Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28520838›Full record

Trial reportJAMA internal medicine2017

Effect of the PREPARE Website vs an Easy-to-Read Advance Directive on Advance Care Planning Documentation and Engagement Among Veterans: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

Rebecca L Sudore, John Boscardin, Mariko A Feuz, Ryan D McMahan, Mary T Katen, Deborah E Barnes

2 registry-linked trialsAbstract readMulticenter StudyRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in JAMA internal medicine, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to 2 registered trials, which are not on this map. Cited by 122 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
122citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

NCT01550731 nacompletednot on this map

Preparing Older Veterans With Serious and Chronic Illness for Decision Making

TypeinterventionalSponsorVA Office of Research and DevelopmentRan2012 to 2016Enrolled414ConditionsAgingArmsPREPARE website, Advance directive
NCT03609658 nacompletednot on this mapstarted 2018, after this paper: background citation

Integrated Approach to Patient and Family Engagement for Advance Care Planning for Vulnerable Older Adult Within an Accountable Care Organization (ACO)

TypeinterventionalSponsorWake Forest University Health SciencesRan2018 to 2019Enrolled146ConditionsAdvance Care PlanningArmsNurse Navigator Pathway, Usual Care
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

122 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Trial
  8. Trial
  9. Trial
  10. Trial
  11. Trial
  12. Trial
  13. Trial
  14. Trial
  15. Trial
  16. Trial
  17. Trial
  18. Trial
  19. Trial
  20. Trial

62 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Rebecca L SudoreDivision of Geriatrics, Department of Medicine, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco.
John BoscardinDivision of Geriatrics, Department of Medicine, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco.
Mariko A FeuzDivision of Geriatrics, Department of Medicine, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco.
Ryan D McMahanDivision of Geriatrics, Department of Medicine, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco.
Mary T KatenDivision of Geriatrics, Department of Medicine, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco.
Deborah E BarnesSan Francisco Veterans Affairs Medical Center, San Francisco, San Francisco, California.

Funding

VARC CoreP30AG044281 · NIA · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, SAN FRANCISCO · PI W. JOHN BOSCARDIN · 2013 to 2026
$19.9M
Mentoring Researchers in Advance Care Planning for Underrepresented Older Adults at Risk for Alzheimer’s Disease and Related Dementias and Their CaregiversK24AG054415 · NIA · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, SAN FRANCISCO · PI REBECCA L SUDORE · 2017 to 2026
$1.7M
NIA NIH HHS K24 AG054415NIA NIH HHS P30 AG044281
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Importance: Documentation rates of patients' medical wishes are often low. It is unknown whether easy-to-use, patient-facing advance care planning (ACP) interventions can overcome barriers to planning in busy primary care settings. Objective: To compare the efficacy of an interactive, patient-centered ACP website (PREPARE) with an easy-to-read advance directive (AD) to increase planning documentation. Design, Setting, and Participants: This was a comparative effectiveness randomized clinical trial from April 2013 to July 2016 conducted at multiple primary care clinics at the San Francisco VA Medical Center. Inclusion criteria were age of a least 60 years; at least 2 chronic and/or serious conditions; and 2 or more primary care visits; and 2 or more additional clinic, hospital, or emergency room visits in the last year. Interventions: Participants were randomized to review PREPARE plus an easy-to-read AD or the AD alone. There were no clinician and/or system-level interventions or education. Research staff were blinded for all follow-up measurements. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was new ACP documentation (ie, legal forms and/or discussions) at 9 months. Secondary outcomes included patient-reported ACP engagement at 1 week, 3 months, and 6 months using validated surveys of behavior change process measures (ie, 5-point knowledge, self-efficacy, readiness scales) and action measures (eg, surrogate designation, using a 0-25 scale). We used intention-to-treat, mixed-effects logistic and linear regression, controlling for time, health literacy, race/ethnicity, baseline ACP, and clustering by physician. Results: The mean (SD) age of 414 participants was 71 (8) years, 38 (9%) were women, 83 (20%) had limited literacy, and 179 (43%) were nonwhite. No participant characteristic differed significantly among study arms at baseline. Retention at 6 months was 90%. Advance care planning documentation 6 months after enrollment was higher in the PREPARE arm vs the AD-alone arm (adjusted 35% vs 25%; odds ratio, 1.61 [95% CI, 1.03-2.51]; P = .04). PREPARE also resulted in higher self-reported ACP engagement at each follow-up, including higher process and action scores; P <.001 at each follow-up). Conclusions and Relevance: Easy-to-use, patient-facing ACP tools, without clinician- and/or system-level interventions, can increase planning documentation 25% to 35%. Combining the PREPARE website with an easy-to-read AD resulted in higher planning documentation than the AD alone, suggesting that PREPARE may increase planning documentation with minimal health care system resources. Trial Registration: clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT01550731.

Indexed as

Advance Care PlanningAdvance DirectivesAgedDocumentationFemaleHospitalizationHumansMaleMiddle AgedMultiple Chronic ConditionsOutcome and Process Assessment, Health CarePatient-Centered CareUnited StatesVeterans Health

Identifiers

PMID28520838
PMCPMC5710440

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.