Effects of a theory-based advance care planning intervention for nursing homes: A cluster randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Uptake of advance care planning in routine nursing home care is low. Through extensive literature review, theoretical development, and stakeholder involvement, we developed the ACP+ intervention. AIMS: To evaluate the effects of ACP+ on the knowledge and self-efficacy (confidence in own skills) of nursing home care staff concerning advance care planning. DESIGN: Cluster randomized controlled trial, conducted between February 2018 and January 2019 (NCT03521206, clinicaltrials.gov). ACP+ is a multicomponent intervention aimed at training and supporting nursing home staff and management in implementing advance care planning in nursing home practice through a train-the-trainer approach over 8 months. Fourteen nursing homes were randomized using a matched-pairing strategy, seven received ACP+, seven followed usual practice. Analyses (intention-to-treat) involved linear mixed models. SETTING/PARTICIPANTS: Nursing homes in Flanders (Belgium). RESULTS: 694 of 1017 care staff (68% response rate) at baseline and 491 of 989 care staff (50%) post-intervention (8 months) returned questionnaires. Post-intervention, care staff's self-efficacy concerning advance care planning was significantly higher in the intervention than in the control group (baseline-adjusted mean difference 0.57; 95% CI 0.20-0.94; p = 0.003; Cohen's d = 0.30). Advance care planning knowledge (95% CI 0.95-1.15; p = 0.339; ratio: 1.04) did not differ significantly between groups. CONCLUSIONS: The ACP+ intervention for nursing homes improved care staff's self-efficacy but not their knowledge concerning advance care planning. Considering the comprehensive and multi-component approach used, these effects were smaller than expected. Reasons for this may be related to the chosen follow-up period, outcomes and measurements, or to the intervention itself and its implementation.

Advance care planning in nursing homes: new conversation and documentation tools.

Although advance care planning (ACP) is highly relevant for nursing home residents, its uptake in nursing homes is low. To meet the need for context-specific ACP tools to support nursing home staff in conducting ACP conversations, we developed the ACP+intervention. At its core, we designed three ACP tools to aid care staff in discussing and documenting nursing home resident's wishes and preferences for future treatment and care: (1) an extensive ACP conversation guide, (2) a one-page conversation tool and (3) an ACP document to record outcomes of conversations. These nursing home-specific ACP tools aim to avoid a purely document-driven or 'tick-box' approach to the ACP process and to involve residents, including those living with dementia according to their capacity, their families and healthcare professionals.

Differences in advance care planning among nursing home care staff.

BACKGROUND: A team-based approach has been advocated for advance care planning in nursing homes. While nurses are often put forward to take the lead, it is not clear to what extent other professions could be involved as well. OBJECTIVES: To examine to what extent engagement in advance care planning practices (e.g. conversations, advance directives), knowledge and self-efficacy differ between nurses, care assistants and allied care staff in nursing homes. DESIGN: Survey study. PARTICIPANTS/SETTING: The study involved a purposive sample of 14 nursing homes in Flanders, Belgium. Nurses, care assistants and allied care staff (e.g. social workers, physical therapists) completed a survey. ETHICAL CONSIDERATIONS: The study was approved by the University Hospital of Brussels (B.U.N. 143201834759), as part of a cluster randomized controlled trial (clinicaltrials.gov NCT03521206). RESULTS: One hundred ninety-six nurses, 319 care assistants and 169 allied staff participated (67% response rate). After adjusting for confounders, nurses were significantly more likely than care assistants to have carried out advance care planning conversations (odds ratio 4; 95% confidence interval 1.73-9.82; p < 0.001) and documented advance care planning (odds ratio 2.67; 95% confidence interval 1.29-5.56; p < 0.001); differences not found between allied staff and care assistants. Advance care planning knowledge total scores differed significantly, with nurses (estimated mean difference 0.13 (score range 0-1); 95% confidence interval 0.08-0.17; p < 0.001) and allied staff (estimated mean difference 0.07; 95% confidence interval 0.03-0.12; p < 0.001) scoring higher than care assistants. We found no significant differences regarding self-efficacy. DISCUSSION: While nursing home nurses conducted more advance care planning conversations and documentation than allied care staff and care assistants, these two professional groups may be a valuable support to nurses in conducting advance care planning, if provided with additional training. CONCLUSIONS: Allied care staff and care assistants, if trained appropriately, can be involved more strongly in advance care planning to enhance relational and individual autonomy of nursing home residents, alongside nurses. Future research to improve and implement advance care planning should consider this finding at the intervention development stage.

