Advance Care Planning in palliative care : a systematic literature review of the contextual factors influencing its uptake 2008-2012

Background: Advance Care Planning is an iterative process of discussion, decision-making and documentation about end-of-life care. Advance Care Planning is highly relevant in palliative care due to intersecting clinical needs. To enhance the implementation of Advance Care Planning, the contextual factors influencing its uptake need to be better understood. Aim: To identify the contextual factors influencing the uptake of Advance Care Planning in palliative care as published between January 2008 and December 2012. Methods: Databases were systematically searched for studies about Advance Care Planning in palliative care published between January 2008 and December 2012. This yielded 27 eligible studies, which were appraised using National Institute of Health and Care Excellence Quality Appraisal Checklists. Iterative thematic synthesis was used to group results. Results: Factors associated with greater uptake included older age, a college degree, a diagnosis of cancer, greater functional impairment, being white, greater understanding of poor prognosis and receiving or working in specialist palliative care. Barriers included having non-malignant diagnoses, having dependent children, being African American, and uncertainty about Advance Care Planning and its legal status. Individuals’ previous illness experiences, preferences and attitudes also influenced their participation. Conclusion: Factors influencing the uptake of Advance Care Planning in palliative care are complex and multifaceted reflecting the diverse and often competing needs of patients, health professionals, legislature and health systems. Large population-based studies of palliative care patients are required to develop the sound theoretical and empirical foundation needed to improve uptake of Advance Care Planning in this setting.

Advance care planning in stroke: Influence of time on engagement in the process

Purpose Individuals who experience stroke have a higher likelihood of subsequent stroke events, making it imperative to plan for future medical care. In the event of a further serious health event, engaging in the process of advanced care planning (ACP) can help family members and health care professionals (HCPs) make medical decisions for individuals who have lost the capacity to do so. Few studies have explored the views and experiences of patients with stroke about discussing their wishes and preferences for future medical events, and the extent to which stroke HCPs engage in conversations around planning for such events. In this study, we sought to understand how the process of ACP unfolded between HCPs and patients post-stroke. Patients and methods Using grounded theory (GT) methodology, we engaged in direct observation of HCP and patient interactions on an acute stroke unit and two stroke rehabilitation units. Using semi-structured interviews, 14 patients and four HCPs were interviewed directly about the ACP process. Results We found that open and continual ACP conversations were not taking place, patients experienced an apparent lack of urgency to engage in ACP, and HCPs were uncomfortable initiating ACP conversations due to the sensitive nature of the topic. Conclusion In this study, we identified lack of engagement in ACP post-stroke, attributable to patient and HCP factors. This encourages us to look further into the process of ACP in order to develop open communication between the patient with stroke, their families, and stroke HCPs.

General practitioners perceptions on advance care planning for patients living with dementia

BACKGROUND: Advance care planning (ACP) facilitates communication and understanding of preferences, nevertheless the use of ACPs in primary care is low. The uncertain course of dementia and the inability to communicate with the patient living with dementia are significant challenges for GPs to initiate discussions on goals of care.

METHODS: A cross-sectional survey, using a purposive, cluster sample of GPs across Northern Ireland with registered dementia patients was used. GPs at selected practices received the survey instrument and up to four mail contacts was implemented.

RESULTS: One hundred and thirty-three GPs (40.6%) participated in the survey, representing 60.9% of surveyed practices. While most respondents regarded dementia as a terminal disease (96.2%) only 37.6% felt that palliative care applied equally from the time of diagnosis to severe dementia. While most respondents thought that early discussions would facilitate decision-making during advanced dementia (61%), respondents were divided on whether ACP should be initiated at the time of diagnoses. While most respondents felt that GPs should take the initiative to introduce and encourage ACP, most survey participants acknowledged the need for improved knowledge to involve families in caring for patients with dementia at the end of life and that a standard format for ACP documentation was needed.

CONCLUSION: Optimal timing of ACP discussions should be determined by the readiness of the patient and family carer to face to face end of life. ACP discussions can be enhanced by educational strategies directed towards the patient and family carer that enable shared decision-making with their GP when considering options in future care.

