Content analysis of Advance Directives completed by patients with advanced cancer as part of an Advance Care Planning intervention : insights gained from the ACTION trial

Purpose Writing an Advance Directive (AD) is often seen as a part of Advance Care Planning (ACP). ADs may include specific preferences regarding future care and treatment and information that provides a context for healthcare professionals and relatives in case they have to make decisions for the patient. The aim of this study was to get insight into the content of ADs as completed by patients with advanced cancer who participated in ACP conversations. Methods A mixed methods study involving content analysis and descriptive statistics was used to describe the content of completed My Preferences forms, an AD used in the intervention arm of the ACTION trial, testing the effectiveness of the ACTION Respecting Choices ACP intervention. Results In total, 33% of 442 patients who received the ACTION RC ACP intervention completed a My Preferences form. Document completion varied per country: 10.4% (United Kingdom), 20.6% (Denmark), 29.2% (Belgium), 41.7% (the Netherlands), 61.3% (Italy) and 63.9% (Slovenia). Content analysis showed that 'maintaining normal life' and 'experiencing meaningful relationships' were important for patients to live well. Fears and worries mainly concerned disease progression, pain or becoming dependent. Patients hoped for prolongation of life and to be looked after by healthcare professionals. Most patients preferred to be resuscitated and 44% of the patients expressed maximizing comfort as their goal of future care. Most patients preferred 'home' as final place of care. Conclusions My Preferences forms provide some insights into patients' perspectives and preferences. However, understanding the reasoning behind preferences requires conversations with patients

English and Spanish‐speaking vulnerable older adults report many barriers to advance care planning

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVES: Advance care planning (ACP) rates are low in diverse, vulnerable older adults, yet little is known about the unique barriers they face and how these barriers impact ACP documentation rates. DESIGN: Validated questionnaires listing patient, family/friend, and clinician/system-level ACP barriers and an open-ended question on ACP barriers SETTING: Two San Francisco public/Veterans Administration (VA) hospitals PARTICIPANTS: 1241 English and Spanish-speaking patients, aged ≥ 55, with ≥ two chronic conditions MEASUREMENTS: The open-ended question on ACP barriers was analyzed using content analysis. We conducted chart review for prior ACP documentation. We used Chi-square/Wilcoxon rank-sum tests and logistic regression to assess associations between ACP barriers and demographic characteristics/ACP documentation. RESULTS: Participant mean age was 65±7.4 years; they were 74% from racial/ethnic minority groups, 36% Spanish-speaking, and 36% with limited health literacy. A total of 26 barriers were identified (15 patient, 4 family/friend, 7 clinician/system-level), and 91% reported at least one ACP barrier (mean: 5.6±4.0). The most common barriers were: (patient-level) discomfort thinking about ACP (60%), wanting to leave health decisions to “God” (44%); (family/friend-level) not wanting to burden friends/family (33%), assuming friends/family already knew their preferences (31%); (clinician/system-level) assuming doctors already knew their preferences (41%) and mistrust (37%). Compared to those with no barriers, participants with at least one reported barrier were more likely to be from a racial/ethnic minority group (76% vs. 53%), Spanish-speaking (39% vs. 6%), with fair-to-poor health (48% vs. 34%) and limited health literacy (39% vs. 9%) (p<0.001 for all). Participants who reported barriers were less likely to have ACP documentation (adjusted OR = 0.64, 95% CI [0.42, 0.98]). CONCLUSION: English- and Spanish-speaking older adults reported 26 unique barriers to ACP, with higher barriers among vulnerable populations, and barriers were associated with lower ACP documentation. Barriers must be considered when developing tailored ACP interventions for diverse older adults