative review explores ACP's evolution, innovations, and outcomes using thematic analysis to synthesize data from randomized controlled trials, reviews, and editorials. Key findings include (1) ACP has evolved over the past several decades from a sole focus on code status and advance directive (AD) forms to a continuum of care planning over the life course focused on tailored preparation for patients and surrogate decision-makers and (2) ACP measurement has evolved from traditional outcome metrics, such as AD completion, to a comprehensive outcomes framework that includes behavior change theory, systems, implementation science, and a focus on surrogate outcomes. Since the recent development of an ACP consensus definition and outcomes framework, high-quality trials have reported mainly positive outcomes for interventions, especially for surrogates, which aligns with the patient desire to relieve decision-making burden for loved ones. Additionally, measurement of "clinically meaningful" ACP information, including documented goals of care discussions, is increasingly being integrated into electronic health records (EHR), and emerging, real-time assessments and natural language processing are enhancing ACP evaluation. To make things easier for patients, families, and care teams, clinicians and researchers can use and disseminate these evolved definitions; provide patients validated, easy-to-use tools that prime patients for conversations and decrease health disparities; use easy-to-access clinician training and simple scripts for interdisciplinary team members; and document patients' values and preferences in the medical record to capture clinically meaningful ACP so this information is available at the point of care. Future efforts should focus on efficient implementation, expanded reimbursement options, and seamless integration of EHR documentation to ensure ACP's continued evolution to better serve patients and their care partners.

[Opportunities and risks of advance directives : An appraisal of the practice in Germany after legal regulation in 2009]

BACKGROUND

Living wills/advance directives (AD) are an important tool for specifying patient wishes regarding medical care in the case of future inability to consent. Since 2009, German legislation defines framework conditions for the creation and validity of such directives in § 1901a BGB.

METHODS

An extensive literature search in an international and a German-language database was conducted to identify, analyze, and evaluate scientific articles on opportunities, risks, and problems in the creation and implementation of living wills.

RESULTS

Between 10 and 40% of patients have an AD. Among the stipulations in the AD, the demand for sufficient pain therapy is very important. However, numerous problems in the preparation and implementation of ADs reduce their value in everyday clinical practice. In particular, unclear conditions of validity, unspecific instructions for action, and lack of availability of the directives prevent practitioners from determining the patient's will. Other fundamental problems include frequent patient ambivalence and clinical ethical dissent. In addition, the framework condition of unlimited coverage set by the law carries the risk that changes of opinion in the course of life or disease are not taken into account.

CONCLUSION

Preparing an AD requires a high level of information, consultation, and time, as well as regular review or adjustment of its content. These factors are often not considered, thus complicating implementation and reducing the value of living wills. Possible solutions to these problems or alternative concepts for different patient settings are discussed in this review.

Advance Care Planning, Shared Decision Making, and Serious Illness Conversations in Onconephrology

Advance care planning, shared decision making, and serious illness conversations are communication processes designed to promote patient-centered care. In onconephrology, patients face a series of complex medical decisions regarding their care at the intersection of oncology and nephrology. Clinicians who aim to ensure that patient preferences and values are integrated into treatment planning must work within a similarly complex care team comprising multiple disciplines. In this review, we describe key decision points in a patient's care trajectory, as well as guidance on how and when to engage in advance care planning, shared decision making, and serious illness discussions. Further research on these processes in the complex context of onconephrology is needed.

The Role of Information and Nudges on Advance Directives and End-of-Life Planning: Evidence From a Randomized Trial

Despite the substantial personal and economic implications of end-of-life decisions, many individuals fail to document their wishes, which often leads to patient dissatisfaction and unnecessary medical spending. We conducted a randomized trial of 1,200 patients aged 55 years and older to facilitate advance directive (AD) completion and better understand why patients fail to engage in high-value planning. We found that including a physical AD form with paper letters as a nudge to decrease hassle costs increased AD completion by 9.0 percentage points (95% confidence interval [CI] = [4.2, 13.9] percentage points). The intervention was especially effective for individuals aged 70 years and older, as AD completion increased by 17.5 percentage points (95% CI = [5.7, 9.4] percentage points). When compared with the impact of costless electronic reminders, each additional AD completion from the letter interventions costs as little as US$37. Our findings suggest that simple, inexpensive interventions with paper communication as behavioral nudges can be effective, especially in older populations.

Development of a Standardized Simulation: Advance Care Planning Conversations for Nurses

BACKGROUND

Advance care planning conversations focus on articulating and documenting patients' healthcare goals. These conversations should occur early and iteratively but are often not completed. Clinicians, specifically registered nurses, lack the needed training in advance care planning to have effective conversations; hands-on teaching modalities are necessary to enhance these communication skills.

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this study was to increase knowledge and comfort in communication about advance care planning; therefore, a validated and standardized simulation was developed and tested among registered nurses. We examined the feasibility of an advance care planning simulation called Conversations Had at Trying Times to explore changes in knowledge, attitudes, and self-efficacy among registered nurses.

METHODS

The National League of Nursing Jeffries simulation theory and Bandura's self-efficacy theory framed the study, which consisted of two stages: (a) simulation development and (b) simulation testing. Construct and content validity guided simulation development; standardization was achieved through International Nursing Association for Clinical Simulation and Learning standards. Testing consisted of a pilot one-group pretest/posttest.

