Life-Sustaining Treatment Decisions Initiative: Early Implementation Results of a National Veterans Affairs Program to Honor Veterans' Care Preferences.

BACKGROUND: On July 1, 2018, the Veterans Health Administration (VA) National Center for Ethics in Health Care implemented the Life-Sustaining Treatment Decisions Initiative (LSTDI). Its goal is to identify, document, and honor LST decisions of seriously ill veterans. Providers document veterans' goals and decisions using a standardized LST template and order set. OBJECTIVE: Evaluate the first 7 months of LSTDI implementation and identify predictors of LST template completion. DESIGN: Retrospective observational study of clinical and administrative data. We identified all completed LST templates, defined as completion of four required template fields. Templates also include four non-required fields. Results were stratified by risk of hospitalization or death as estimated by the Care Assessment Need (CAN) score. SUBJECTS: All veterans with VA utilization between July 1, 2018, and January 31, 2019. MAIN MEASURES: Completed LST templates, goals and LST preferences, and predictors of documentation. RESULTS: LST templates were documented for 108,145 veterans, and 85% had one or more of the non-required fields completed in addition to the required fields. Approximately half documented a preference for cardiopulmonary resuscitation. Among those who documented specific goals, half wanted to improve or maintain function, independence, and quality of life while 28% had a goal of life prolongation irrespective of risk of hospitalization/death and 45% expressed a goal of comfort. Only 7% expressed a goal of being cured. Predictors of documentation included VA nursing home residence, older age, frailty, and comorbidity, while non-Caucasian race, rural residence, and receipt of care in a lower complexity medical center were predictive of no documentation. CONCLUSIONS: LST decisions were documented for veterans at high risk of hospitalization or death. While few expressed a preference for cure, half desire, cardiopulmonary resuscitation. Predictors of documentation were generally consistent with existing literature. Opportunities to reduce observed disparities exist by leveraging available VA resources and programs.

Increasing goals of care conversations in primary care: Study protocol for a cluster randomized, pragmatic, sequential multiple assignment randomized trial.

BACKGROUND: Goals of care conversations explore seriously ill patients' values to guide medical decision making and often inform decisions about life sustaining treatments. Ideally, conversations occur before a health crisis between patients and clinicians in the outpatient setting. In the United States Veterans Affairs (VA) healthcare system, most conversations still occur in the inpatient setting. Strategies are needed to improve implementation of outpatient, primary care goals of care conversations. METHODS: We plan a cluster randomized (clinician-level) sequential, multiple assignment randomized trial to evaluate the effectiveness of patient implementation strategies on the outcome of goals of care conversation documentation when delivered in combination with clinician implementation strategies. Across three VA healthcare system sites, we will enroll primary care clinicians with low rates of goals of care conversations and their patients with serious medical illness in the top 10th percentile of risk of hospitalization or death. We will compare the effectiveness of sequences of implementation strategies and explore how patient and site factors modify implementation strategy effects. Finally, we will conduct a mixed-methods evaluation to understand implementation strategy success or failure. The design includes two key innovations: (1) strategies that target both clinicians and patients and (2) sequential strategies with increased intensity for non-responders. CONCLUSION: This study aims to determine the effect of different sequences and combinations of implementation strategies on primary care documentation of goals of care conversations. Study partners, including the VA National Center for Ethics in Health Care and Office of Primary Care, can consider policies based on study findings.

Clinician Perspectives on Animated Video Vignettes to Support Advance Care Planning Communication for Veterans.

Background: Despite availability of educational resources and documentation methods for advance care planning (ACP), few video tools exist. Animation relevant to Veteran experiences may enhance clinical conversations by illustrating relatable scenarios. Objective: To explore clinician perspectives on four novel video vignettes created by the study group. Design: Online survey with attention to perceived appropriateness, usefulness, and uptake intention. Settings/Subjects: Virtual video presentation with feedback poll for Veterans Affairs clinicians. Measurements: Descriptive and univariant analyses of responses to questions extracted from the validated Video Engagement Scale and prior ACP assessments. Results: Thirty respondents rated video appropriateness and usefulness at a mean 4.8 (range 4-5). Videos were relatable, relevant, and motivating with 90% respondents reporting ready intention to use in clinical practice. Conclusions: Veteran-specific animated video vignettes are received affirmatively by Veteran Affairs clinicians. These videos have potential to foster early engaged discussions about ACP.

Pilot of the Life-Sustaining Treatment Decisions Initiative Among Veterans With Serious Illness.

BACKGROUND: Prior to national spread, the Department of Veterans Affairs implemented a pilot of the life-sustaining treatment decisions initiative (LSTDI) to promote proactive goals of care conversations (GoCC) with seriously ill patients, including policy and practice standards, an electronic documentation template and order set, and implementation support. AIM: To describe a 2-year pilot of the LSTDI at 4 demonstration sites. DESIGN: Prospective observational study. SETTING/PARTICIPANTS: A total of 6664 patients who had at least one GoCC. RESULTS: Descriptive statistics characterized patient demographics, goals of care, LST decisions, and risk of hospitalization or mortality among patients with at least one GoCC. Participants were on average 71.4 years old, 93.2% male, 87.1% white, and 64.7% urban; 27.3% died by the end of the pilot period. Fifteen percent lacked decision-making capacity (DMC). Nonmutually exclusive goals included to be cured (7.6%), to prolong life (34%), to improve/maintain quality of life (61.5%), to be comfortable (53%), to obtain support for family/caregiver (8.4%), to achieve life goals (2.1%), and other (10.5%). Many GoCCs resulted in a do not resuscitate (DNR) order (58.8%). Patients without DMC were more likely to have comfort-oriented goals (77.3% vs 48.8%) and a DNR (84% vs 52.6%). Chart abstraction supported content validity of GoCC documentation. CONCLUSION: The pilot demonstrated that standardizing practices for eliciting and documenting GoCCs resulted in customized documentation of goals of care and LST decisions of a large number of seriously ill patients and established the feasibility of spreading standardized practices throughout a large integrated health care system.