Self-efficacy of advanced cancer patients for participation in treatment-related decision-making in six European countries: the ACTION study.

PURPOSE: Many patients prefer an active role in making decisions about their care and treatment, but participating in such decision-making is challenging. The aim of this study was to explore whether patient-reported outcomes (quality of life and patient satisfaction), patients' coping strategies, and sociodemographic and clinical characteristics were associated with self-efficacy for participation in decision-making among patients with advanced cancer. METHODS: We used baseline data from the ACTION trial of patients with advanced colorectal or lung cancer from six European countries, including scores on the decision-making participation self-efficacy (DEPS) scale, EORTC QLQ-C15-PAL questionnaire, and the EORTC IN-PATSAT32 questionnaire. Multivariable linear regression analyses were used to examine associations with self-efficacy scores. RESULTS: The sample included 660 patients with a mean age of 66 years (SD 10). Patients had a mean score of 73 (SD 24) for self-efficacy. Problem-focused coping (B 1.41 (95% CI 0.77 to 2.06)), better quality of life (B 2.34 (95% CI 0.89 to 3.80)), and more patient satisfaction (B 7.59 (95% CI 5.61 to 9.56)) were associated with a higher level of self-efficacy. Patients in the Netherlands had a higher level of self-efficacy than patients in Belgium ((B 7.85 (95% CI 2.28 to 13.42)), whereas Italian patients had a lower level ((B -7.50 (95% CI -13.04 to -1.96)) than those in Belgium. CONCLUSION: Coping style, quality of life, and patient satisfaction with care were associated with self-efficacy for participation in decision-making among patients with advanced cancer. These factors are important to consider for healthcare professionals when supporting patients in decision-making processes.

Impacts of an advance care planning intervention on close relationships.

OBJECTIVES: To examine how an advance care planning (ACP) intervention based on structured conversations impacts the relationship between patients with advanced cancer and their nominated Personal Representatives (PRs). METHODS: Within the ACTION research project, a qualitative study was carried out in 4 countries (Italy, United Kingdom, the Netherlands, and Slovenia) to explore the lived experience of engagement with the ACTION Respecting Choices® ACP intervention from the perspectives of patients and their PRs. A phenomenological approach was undertaken. RESULTS: Our findings show that taking part in the ACTION ACP intervention provides a communicative space for patients and their PRs to share their understanding and concerns about the illness and its consequences. In some cases, this may strengthen relationships by realigning patients' and PRs' understanding and expectations and affirming their mutual commitment and support. SIGNIFICANCE OF RESULTS: The most significant consequence of the ACP process in our study was the deepening of mutual understanding and relationship between some patients and PRs and the enhancement of their sense of mutuality and connectedness in the present. However, being a relational intervention, ACP may raise some challenging and distressing issues. The interpersonal dynamics of the discussion require skilled and careful professional facilitation.

How can advance care planning support hope in patients with advanced cancer and their families: A qualitative study as part of the international ACTION trial.

OBJECTIVE: Clinicians' fears of taking away patients' hope is one of the barriers to advance care planning (ACP). Research on how ACP supports hope is scarce. We have taken up the challenge to specify ways in which ACP conversations may potentially support hope. METHODS: In an international qualitative study, we explored ACP experiences of patients with advanced cancer and their personal representatives (PRs) within the cluster-randomised control ACTION trial. Using deductive analysis of data obtained in interviews following the ACP conversations, this substudy reports on a theme of hope. A latent thematic analysis was performed on segments of text relevant to answer the research question. RESULTS: Twenty patients with advanced cancer and 17 PRs from Italy, the Netherlands, Slovenia, and the United Kingdom were participating in post-ACP interviews. Three themes reflecting elements that provide grounds for hope were constructed. ACP potentially supports hope by being (I) a meaningful activity that embraces uncertainties and difficulties; (II) an action towards an aware and empowered position; (III) an act of mutual care anchored in commitments. CONCLUSION: Our findings on various potentially hope supporting elements of ACP conversations provide a constructive way of thinking about hope in relation to ACP that could inform practice.

Inclusion of palliative care in health care policy for older people: A directed documentary analysis in 13 of the most rapidly ageing countries worldwide.

