Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35018570›Full record

ArticleJournal of general internal medicine2022

Is This ACP? A Focus Group Study of Patient Experiences of Advance Care Planning.

Amanda J Reich, Stephen Perez, Priscilla Gazarian, Noah D'Arcangelo, Kristina Gonzales, Phillip Rodgers, Deepshikha C Ashana, Joel S Weissman, Keren Ladin

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of general internal medicine, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing 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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Kidney Transplant Clinicians' Perceptions of Palliative Care for Patients With Failing Allografts in the US: A Mixed Methods Study.American journal of kidney diseases : the official journal of the National Kidney Foundation · 2024
    Article
  6. 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

9 authors.

Amanda J ReichCenter for Surgery and Public Health, Brigham and Women's Hospital, One Brigham Circle, 1620 Tremont Street, Suite 2-016, Boston, MA, 02120, USA. ajreich@bwh.harvard.edu.
Stephen PerezCenter for Surgery and Public Health, Brigham and Women's Hospital, One Brigham Circle, 1620 Tremont Street, Suite 2-016, Boston, MA, 02120, USA.
Priscilla GazarianCenter for Surgery and Public Health, Brigham and Women's Hospital, One Brigham Circle, 1620 Tremont Street, Suite 2-016, Boston, MA, 02120, USA.
Noah D'ArcangeloDepartment of Occupational and Community Health, Tufts University, Medford, USA.
Kristina GonzalesDepartment of Occupational and Community Health, Tufts University, Medford, USA.
Phillip RodgersGeriatric and Palliative Medicine, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, USA.
Deepshikha C AshanaDept. of Pulmonary, Allergy, and Critical Care Medicine, Duke University, Durham, USA.
Joel S WeissmanCenter for Surgery and Public Health, Brigham and Women's Hospital, One Brigham Circle, 1620 Tremont Street, Suite 2-016, Boston, MA, 02120, USA.
Keren LadinDepartment of Occupational and Community Health, Tufts University, Medford, USA.

Funding

Identifying barriers, facilitators and outcomes of Advanced Care Planning conversations with Medicare patientsR01NR017034 · NINR · BRIGHAM AND WOMEN'S HOSPITAL · PI WEISSMAN, JOEL S. · 2017 to 2020
$3.3M
NINR NIH HHS R01 NR017034
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundTo date, most research on patients' experiences with advance care planning (ACP) focuses on motivations to engage in discussions and how patients prepare. Gaps remain in understanding how non-critically ill Medicare patients perceive ACP encounters, including how they characterize positive and negative experiences with ACP.

objectivesUnderstanding these patients' perceptions is imperative as Medicare has sought to incentivize provision of ACP services via two billing codes in 2016.

designQualitative focus group study. Thematic analysis was performed to assess participants ACP experience.

participantsMedicare beneficiaries who had engaged in or were billed for ACP. KEY

resultsSeven focus groups were conducted with 34 Medicare beneficiaries who had engaged in ACP across 5 US health systems. Participants described a spectrum of perceptions regarding ACP, and a range of delivery approaches, including group ACP, discussions with specialists during serious illness, and ACP in primary care settings during wellness visits. Despite being billed for ACP or having ACP services noted in their medical record, many did not recognize that they had engaged in ACP, expressed lack of clarity over the term "ACP," and were unaware of the Medicare billing codes. Among participants who described quality patient-centered ACP experiences, three additional themes were identified: trusted and established patient/clinician relationships, transparent communication and documentation, and an understanding that ACP is revisable. Participants offered recommendations for clinicians and health systems to improve the patient ACP experience.

conclusionsFindings include actionable steps to promote patient-centered ACP experiences, including clinician training to support improved communication and facilitating shared decision-making, allocating sufficient clinical time for discussions, and ensuring that documentation of preferences is clear and accessible. Other approaches such as group ACP and ACP navigators may help to support patient interests within clinical constraints and need to be further explored.

Indexed as

Advance Care PlanningMedicareAgedCommunicationFocus GroupsHumansPatient Outcome AssessmentUnited StatesFocus group analysisMedicareQualitative methods

Identifiers

PMID35018570
PMCPMC9086090

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.