Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Complex advance care planning intervention in general practice (ACP-GP): a cluster-randomised controlled trial.
Stevens, Julie; Miranda, Rose; Pype, Peter; Eecloo, Kim; Deliens, Luc; De Vleminck, Aline; Pardon, Koen.
Afiliação
  • Stevens J; End-of-Life Care Research Group, VUB & Universiteit Gent, Brussels; Department of Family Medicine and Chronic Care, VUB, Brussels; Department of Public Health and Primary Care, Universiteit Gent, Ghent.
  • Miranda R; End-of-Life Care Research Group, VUB & Universiteit Gent, Brussels; Department of Family Medicine and Chronic Care, VUB, Brussels.
  • Pype P; End-of-Life Care Research Group, VUB & Universiteit Gent, Brussels; Department of Public Health and Primary Care, Universiteit Gent, Ghent.
  • Eecloo K; End-of-Life Care Research Group, VUB & Universiteit Gent, Brussels; Department of Public Health and Primary Care, Universiteit Gent, Ghent.
  • Deliens L; End-of-Life Care Research Group, VUB & Universiteit Gent, Brussels; Department of Family Medicine and Chronic Care, VUB, Brussels; Department of Public Health and Primary Care, Universiteit Gent, Ghent.
  • De Vleminck A; End-of-Life Care Research Group, VUB & Universiteit Gent, Brussels; Department of Family Medicine and Chronic Care, VUB, Brussels.
  • Pardon K; End-of-Life Care Research Group, VUB & Universiteit Gent, Brussels; Department of Family Medicine and Chronic Care, VUB, Brussels.
Br J Gen Pract ; 74(739): e78-e87, 2024 Feb.
Article em En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38253546
ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND:

Advance care planning (ACP) is an iterative communication process about patients' preferences for future care. In general practice, there are barriers to ACP at patient, GP, and healthcare-system levels. A complex intervention may be necessary to reduce barriers.

AIM:

To evaluate the effects of a complex ACP intervention for patients with chronic, life-limiting illness in general practice (ACP-GP). DESIGN AND

SETTING:

A cluster-randomised controlled trial was undertaken in Belgian general practice.

METHOD:

ACP-GP included a patient workbook, GP training, ACP conversations, and a documentation template. The control group received usual care. Outcomes were the 15-item ACP Engagement Survey for patients and the ACP Self-Efficacy scale for GPs. Linear mixed models evaluated differences at 3 months (T1, effectiveness evaluation) and 6 months (T2) post-baseline. Analysis was intention-to-treat.

RESULTS:

In total, 35 GPs and 95 patients were randomised. Patient ACP engagement did not differ between the intervention and control group at T1 (baseline-adjusted mean difference = 0.34; 95% confidence interval [CI] = -0.02 to 0.69; P = 0.062) or T2 (baseline-adjusted mean difference = 0.20; 95% CI = -0.17 to 0.57; P = 0.28). For GP ACP self-efficacy, there were no significant differences between groups at T1 (baseline-adjusted mean difference = 0.16; 95% CI = -0.04 to 0.35; P = 0.11) or at T2 (baseline-adjusted mean difference = 0.11; 95% CI = -0.09 to 0.31; P = 0.27).

CONCLUSION:

ACP-GP did not improve patient engagement and GP self-efficacy more than usual care. Both groups showed patterns of increase from baseline. Trial procedures and the COVID-19 pandemic may have increased awareness about ACP.
Assuntos
Palavras-chave

Texto completo: 1 Coleções: 01-internacional Base de dados: MEDLINE Assunto principal: Planejamento Antecipado de Cuidados / Medicina Geral Tipo de estudo: Clinical_trials Limite: Humans Idioma: En Ano de publicação: 2024 Tipo de documento: Article

Texto completo: 1 Coleções: 01-internacional Base de dados: MEDLINE Assunto principal: Planejamento Antecipado de Cuidados / Medicina Geral Tipo de estudo: Clinical_trials Limite: Humans Idioma: En Ano de publicação: 2024 Tipo de documento: Article