Advance care planning for people living with dementia: An umbrella review of effectiveness and experiences.

BACKGROUND: End of life care is often inadequate for people with dementia. Advanced care planning (ACP) has the potential to improve outcomes for people with dementia. The aim of this review is to establish the strength of the evidence and provide decision makers with a clear understanding of what is known about ACP for people living with dementia. DESIGN: Evidence synthesis including systematic reviews and primary studies. PROSPERO registration: CRD42018107718. DATA SOURCES: PubMed, CINAHL Plus, SCOPUS, Social Care Online and Cochrane Library were searched (July 2018). No year limit applied. To be included, reviews had to evaluate effectiveness of ACP for people with dementia or report on views and experiences of ACP from the perspective of people with dementia, carers, or health and care professionals. Additional searches (September 2018) were conducted to identify recent primary studies not included in the reviews. REVIEW METHODS: Data extraction was undertaken by one reviewer and checked by a second. Methodological quality was assessed using AMSTAR-2 and Joanna Briggs Institute instruments by two authors independently. Outcomes were categorized and tabulated to assess effectiveness. Qualitative data was analysed using thematic synthesis. RESULTS: Nineteen reviews (163 unique studies) and 11 primary articles with a range of advance care planning definitions and of variable quality were included. Advance care planning was associated with decreased hospitalizations, increased concordance between care received and prior wishes and increased completion of advance care planning documents but quality of primary research was variable. Views of ACP for people with dementia can be clustered around six themes; 1) timing and tailoring, 2) willingness to engage, 3) roles and responsibilities of healthcare professionals, 4) relationships, 5) training and 6) resources needed. Diminishing decision-making capacity over time is a key overarching feature. CONCLUSIONS: Advance care planning is acceptable for people with dementia and their carers and is associated with improved outcomes. Guidelines on which outcomes and which definition to use are necessary, as is research to test different approaches to ACP. Education on topics related to diminishing decision-making capacity is key to optimize advance care planning for people with dementia and their carers.

Nurses' self-efficacy, rather than their knowledge, is associated with their engagement in advance care planning in nursing homes: A survey study.

BACKGROUND: Considering social cognitive theory and current literature about successful advance care planning in nursing homes, sufficient knowledge and self-efficacy are important preconditions for staff to be able to carry out advance care planning in practice. AIM: Exploring to what extent nurses' knowledge about and self-efficacy is associated with their engagement in advance care planning in nursing homes. DESIGN: Survey study as part of a baseline measurement of a randomised controlled cluster trial (NCT03521206). SETTING/PARTICIPANTS: Nurses in a purposive sample of 14 nursing homes in Belgium. METHODS: A survey was distributed among nurses, evaluating knowledge (11 true/false items), self-efficacy (12 roles and tasks on 10-point Likert-type scale) and six advance care planning practices (yes/no), ranging from performing advance care planning conversations to completing advance directives. RESULTS: A total of 196 nurses participated (66% response rate). While knowledge was not significantly associated with advance care planning practices, self-efficacy was. One unit's increase in self-efficacy was statistically associated with an estimated 32% increase in the number of practices having carried out. CONCLUSIONS: Nurses' engagement in advance care planning practices is mainly associated with their self-efficacy rather than their knowledge. Further research is necessary to improve the evidence regarding the causal relationship between constructs. However, these results suggest that educational programmes that focus solely on knowledge might not lead to increasing uptake of advance care planning in nurses.