The views of general practitioners on advance care planning for patients living with dementia

Background Advance care planning (ACP) facilitates communication
and understanding of preferences, nevertheless the use of
ACPs in primary care for patients with dementia is low. The disease’s
uncertain course and the inability to communicate with
the patient living with dementia are significant challenges for
GPs.
Aim The purpose of this study was to describe the attitudes and
practice preferences of GPs working within the UK’s National
Health System (NHS) regarding communication, and decisionmaking
for patients with dementia and their families
Methods A cross-sectional survey, using a purposive, cluster sample
of GPs across Northern Ireland with registered dementia
patients was used.
Results One hundred and thirty-three GPs (40.6%) participated
in the survey, representing 60.9% of surveyed practices. While
most respondents regarded dementia as a terminal disease
(96.2%) only 37.6% felt that palliative care applied equally from
the time of diagnosis to severe dementia. While most respondents
thought that early discussions would facilitate decision-making
during advanced dementia (61%), respondents were divided
on whether ACP should be initiated at the time of diagnoses
(39.8% in favour vs 45.8% disagreed). Interestingly, GPs who
were longer in practice placed greater importance on the presence
of an advance directive (F (2, 124) = 3.38, p = 0.037).
Discussion The timing of initiating ACP varies across individuals
requiring GPs to carefully consider strategies and receptiveness
of the patient and family carer.
Conclusion The findings promote both ongoing training in communication
and dementia management for GPs to meet the
needs of their patients living with dementia.

Initiating advance care planning on end-of-life issues in dementia: Ambiguity among UK and Dutch physicians

Background
In dementia, advance care planning (ACP) of end-of-life issues may start as early as possible in view of the patient’s decreasing ability to participate in decision making. We aimed to assess whether practicing physicians in the Netherlands and the United Kingdom who provide most of the end-of-life care, differ in finding that ACP in dementia should start at diagnosis.

Methods
In a cross-sectional study, we surveyed 188 Dutch elderly care physicians who are on the staff of nursing homes and 133 general practitioners from Northern Ireland. We compared difference by country in the outcome (perception of ACP timing), rated on a 1–5 agreement scale. Regression analyses examined whether a country difference can be explained by contrasts in demographics, presence, exposure and role perceptions.

Results
There was wide variability in agreement with the initiation of ACP at dementia diagnosis, in particular in the UK but also in the Netherlands (60.8% agreed, 25.3% disagreed and 14.0% neither agreed, nor disagreed). Large differences in physician characteristics (Dutch physicians being more present, exposed and adopting a stronger role perception) hardly explained the modest country difference. The perception that the physician should take the initiative was independently associated with agreeing with ACP at diagnosis.

Conclusions
There is considerable ambiguity about initiating ACP in dementia at diagnosis among physicians practicing in two different European health care systems and caring for different patient populations. ACP strategies should accommodate not only variations in readiness to engage in ACP early among patient and families, but also among physicians.

Assessing capacity in the context of testamentary, enduring power of attorney, and advance care directive documents in Australia

Balancing the competing interests of autonomy and protection of individuals is an escalating challenge confronting an ageing Australian population. Legal and medical professionals are increasingly being asked to determine whether individuals are legally capable to make their own testamentary, financial and/or personal/health care decisions. Diseases such as dementia impact upon cognition which necessitates collaboration between the legal and medical professions to satisfactorily assess the effect of such mentally disabling conditions upon legal competency. Terminological and methodological differences exist between the two professions when assessing capacity in this context which subsequently create miscommunication and misunderstanding. Consequently, it is not necessarily a simple solution for a legal professional to seek the opinion of a medical practitioner. Exacerbating the situation is the fact that no consistent and transparent capacity assessment paradigm currently exists in Australia. Assessments are instead being undertaken on an ad hoc basis dependent upon the skill set of the legal and/or medical professionals involved. A qualitative study seeking the views of legal and medical professionals who practise in this area has been conducted. This incorporated a review of the relevant literature and surveys which informed the semi-structured interviews conducted with 10 legal and 20 medical practitioners. Practitioners were asked whether there is a standard approach to assessment and whether national guidelines would assist. The general consensus was that uniform guidelines would be advantageous. The research also canvassed practitioner views as to the state of the relationship between the professions when assessing capacity. Three promising practices have emerged from this research: first, is the need for the development of national guidelines and supporting principles to satisfactorily assess capacity; second, is the possibility of strengthening the relationship between legal and medical professionals to assist in the satisfactory assessment of legal capacity; and third, the need for increased community education.