RESULTS

Conversations Had at Trying Times, a researcher-designed high-fidelity validated simulation, enhanced nurses' communication skills. Thirty-six registered nurses completed the simulation; knowledge, attitudes, and self-efficacy increased pre- to posttest. Postsimulation evaluations confirmed the feasibility of the simulation. The greatest variation in results was among registered nurses with less than a year of experience.

DISCUSSION

The study findings support the feasibility and effectiveness of the Conversations Had at Trying Times simulation in its development and outcome measurements of knowledge, attitudes, and self-efficacy in advance care planning. Simulation is an educational modality underutilized, and Conversations Had at Trying Times is one of the few validated simulations for nurses. Further analysis showed that years of experience was a significant factor. Younger, inexperienced nurses had positive outcomes, but not to the extent of other practicing nurses, which suggests that simulation tailoring is necessary for newer nurses or alternative education modalities need to be explored. In addition, more training in advance care planning communication is needed for newer nurses through nurse residency programs, staff development, and mentorship. Finally, advance care planning communication needs to be addressed in undergraduate education to better prepare new graduate nurses.

Advance Care Planning in Serious Illness: A Narrative Review

CONTEXT

Advance care planning (ACP) intends to support person-centered medical decision-making by eliciting patient preferences. Research has not identified significant associations between ACP and goal-concordant end-of-life care, leading to justified scientific debate regarding ACP utility.

OBJECTIVE

To delineate ACP's potential benefits and missed opportunities and identify an evidence-informed, clinically relevant path ahead for ACP in serious illness.

METHODS

We conducted a narrative review merging the best available ACP empirical data, grey literature, and emergent scholarly discourse using a snowball search of PubMed, Medline, and Google Scholar (2000-2022). Findings were informed by our team's interprofessional clinical and research expertise in serious illness care.

RESULTS

Early ACP practices were largely tied to mandated document completion, potentially failing to capture the holistic preferences of patients and surrogates. ACP models focused on serious illness communication rather than documentation show promising patient and clinician results. Ideally, ACP would lead to goal-concordant care even amid the unpredictability of serious illness trajectories. But ACP might also provide a false sense of security that patients' wishes will be honored and revisited at end-of-life. An iterative, 'building block' framework to integrate ACP throughout serious illness is provided alongside clinical practice, research, and policy recommendations.

CONCLUSIONS

We advocate a balanced approach to ACP, recognizing empirical deficits while acknowledging potential benefits and ethical imperatives (e.g., fostering clinician-patient trust and shared decision-making). We support prioritizing patient/surrogate-centered outcomes with more robust measures to account for interpersonal clinician-patient variables that likely inform ACP efficacy and may better evaluate information gleaned during serious illness encounters.

Social Isolation and Implementation of Advanced Care Planning Among Hospitalized Patients With Heart Failure

Background

The implementation of advance care planning (ACP) in heart failure management is insufficient. Social isolation (SI) could be a barrier to ACP initiation, albeit the relationship between SI and patients' preference for ACP or end‐of‐life care remains unknown.

Methods and Results

We conducted a questionnaire survey, including assessments of SI using the 6‐item Lubben Social Network Scale as well as patients' perspectives on ACP and end‐of‐life care. Of the 160 patients approached by our multidisciplinary heart failure team during admission, 120 patients (75.0%) completed the survey (median age, 73.0 years; men, 74.2%). A Cox proportional hazard model was constructed to elucidate the short‐term (180‐day) prognostic impact of SI. Overall, 28.3% of participants were at high risk for SI (6‐item Lubben Social Network Scale score <12). High‐risk patients had more negative attitudes toward ACP than those without (61.8% versus 80.2%; P =0.035). The actual performance of ACP conversation in patients with and without high risk were 20.6% and 30.2%, respectively. Regarding preference in end‐of‐life care, “Saying what one wants to tell loved ones” (73.5% versus 90.6%; P =0.016) and “Spending enough time with family” (58.8% versus 77.9%; P =0.035) were less important in high‐risk patients. High risk for SI was associated with higher 180‐day risk‐adjusted all‐cause mortality (hazard ratio, 7.89 [95% CI, 1.53–40.75]).

Conclusions

In hospitalized patients with heart failure, high risk for SI was frequently observed. High‐risk patients were associated with a negative attitude toward ACP, despite higher mortality. Further research is required to establish an ideal approach to provide ACP in socially vulnerable patients.

Values elicitation among adults making health-related decisions: A concept analysis

AIM

To conduct a concept analysis of values elicitation in the context of health care and treatment decision-making and formulate a conceptual definition.

BACKGROUND

Values elicitation is a commonly cited term for an activity to help patients identify values and evaluate their application in health care decision-making, yet it remains ambiguous and difficult to differentiate from similar concepts.

DESIGN

Concept analysis.

DATA SOURCE

Three databases, including PubMed, CINAHL Plus, and Scopus, were searched from inception to February 2021.

REVIEW METHODS

Walker and Avant's eight-stage method was used to identify attributes, cases, antecedents, consequences, and empirical referents and formulate a conceptual definition.

RESULTS

The concept analysis identified 3 attributes, 10 consequences, 7 antecedents, and 3 empirical referents. Our analysis defines values elicitation as an intentional process whereby individuals explore their core beliefs, alone or with others, to (1) determine their preference, or a lack thereof, between health or treatment options, and (2) frame decisions.

CONCLUSIONS

The findings have the potential to influence the identification, discussion, and measurement of values elicitation by nurses and researchers across disciplines. Further exploration of this concept is warranted as the literature continues to emerge.