Unraveling patients' readiness in advance care planning conversations: a qualitative study as part of the ACTION Study.

PURPOSE: Patients' readiness for advance care planning (ACP) is often considered a prerequisite for starting ACP conversations. Healthcare professionals' uncertainty about patients' readiness hampers the uptake of ACP in clinical practice. This study aims To determine how patients' readiness is expressed and develops throughout an ACP conversation. METHODS: A qualitative sub-study into the ACTION ACP conversations collected as part of the international Phase III multicenter cluster-randomized clinical trial. A purposeful sample was taken of ACP conversations of patients with advanced lung or colorectal cancer who participated in the ACTION study between May 2015 and December 2018 (n = 15). A content analysis of the ACP conversations was conducted. RESULTS: All patients (n = 15) expressed both signs of not being ready and of being ready. Signs of being ready included anticipating possible future scenarios or demonstrating an understanding of one's disease. Signs of not being ready included limiting one's perspective to the here and now or indicating a preference not to talk about an ACP topic. Signs of not being ready occurred more often when future-oriented topics were discussed. Despite showing signs of not being ready, patients were able to continue the conversation when a new topic was introduced. CONCLUSION: Healthcare professionals should be aware that patients do not have to be ready for all ACP topics to be able to participate in an ACP conversation. They should be sensitive to signs of not being ready and develop the ability to adapt the conversation accordingly.

Trained facilitators' experiences with structured advance care planning conversations in oncology: an international focus group study within the ACTION trial.

BACKGROUND: In oncology, Health Care Professionals often experience conducting Advance Care Planning (ACP) conversations as difficult and are hesitant to start them. A structured approach could help to overcome this. In the ACTION trial, a Phase III multi-center cluster-randomized clinical trial in six European countries (Belgium, Denmark, Italy, the Netherlands, Slovenia, United Kingdom), patients with advanced lung or colorectal cancer are invited to have one or two structured ACP conversations with a trained facilitator. It is unclear how trained facilitators experience conducting structured ACP conversations. This study aims to understand how facilitators experience delivering the ACTION Respecting Choices (RC) ACP conversation. METHODS: A qualitative study involving focus groups with RC facilitators. Focus group interviews were recorded, transcribed, anonymized, translated into English, and thematically analysed, supported by NVivo 11. The international research team was involved in data analysis from initial coding and discussion towards final themes. RESULTS: Seven focus groups were conducted, involving 28 of in total 39 trained facilitators, with different professional backgrounds from all participating countries. Alongside some cultural differences, six themes were identified. These reflect that most facilitators welcomed the opportunity to participate in the ACTION trial, seeing it as a means of learning new skills in an important area. The RC script was seen as supportive to ask questions, including those perceived as difficult to ask, but was also experienced as a barrier to a spontaneous conversation. Facilitators noticed that most patients were positive about their ACTION RC ACP conversation, which had prompted them to become aware of their wishes and to share these with others. The facilitators observed that it took patients substantial effort to have these conversations. In response, facilitators took responsibility for enabling patients to experience a conversation from which they could benefit. Facilitators emphasized the need for training, support and advanced communication skills to be able to work with the script. CONCLUSIONS: Facilitators experienced benefits and challenges in conducting scripted ACP conversations. They mentioned the importance of being skilled and experienced in carrying out ACP conversations in order to be able to explore the patients' preferences while staying attuned to patients' needs. TRIAL REGISTRATION: International Standard Randomised Controlled Trial Number registry 63110516 ( ISRCTN63110516 ) per 10/3/2014.

Advance care planning: A systematic review about experiences of patients with a life-threatening or life-limiting illness.

BACKGROUND: Advance care planning is seen as an important strategy to improve end-of-life communication and the quality of life of patients and their relatives. However, the frequency of advance care planning conversations in practice remains low. In-depth understanding of patients' experiences with advance care planning might provide clues to optimise its value to patients and improve implementation. AIM: To synthesise and describe the research findings on the experiences with advance care planning of patients with a life-threatening or life-limiting illness. DESIGN: A systematic literature review, using an iterative search strategy. A thematic synthesis was conducted and was supported by NVivo 11. DATA SOURCES: The search was performed in MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO and CINAHL on 7 November 2016. RESULTS: Of the 3555 articles found, 20 were included. We identified three themes in patients' experiences with advance care planning. 'Ambivalence' refers to patients simultaneously experiencing benefits from advance care planning as well as unpleasant feelings. 'Readiness' for advance care planning is a necessary prerequisite for taking up its benefits but can also be promoted by the process of advance care planning itself. 'Openness' refers to patients' need to feel comfortable in being open about their preferences for future care towards relevant others. CONCLUSION: Although participation in advance care planning can be accompanied by unpleasant feelings, many patients reported benefits of advance care planning as well. This suggests a need for advance care planning to be personalised in a form which is both feasible and relevant at moments suitable for the individual patient.

Long-term quality of life and aesthetic outcomes after breast conserving surgery in patients with breast cancer.

INTRODUCTION: Breast surgery has become less invasive without compromising survival and aimed at improving quality of life (QoL) in terms of satisfaction with cosmesis. Despite that, short-term patient-perceived aesthetic results after breast-conserving surgery (BCS) can still be displeasing. Long-term analysis regarding contentment with cosmesis are lacking and could be different, considering that over time, patients' priorities might change and a different thought-out judgment could be given. The goal of this study is to describe long-term results in QoL after BCS and to identify possible predictors for disappointing aesthetic results. METHODS: In this retrospective cohort study, the long-term outcomes of QoL, patient-reported outcome measurements and aesthetic outcomes were investigated 4.5-10.8 years after BCS. In total, 104 patients received standardized questionnaires from the European Organisation of Research and Treatment of Cancer. The aesthetic results after BCS were evaluated subjectively through a diverse panel of healthcare observers. Objective assessment of the aesthetic results was done using the BCCT.core system of evaluating standardised breast photographs. Factors influencing aesthetic outcome were statistically analysed. RESULTS: QoL was high in around 75% of the patients. Correlation between QoL and aesthetic outcomes was found according to Spearman's correlation (r = 0.262, p = 0.007). Significant factors negatively influencing patient reported aesthetic outcomes were sentinel node procedure (p = 0.016), axillary lymph node dissection (p = 0.004), chemotherapy (p = 0.001), and hormonal therapy (p = 0.001). CONCLUSION: The majority of the patients have acceptable QoL after BCS during long-term follow-up. Unacceptable aesthetic outcomes after BCS are associated with lower QoL and are influenced by sentinel node procedure, axillary lymph node dissection, chemotherapy, and hormonal therapy.