Advance directives, autonomy and the refusal of life-sustaining medical treatment

As Australian society 1s agemg, individuals are increasingly concerned about managing their future, including making decisions about the medical treatment they may wish to receive or refuse if they lose decision-making capacity. To date, there has been relatively little research into the extent to which legal regulation allows competent adults to make advance refusals of life-sustaining medical treatment that will bind health professionals and others when a decision needs to be made at a future time. This thesis aims to fill this gap in the research by presenting the results of research into the legal regulation of advance directives that refuse life-sustaining medical treatment. In the five papers that comprise this thesis, the law that governs this area is examined, and the ethical principle of autonomy is used to critically evaluate that law. The principal finding of this research is that the current scheme of regulation is ineffective to adequately promote the right of a competent adult to make binding advance directives about refusal of medical treatment. The research concludes that legislation should be enacted to enable individuals to complete an advance directive, only imposing restrictions to the extent that this is necessary to promote individual autonomy. The thesis first examines the principle of autonomy upon which the common law (and some statutory law) is expressed to be based, to determine whether that principle is an appropriate one to underpin regulation. 1 The finding of the research is that autonomy can be justified as an organising principle on a number of grounds: it is consistent with the values of a liberal democracy; over recent decades, it is a principle that has been even more prominent within the discipline of medical ethics; and it is the principle which underpins the legal regulation of a related topic, namely the contemporaneous refusal of medical treatment. Next, the thesis reviews the common law to determine whether it effectively achieves the goal of promoting autonomy by allowing a competent adult to make an advance directive refusing treatment that will operate if he or she later loses decision-making capacity. 2 This research finds that conunon law doctrine, as espoused by the judiciary, prioritises individual choice by recognising valid advance directives that refuse treatment as binding. However, the research also concludes that the common law, as applied by the judiciary in some cases, may not be effective to promote individual autonomy, as there have been a number of circumstances where advance directives that refuse treatment have not been followed. The thesis then examines the statutory regimes in Australia that regulate advance directives, with a focus on the regulation of advance refusals of life-sustaining medical treatment.3 This review commences with an examination ofparliamentary debates to establish why legislation was thought to be necessary. It then provides a detailed review of all of the statutory regimes, the extent to which the legislation regulates the form of advance directives, and the circumstances in which they can be completed, will operate and can be ignored by medical professionals. The research finds that legislation was enacted mainly to clarify the common law and bring a level of certainty to the field. Legislative regimes were thought to provide medical professionals with the assurance that compliance with an advance directive that refuses life-sustaining medical treatment will not expose them to legal sanction. However, the research also finds that the legislation places so many restrictions on when an advance directive refusing treatment can be made, or will operate, that they have not been successful in promoting individual autonomy.

Should law have a role in end-of-life care?

What do physicians think of law? Do they know the law? What role does it have in the provision of end-of-life care? Physicians in New South Wales, Victoria and Queensland are being asked about these issues in a study by the Queensland University of Technology entitled ‘Withholding and withdrawing life-sustaining treatment from adults who lack capacity: The role of law in medical practice’. This research aims to examine the role that law plays in decisions to withhold or withdraw life-sustaining treatment from adults who lack capacity.

Assessment of damages for wrongful birth and consolidation in advance care directives

The recent decision of Waller v James involved a claim by the plaintiff parents for damages for wrongful birth against the defendant doctor, Dr James, a gynaecologist with a practice in infertility and IVF procedures, who had been consulted by the plaintiffs. The second plaintiff, Mr Waller suffered an inherited anti-thrombin deficiency (ATD), a condition which results in a propensity for the blood to clot, at least in adults. Dr James subsequently recommended IVF treatment. The first plaintiff, Mrs Waller became pregnant after the first cycle of IVF treatment. Her son Keeden was born on 10 August 2000 with a genetic anti-thrombin deficiency. Keeden was released from hospital on 14 August 2000. However, he was brought back to the hospital the next day with cerebral thrombosis (CSVT). As a result of the thrombosis, he suffered permanent brain damage, cerebral palsy and related disabilities. The plaintiffs alleged that the defendant was in breach of contract and his common law duty of care to the plaintiffs in failing to inform them, or cause them to be informed, of the hereditary aspects of ATD. They further alleged that, had they been properly informed, they would not have proceeded to conceive a child using the male plaintiff’s sperm and therefore avoided the harm that had befallen them. The plaintiffs claimed damages to compensate them for their losses, including psychiatric and physical injuries and the costs of having, raising and caring for Keeden. The defendant was held to be not liable in negligence by Justice Hislop of the Supreme Court of New South Wales because a finding was made on medical causation which was adverse to the plaintiffs claim.