ArticleBMJ open2022
Perspective of geriatric patients on advance care planning in Denmark: a qualitative study.
Article in BMJ open, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Exploring readiness for advance care planning in Japan: A qualitative interview study with older adults with frailty, family caregivers, and health and social care practitioners in the homecare setting.Palliative care and social practice · 2025Article
- Barriers and facilitators in implementing advance care planning for frail older patients acutely admitted to geriatric hospital units: a nested qualitative study.Frontiers in health services · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveMost previous studies on advance care planning (ACP) have focused on patients with specific diseases and only a few on frail ageing individuals. We therefore decided to examine the perspective of geriatric patients on ACP. Our research questions include if, when, with whom and with which content geriatric patients wish to have ACP conversations.
designParticipants were interviewed either in the hospital or in their own home. The interviewer followed a semistructured interview guide. Interviews were transcribed and analysed using the systemic text condensation method.
settingGeriatric department in a regional hospital in a rural area in Region Zealand, Denmark.
participantsWe included 11 geriatric patients aged above 65 who had been referred for geriatric inpatient or outpatient assessment. Participants were clinically judged by experienced geriatricians to have sufficient physical and mental capacity to take part in an interview.
resultsThis study's main finding is that geriatric patients have varying preferences and feelings towards ACP. Some expressed concerns about ACP, especially regarding personal fear to talk about end-of-life (EOL) decisions, and whether a busy healthcare system has the resources to conduct ACP. Proper timing of ACP seemed unrelated to specific age but related to perception of health situation. The health professional involved should be well trained and a person the participant could trust. Most participants wanted family members to participate. Concerning content, participants mentioned quality of life, fear of losing their spouse, earlier experience with death, and practical concerns regarding funeral and will.
conclusionAmong geriatric patients, feelings towards ACP are mixed. Even participants who were generally positive towards the concept uttered concerns about the circumstances when talking about EOL topics. Health professionals therefore should approach ACP discussions with caution. Further studies aiming to develop guidelines describing the proper way to introduce and perform ACP in this patient group are needed.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
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.