Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30486774›Full record

ArticleBMC family practice2018

Advance care planning conversations with palliative patients: looking through the GP's eyes.

Anne B Wichmann, Hanna van Dam, Bregje Thoonsen, Theo A Boer, Yvonne Engels, A Stef Groenewoud

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC family practice, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 31 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
31citing papers in PubMed, 1 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.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

31 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Physicians' perceptions of patient participation and the involvement of family caregivers in the palliative care pathway.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2022
    Article
  17. Observational
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
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.

Anne B WichmannRadboud Institute for Health Sciences, IQ healthcare, Radboud university medical center, Nijmegen, The Netherlands. Anne.Wichmann@radboudumc.nl.
Hanna van DamRadboud Institute for Health Sciences, IQ healthcare, Radboud university medical center, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.
Bregje ThoonsenDepartment of Anesthesiology, Pain and Palliative Medicine, Radboud university medical center, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.
Theo A BoerSection Ethics, University Kampen, Kampen, The Netherlands.
Yvonne EngelsDepartment of Anesthesiology, Pain and Palliative Medicine, Radboud university medical center, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.
A Stef GroenewoudRadboud Institute for Health Sciences, IQ healthcare, Radboud university medical center, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAlthough it is often recommended that general practitioners (GPs) initiate advance care planning (ACP), little is known about their experiences with ACP. This study aimed to identify GP experiences when conducting ACP conversations with palliative patients, and what factors influence these experiences.

methodsDutch GPs (N = 17) who had participated in a training on timely ACP were interviewed. Data from these interviews were analysed using direct content analysis.

resultsFour themes were identified: ACP and society, the GP's perceived role in ACP, initiating ACP and tailor-made ACP. ACP was regarded as a 'hot topic'. At the same time, a tendency towards a society in which death is not a natural part of life was recognized, making it difficult to start ACP discussions. Interviewees perceived having ACP discussions as a typical GP task. They found initiating and timing ACP easier with proactive patients, e.g. who are anxious of losing capacity, and much more challenging when it concerned patients with COPD or heart failure. Patients still being treated in hospital posed another difficulty, because they often times are not open to discussion. Furthermore, interviewees emphasized that taking into account changing wishes and the fact that not everything can be anticipated, is of the utmost importance. Moreover, when patients are not open to ACP, at a certain point it should be granted that choosing not to know, for example about where things are going or what possible ways of care planning might be, is also a form of autonomy.

conclusionsACP currently is a hot topic, which has favourable as well as unfavourable effects. As GPs experience difficulties in initiating ACP if patients are being treated in the hospital, future research could focus on a multidisciplinary ACP approach and the role of medical specialists in ACP. Furthermore, when starting ACP with palliative patients, we recommend starting with current issues. In doing so, a start can be made with future issues kept in view. Although the tension between ACP's focus on the patient's direction and the right not to know can be difficult, ACP has to be tailored to each individual patient.

Indexed as

Attitude of Health PersonnelCommunicationPhysician-Patient RelationsQualitative ResearchAdultAdvance Care PlanningAgedFemaleGeneral PractitionersHumansMaleMiddle AgedPalliative CarePractice Patterns, Physicians'Young AdultAdvance care planningGeneral practicePalliative medicineQualitative research

Identifiers

PMID30486774
PMCPMC6263059

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.