Implementing the theory-based advance care planning ACP+ programme for nursing homes: study protocol for a cluster randomised controlled trial and process evaluation.

BACKGROUND: Research has highlighted the need for improving the implementation of advance care planning (ACP) in nursing homes. We developed a theory-based multicomponent ACP intervention (the ACP+ programme) aimed at supporting nursing home staff with the implementation of ACP into routine nursing home care. We describe here the protocol of a cluster randomised controlled trial (RCT) that aims to evaluate the effects of ACP+ on nursing home staff and volunteer level outcomes and its underlying processes of change. METHODS: We will conduct a cluster RCT in Flanders, Belgium. Fourteen eligible nursing homes will be pair-matched and one from each pair will be randomised to either continue care and education as usual or to receive the ACP+ programme (a multicomponent programme which is delivered stepwise over an eight-month period with the help of an external trainer). Primary outcomes are: nursing home care staff's knowledge of, and self-efficacy regarding ACP. Secondary outcomes are: 1) nursing home care staff's attitudes towards ACP and ACP practices; 2) support staff's and volunteer's ACP practices and 3) support staff's and volunteers' self-efficacy. Measurements will be performed at baseline and eight months post-measurement, using structured self-reported questionnaires. A process evaluation will accompany the outcome evaluation in the intervention group, with measurements throughout and post-intervention to assess implementation, mechanisms of impact and context and will be carried out using a mixed-methods design. DISCUSSION: There is little high-quality evidence regarding the effectiveness and underlying processes of change of ACP in nursing homes. This combined outcome and process evaluation of the ACP+ programme aims to contribute to building the necessary evidence to improve ACP and its uptake for nursing home residents and their family. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The study is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (no. NCT03521206). Registration date: May 10, 2018. Inclusion of nursing homes started March, 2018. Hence, the trial was retrospectively registered but before end of data collection and analyses.

Implementing advance care planning in routine nursing home care: The development of the theory-based ACP+ program.

BACKGROUND: While various initiatives have been taken to improve advance care planning in nursing homes, it is difficult to find enough details about interventions to allow comparison, replication and translation into practice. OBJECTIVES: We report on the development and description of the ACP+ program, a multi-component theory-based program that aims to implement advance care planning into routine nursing home care. We aimed to 1) specify how intervention components can be delivered; 2) evaluate the feasibility and acceptability of the program; 3) describe the final program in a standardized manner. DESIGN: To develop and model the intervention, we applied multiple study methods including a literature review, expert discussions and individual and group interviews with nursing home staff and management. We recruited participants through convenience sampling. SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: Management and staff (n = 17) from five nursing homes in Flanders (Belgium), a multidisciplinary expert group and a palliative care nurse-trainer. METHODS: The work was carried out by means of 1) operationalization of key intervention components-identified as part of a previously developed theory on how advance care planning is expected to lead to its desired outcomes in nursing homes-into specific activities and materials, through expert discussions and review of existing advance care planning programs; 2) evaluation of feasibility and acceptability of the program through interviews with nursing home management and staff and expert revisions; and 3) standardized description of the final program according to the TIDieR checklist. During step 2, we used thematic analysis. RESULTS: The original program with nine key components was expanded to include ten intervention components, 22 activities and 17 materials to support delivery into routine nursing home care. The final ACP+ program includes ongoing training and coaching, management engagement, different roles and responsibilities in organizing advance care planning, conversations, documentation and information transfer, integration of advance care planning into multidisciplinary meetings, auditing, and tailoring to the specific setting. These components are to be implemented stepwise throughout an intervention period. The program involves the entire nursing home workforce. The support of an external trainer decreases as nursing home staff become more autonomous in organizing advance care planning. CONCLUSIONS: The multicomponent ACP+ program involves residents, family, and the different groups of people working in the nursing home. It is deemed feasible and acceptable by nursing home staff and management. The findings presented in this paper, alongside results of the subsequent randomized controlled cluster trial, can facilitate comparison, replicability and translation of the intervention into practice.