We have located links that may give you full text access.
Journal Article
Review
How Should End-of-Life Advance Care Planning Discussions Be Implemented According to Patients and Informal Carers? A Qualitative Review of Reviews.
Journal of Pain and Symptom Management 2019 August
CONTEXT: The goal of advance care planning (ACP) is to help ensure that the care people receive during periods of serious illness is consistent with their preferences and values. There is a lack of clear understanding about how patients and their informal carers feel ACP discussions should be implemented.
OBJECTIVES: The objective of this study was to synthesize literature reviews pertaining to patients' and informal carers' perspectives on ACP discussions.
METHODS: This is a systematic review of reviews.
RESULTS: We identified 55 literature reviews published between 2007 and 2018. ACP discussions were facilitated by a diverse range of formats and tools, all of which were acceptable to patients and carers. Patients and carers preferred health professionals to initiate discussions, with the relationships they had with the professionals being particularly important. There were mixed feelings about the best timing, with many people preferring to defer discussions until they perceived them to be clinically relevant. ACP was felt to bring benefits including a greater sense of peace and less worry, but it could also be disruptive and distressing. Patients and carers perceived many benefits from ACP discussions, but these may differ from the dominant narratives about ACP in health policy and may move away from the narratives of RCTs and standardization in research and practice.
CONCLUSION: Researchers and clinicians may need to adjust their approaches as current practices are not aligned enough with patients' and carers' preferences. Future research may need to test implementation strategies of ACP interventions to elucidate how benefits from standardization and flexibility might both be realized.
OBJECTIVES: The objective of this study was to synthesize literature reviews pertaining to patients' and informal carers' perspectives on ACP discussions.
METHODS: This is a systematic review of reviews.
RESULTS: We identified 55 literature reviews published between 2007 and 2018. ACP discussions were facilitated by a diverse range of formats and tools, all of which were acceptable to patients and carers. Patients and carers preferred health professionals to initiate discussions, with the relationships they had with the professionals being particularly important. There were mixed feelings about the best timing, with many people preferring to defer discussions until they perceived them to be clinically relevant. ACP was felt to bring benefits including a greater sense of peace and less worry, but it could also be disruptive and distressing. Patients and carers perceived many benefits from ACP discussions, but these may differ from the dominant narratives about ACP in health policy and may move away from the narratives of RCTs and standardization in research and practice.
CONCLUSION: Researchers and clinicians may need to adjust their approaches as current practices are not aligned enough with patients' and carers' preferences. Future research may need to test implementation strategies of ACP interventions to elucidate how benefits from standardization and flexibility might both be realized.
Full text links
Related Resources
Trending Papers
Challenges in Septic Shock: From New Hemodynamics to Blood Purification Therapies.Journal of Personalized Medicine 2024 Februrary 4
Molecular Targets of Novel Therapeutics for Diabetic Kidney Disease: A New Era of Nephroprotection.International Journal of Molecular Sciences 2024 April 4
The 'Ten Commandments' for the 2023 European Society of Cardiology guidelines for the management of endocarditis.European Heart Journal 2024 April 18
A Guide to the Use of Vasopressors and Inotropes for Patients in Shock.Journal of Intensive Care Medicine 2024 April 14
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app