Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31174530›Full record

SynthesisBMC health services research2019

A systematic review of the effects of advance care planning facilitators training programs.

Carmen Wing Han Chan, Nancy Hiu Yim Ng, Helen Y L Chan, Martin M H Wong, K M Chow

Abstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in BMC health services research, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 49 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
49citing 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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Advance care planning in patients with respiratory failure.European respiratory review : an official journal of the European Respiratory Society · 2024
    Review
  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

5 authors.

Carmen Wing Han ChanThe Nethersole School of Nursing, Faculty of Medicine, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, 6/F, Esther Lee Building, Shatin, NT, Hong Kong.
Nancy Hiu Yim NgThe Nethersole School of Nursing, Faculty of Medicine, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, 6/F, Esther Lee Building, Shatin, NT, Hong Kong. nhy582@ha.org.hk.
Helen Y L ChanThe Nethersole School of Nursing, Faculty of Medicine, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, 6/F, Esther Lee Building, Shatin, NT, Hong Kong.
Martin M H WongThe Nethersole School of Nursing, Faculty of Medicine, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, 6/F, Esther Lee Building, Shatin, NT, Hong Kong.
K M ChowThe Nethersole School of Nursing, Faculty of Medicine, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, 6/F, Esther Lee Building, Shatin, NT, Hong Kong.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAdvance care planning (ACP) is the process of ongoing communication among patients, family and health care professionals regarding what plans for future care are preferred in the event that patients become unable to make their own decisions. Clinicians play an important role in ACP as both initiators and decision coaches. However, lack of training for clinicians has frequently been reported as the reason for low involvement in ACP discussions - hence the present review evaluates the effectiveness of ACP training programs for healthcare professionals to guide the development of novel training programs for them in the future.

methodsA literature search for intervention studies was conducted independently by two reviewers in July 2018. Participants included all healthcare professionals working with adult patients suffering from terminal illness. The primary outcomes were the professionals' knowledge of and attitudes towards ACP, and self-perceived competence in ACP conversations. The Effective Public Health Practice Project appraisal tool was used to examine the quality of the studies included.

resultsA total of 4025 articles were identified, and ten eligible articles, covering 1081 participants, were included in the review. However, there is a lack of high quality randomized controlled trials of providing ACP training for nurses working in non-palliative care hospital settings. The overall quality of the intervention studies was moderate. All the studies included used instructional sessions in their interventions, while some contained group discussion, role-play and the use of advanced technology. The training programs increased the knowledge, attitudes towards shared decision-making, perceived communication skills, confidence, comfort and experiences concerned with discussing end-of-life (EOL) issues. Patient advocacy, job satisfaction and perceived level of adequate training for EOL care were improved. The use of 'decision aids' was rated as acceptable and clinically useful.

conclusionsTraining for healthcare professionals in ACP has positive effects on their knowledge, attitude and skills. The use of decision aids and advanced technology, instructional sessions with role play, training content focused on ACP communication skills and the needs and experience of patient in the ACP process, and a values-based ACP process are all those factors that made the ACP training programs effective.

Indexed as

Advance DirectivesAdvance Care PlanningDecision MakingEvidence-Based PracticeHealth PersonnelHumansRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicAdvance care planningEducationEnd-of-life careFacilitatorHealthcare professionalsNursePalliative careTraining

Identifiers

PMID31174530
PMCPMC6555972

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.