Advance Care Planning for Adults With CKD: A Systematic Integrative Review

Author version made avilable in accordance with the publisher's policy. © 2014, the National Kindney Foundation, inc. 
Licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/Background Recent clinical practice guidelines have highlighted the importance of advance care planning (ACP) for improving end-of-life care for people with chronic kidney disease (CKD). Study Design We conducted a systematic integrative review of the literature to inform future ACP practice and research in CKD, searching electronic databases in April 2013. Synthesis used narrative methods. Setting & Population We focused on adults with a primary diagnosis of CKD in any setting. Selection Criteria for Studies We included studies of any design, quantitative or qualitative.. Interventions ACP was defined as any formal means taken to ensure health professionals and family members are aware of patients’ wishes for care in the event they become too unwell to speak for themselves. Outcomes Measures of all kinds were considered to be of interest. Results Fifty-five articles met criteria reporting on 51 discrete samples. All patient samples included people with Stage 5 CKD; two also included patients with Stage 4. Seven interventions were tested; all were narrowly focused and none was evaluated by comparing wishes for end-of-life care with care received. One intervention demonstrated effects on patient/family outcomes in the form of improved wellbeing and anxiety following sessions with a peer mentor. Insights from qualitative studies that have not been emphasised in interventions include the importance of instilling patient confidence that their advance directives will be enacted and discussing decisions about (dis)continuing dialysis separately from ‘aggressive’ life-sustaining treatments (e.g. ventilation). Limitations Whilst quantitative and qualitative findings were integrated according to best practice, methods for this are in their infancy. Conclusions Research on ACP in patients with CKD is limited, especially regarding intervention studies. Interventions in CKD should attend to barriers and facilitators at the levels of patient, caregiver, health professional and system. Intervention studies should measure impact on compliance with patient wishes for end-of-life care. Index words Chronic kidney disease, Renal failure, Advance care planning, Advance directives, Decision-makin

Advance care planning in chronic kidney disease: a survey of current practice in Australia

Aim: Advance care planning (ACP) in nephrology is widely advocated but not always implemented. The aims of this study were to describe current ACP practice and identify barriers/facilitators and perceived need for health professional education and chronic kidney disease (CKD)-specific approaches. Methods: An anonymous cross-sectional survey was administered online. Nephrology health professionals in Australia and New Zealandwere recruited via professional societies, email lists and nephrology conferences. Multiple regression explored the influence of respondents’ attributes on extent of involvement in ACP and willingness to engage in future. Results: A total of 375 respondents included nephrologists (23%), nurses (65%), social workers (4%) and others (8%) with 54% indicated that ACP at their workplace was performed ad hoc and 61% poorly. Perceived barriers included patient/family discomfort (84%), difficulty engaging families (83%), lack of clinician expertise (83%) and time (82%), health professional discomfort (72%), cultural/language barriers (65%), lack of private space (61%) and lack of formal policy/procedures (60%). Respondents overwhelmingly endorsed the need for more dialysis-specific ACP programs (96%) and education (95%). Whilst 85% thought ACP would be optimally performed by specially trained staff, comments emphasized that all clinicians should have a working proficiency. Respondents who were more willing to engage in future ACP tended to be non-physicians (odds ratio (OR) 4.96, 95% confidence intervals (CI) 1.74–14.07) and reported a greater need for CKD-specific ACP materials (OR 10.88, 95% CI 2.38–49.79). Conclusion: Advance care planning in nephrology needs support through education and CKD-specific resources. Endorsement by nephrologists is important. A multidisciplinary approach with a gradient of ACP expertise is also recommended

Does implementation matter if comprehension is lacking? A qualitative investigation into perceptions of advance care planning in people with cancer

Purpose: While advance care planning holds promise, uptake is variable and it is unclear how well people engage with or comprehend advance care planning. The objective of this study was to explore how people with cancer comprehended Advance Care Plans and examine how accurately advance care planning documentation represented patient wishes. Methods: This study used a qualitative descriptive design. Data collection comprised interviews and an examination of participants’ existing advance care planning documentation. Participants included those who had any diagnosis of cancer with an advance care plan recorded: Refusal of Treatment Certificate; Statement of Choices; and/or Enduring Power of Attorney (Medical Treatment) at one cancer treatment centre. Results: Fourteen participants were involved in the study. Twelve participants were female (86%). The mean age was 77 (range: 61-91) and participants had completed their advance care planning documentation between 8 and 72 weeks prior to the interview (mean 33 weeks). Three themes were evident from the data: Incomplete advance care planning understanding and confidence; Limited congruence for attitude and documentation; Advance care planning can enable peace of mind. Complete advance care planning understanding was unusual; most participants demonstrated partial comprehension of their own advance care plan, and some indicated very limited understanding. Participants’ attitudes and their written document congruence was limited, but advance care planning was seen as helpful. Conclusions: This study highlighted advance care planning was not a completely accurate representation of patient wishes. There is opportunity to improve how patients comprehend their own advance care planning documentation

Engaging terminally ill patients in end of life talk: How experienced palliative medicine doctors navigate the dilemma of promoting discussions about dying