BACKGROUND: Palliative care is insufficiently integrated in the continuum of care for older people. It is unclear to what extent healthcare policy for older people includes elements of palliative care and thus supports its integration. AIM: (1) To develop a reference framework for identifying palliative care contents in policy documents; (2) to determine inclusion of palliative care in public policy documents on healthcare for older people in 13 rapidly ageing countries. DESIGN: Directed documentary analysis of public policy documents (legislation, policies/strategies, guidelines, white papers) on healthcare for older people. Using existing literature, we developed a reference framework and data extraction form assessing 10 criteria of palliative care inclusion. Country experts identified documents and extracted data. SETTING: Austria, Belgium, Canada, Czech Republic, England, Japan, Mexico, Netherlands, New Zealand, Singapore, Slovenia, South Korea, Spain. RESULTS: Of 139 identified documents, 50 met inclusion criteria. The most frequently addressed palliative care elements were coordination and continuity of care (12 countries), communication and care planning, care for family, and ethical and legal aspects (11 countries). Documents in 10 countries explicitly mentioned palliative care, nine addressed symptom management, eight mentioned end-of-life care, and five referred to existing palliative care strategies (out of nine that had them). CONCLUSIONS: Health care policies for older people need revising to include reference to end-of-life care and dying and ensure linkage to existing national or regional palliative care strategies. The strong policy focus on care coordination and continuity in policies for older people is an opportunity window for palliative care advocacy.

Advance care planning in patients with advanced cancer: A 6-country, cluster-randomised clinical trial.

BACKGROUND: Advance care planning (ACP) supports individuals to define, discuss, and record goals and preferences for future medical treatment and care. Despite being internationally recommended, randomised clinical trials of ACP in patients with advanced cancer are scarce. METHODS AND FINDINGS: To test the implementation of ACP in patients with advanced cancer, we conducted a cluster-randomised trial in 23 hospitals across Belgium, Denmark, Italy, Netherlands, Slovenia, and United Kingdom in 2015-2018. Patients with advanced lung (stage III/IV) or colorectal (stage IV) cancer, WHO performance status 0-3, and at least 3 months life expectancy were eligible. The ACTION Respecting Choices ACP intervention as offered to patients in the intervention arm included scripted ACP conversations between patients, family members, and certified facilitators; standardised leaflets; and standardised advance directives. Control patients received care as usual. Main outcome measures were quality of life (operationalised as European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer [EORTC] emotional functioning) and symptoms. Secondary outcomes were coping, patient satisfaction, shared decision-making, patient involvement in decision-making, inclusion of advance directives (ADs) in hospital files, and use of hospital care. In all, 1,117 patients were included (442 intervention; 675 control), and 809 (72%) completed the 12-week questionnaire. Patients' age ranged from 18 to 91 years, with a mean of 66; 39% were female. The mean number of ACP conversations per patient was 1.3. Fidelity was 86%. Sixteen percent of patients found ACP conversations distressing. Mean change in patients' quality of life did not differ between intervention and control groups (T-score -1.8 versus -0.8, p = 0.59), nor did changes in symptoms, coping, patient satisfaction, and shared decision-making. Specialist palliative care (37% versus 27%, p = 0.002) and AD inclusion in hospital files (10% versus 3%, p < 0.001) were more likely in the intervention group. A key limitation of the study is that recruitment rates were lower in intervention than in control hospitals. CONCLUSIONS: Our results show that quality of life effects were not different between patients who had ACP conversations and those who received usual care. The increased use of specialist palliative care and AD inclusion in hospital files of intervention patients is meaningful and requires further study. Our findings suggest that alternative approaches to support patient-centred end-of-life care in this population are needed. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN registry ISRCTN63110516.

Impact of advance care planning on end-of-life management.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: The aim of this review is to critically appraise the recent evidence on different aspects of impact of advance care planning (ACP) in palliative care and to reflect on further implications on practice and research in the future. RECENT FINDINGS: Evidence about various ACP impacts is rapidly growing and most common outcome measures are still advance directive completion, change in hospital admission rate and patients' and families' views and experiences with ACP. Mainly descriptive studies bring new information of ACP impact for specific groups of patients, their families, settings, countries, contexts, staff and healthcare system as such. It is not yet clear who and when would best conduct ACP, from general practitioners (GPs) to specialists in the hospitals and even lay-navigators for cancer patients; from early ACP conversations to critical ACP in acute events at the end-of-life. The need for ACP impacts high-quality evidence is becoming more urgent because latest future projections are showing higher palliative care needs than previously expected. SUMMARY: Recent studies on various ACP impacts reveal variety of outcomes for different patient groups and settings, and are contributing to a wider picture of ACP situation around the world. However, high-quality evidence on ACP impact is still urgently expected in times of growing need for system-level changes for effective ACP implementation.