Facilitated Advance Care Planning Interventions: A Narrative Review

Multiple interventions have been designed to employ facilitators to address gaps in Advance Care Planning (ACP). To collect and review available evidence related to facilitated ACP interventions. Narrative review using a previously described framework for scoping reviews. We searched PubMed using st...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:American journal of hospice & palliative medicine 2024-11, p.10499091241298677
Hauptverfasser: Penumarthy, Akhila, Zupanc, Seth N, Paasche-Orlow, Michael K, Volandes, Angelo, Lakin, Joshua R
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:Multiple interventions have been designed to employ facilitators to address gaps in Advance Care Planning (ACP). To collect and review available evidence related to facilitated ACP interventions. Narrative review using a previously described framework for scoping reviews. We searched PubMed using structured criteria and report synthesized themes detailing the design, target populations, methods, and outcome measurements for interventions in which a facilitator-who may or may not be clinical staff-engaged a patient and/or a patient's caregiver in some part of the ACP process. Of 1492 articles discovered on our search, 28 met the inclusion criteria. Twelve (42.9%) studies utilized a nurse facilitator, two (7.1%) utilized trained social workers, and one (3.6%) embedded multiple facilitators. The remaining 13 (46.4%) utilized facilitators from other various professional and community backgrounds, such as lay navigators, care coordinators, and peer mentors. Twenty-five (89.2%) studies included patients with serious or chronic illness, at the end-of-life, or having a high risk of need for medical care. Four (14.3%) articles focused on marginalized populations. Intervention settings varied notably across studies. Eighteen (64.3%) integrated interventions into existing clinical workflows. Primary outcomes were measured in one of three ways: documentation in the Electronic Health Record (EHR) (25.0%); questionnaires, scales, patient reports, or non-EHR documentation (64.3%); or multiple measures (10.7%). Twenty-three (82.1%) of the studies were determined a success by study authors. We identified a variety of key characteristics that can be modified to target facilitated ACP interventions towards gaps in current applications of ACP.
ISSN:1049-9091
1938-2715
1938-2715
DOI:10.1177/10499091241298677