Objective: To examine how palliative medicine doctors engage patients in end-of-life (hereon, EoL) talk. To examine whether the practice of “eliciting and responding to cues”, which has been widely advocated in the EoL care literature, promotes EoL talk. Design: Conversation analysis of video- and audio-recorded consultations. Participants: Unselected terminally ill patients and their companions in consultation with experienced palliative medicine doctors. Setting: Outpatient clinic, day therapy clinic, and inpatient unit of a single English hospice. Results: Doctors most commonly promoted EoL talk through open elaboration solicitations; these created opportunities for patients to introduce Ð then later further articulate Ð EoL considerations in such a way that doctors did not overtly ask about EoL matters. Importantly, the wording of elaboration solicitations avoided assuming that patients had EoL concerns. If a patient responded to open elaboration solicitations without introducing EoL considerations, doctors sometimes pursued EoL talk by switching to a less participatory and more presumptive type of solicitation, which suggested the patient might have EoL concerns. These more overt solicitations were used only later in consultations, which indicates that doctors give precedence to patients volunteering EoL considerations, and offer them opportunities to take the lead in initiating EoL talk. There is evidence that doctors treat elaboration of patients’ talk as a resource for engaging them in EoL conversations. However, there are limitations associated with labelling that talk as “cues” as is common in EoL communication contexts. We examine these limitations and propose “possible EoL considerations” as a descriptively more accurate term. Conclusions: Through communicating Ð via open elaboration solicitations Ð in ways that create opportunities for patients to volunteer EoL considerations, doctors navigate a core dilemma in promoting EoL talk: giving patients opportunities to choose whether to engage in conversations about EoL whilst being sensitive to their communication needs, preferences and state of readiness for such dialogue

Author Correction: Pan-cancer analysis of whole genomes identifies driver rearrangements promoted by LINE-1 retrotransposition

Correction to: Nature Genetics https://doi.org/10.1038/s41588-019-0562-0, published online 05 February 2020

Intraperitoneal drain placement and outcomes after elective colorectal surgery: international matched, prospective, cohort study

Despite current guidelines, intraperitoneal drain placement after elective colorectal surgery remains widespread. Drains were not associated with earlier detection of intraperitoneal collections, but were associated with prolonged hospital stay and increased risk of surgical-site infections.Background Many surgeons routinely place intraperitoneal drains after elective colorectal surgery. However, enhanced recovery after surgery guidelines recommend against their routine use owing to a lack of clear clinical benefit. This study aimed to describe international variation in intraperitoneal drain placement and the safety of this practice. Methods COMPASS (COMPlicAted intra-abdominal collectionS after colorectal Surgery) was a prospective, international, cohort study which enrolled consecutive adults undergoing elective colorectal surgery (February to March 2020). The primary outcome was the rate of intraperitoneal drain placement. Secondary outcomes included: rate and time to diagnosis of postoperative intraperitoneal collections; rate of surgical site infections (SSIs); time to discharge; and 30-day major postoperative complications (Clavien-Dindo grade at least III). After propensity score matching, multivariable logistic regression and Cox proportional hazards regression were used to estimate the independent association of the secondary outcomes with drain placement. Results Overall, 1805 patients from 22 countries were included (798 women, 44.2 per cent; median age 67.0 years). The drain insertion rate was 51.9 per cent (937 patients). After matching, drains were not associated with reduced rates (odds ratio (OR) 1.33, 95 per cent c.i. 0.79 to 2.23; P = 0.287) or earlier detection (hazard ratio (HR) 0.87, 0.33 to 2.31; P = 0.780) of collections. Although not associated with worse major postoperative complications (OR 1.09, 0.68 to 1.75; P = 0.709), drains were associated with delayed hospital discharge (HR 0.58, 0.52 to 0.66; P < 0.001) and an increased risk of SSIs (OR 2.47, 1.50 to 4.05; P < 0.001). Conclusion Intraperitoneal drain placement after elective colorectal surgery is not associated with earlier detection of postoperative collections, but prolongs hospital stay and increases SSI risk

Critical appraisal of advance directives given by patients with fatal acute stroke: an observational cohort study

Background: Advance directives (AD) imply the promise of determining future medical treatment in case of decisional incapacity. However, clinical practice increasingly indicates that standardized ADs often fail to support patients’ autonomy. To date, little data are available about the quality and impact of ADs on end-of-life decisions for incapacitated acute stroke patients. Methods: We analyzed the ADs of patients with fatal stroke, focusing on: (a) their availability and type, (b) stated circumstances to which the AD should apply, and (c) stated wishes regarding specific treatment options. Results: Between 2011 and 2014, 143 patients died during their hospitalization on our stroke unit. Forty-two of them (29.4%) had a completed and signed, written AD, as reported by their family, but only 35 ADs (24.5%) were available. The circumstances in which the AD should apply were stated by 21/35 (60%) as a “terminal condition that will cause death within a relatively short time” or an ongoing “dying process.” A retrospective review found only 16 of 35 ADs (45.7%) described circumstances that, according to the medical file, could have been considered applicable by the treating physicians. A majority of patients objected to cardiopulmonary resuscitation (22/35, 62.9%), mechanical ventilation (19/35, 54.3%), and artificial nutrition (26/35, 74.3%), while almost all (33/35, 94.3%) directed that treatment for alleviation of pain or discomfort should be provided at all times even if it could hasten death. Conclusions: The prevalence of ADs among patients who die from acute stroke is still low. A major flaw of the ADs in our cohort was their attempt to determine single medical procedures without focusing on a precise description of applicable scenarios. Therefore, less than half of the ADs were considered applicable for severe acute stroke. These findings stress the need to foster educational programs for the general public about advance care planning to facilitate the processing of timely, comprehensive, and individualized end-of-life decision-making