Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36514002›Full record

ArticleBMC primary care2022

Actual timing versus GPs' perceptions of optimal timing of advance care planning: a mixed-methods health record-based study.

Willemijn Tros, Jenny T van der Steen, Janine Liefers, Reinier Akkermans, Henk Schers, Mattijs E Numans, Petra G van Peet, A Stef Groenewoud

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC primary care, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
2.0field-weighted citation impact, top 14% of its field
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

3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 10 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. 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

8 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Willemijn TrosDepartment of Public Health and Primary Care, Leiden University Medical Center (LUMC), Leiden, the Netherlands. w.tros@lumc.nl.
Jenny T van der SteenDepartment of Public Health and Primary Care, Leiden University Medical Center (LUMC), Leiden, the Netherlands.
Janine LiefersRadboud Institute for Health Sciences, Scientific Center for Quality of Healthcare, Radboud university medical center, Nijmegen, the Netherlands.
Reinier AkkermansDepartment of Primary and Community Care, Radboud university medical center, Nijmegen, the Netherlands.
Henk SchersDepartment of Primary and Community Care, Radboud university medical center, Nijmegen, the Netherlands.
Mattijs E NumansDepartment of Public Health and Primary Care, Leiden University Medical Center (LUMC), Leiden, the Netherlands.
Petra G van PeetDepartment of Public Health and Primary Care, Leiden University Medical Center (LUMC), Leiden, the Netherlands.
A Stef GroenewoudRadboud Institute for Health Sciences, Scientific Center for Quality of Healthcare, Radboud university medical center, Nijmegen, the Netherlands.
Leiden University Medical Center · NLRadboud University Nijmegen · NLRadboud University Medical Center · NL

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundTimely initiation of advance care planning (ACP) in general practice is challenging, especially in patients with non-malignant conditions. Our aim was to investigate how perceived optimal timing of ACP initiation and its triggers relate to recorded actual timing in patients with cancer, organ failure, or multimorbidity.

methodsIn this mixed-methods study in the Netherlands, we analysed health records selected from a database with primary care routine data and with a recorded ACP conversation in the last two years before death of patients who died with cancer, organ failure, or multimorbidity. We compared actual timing of ACP initiation as recorded in health records of 51 patients with the perceived optimal timing as determined by 83 independent GPs who studied these records. Further, to identify and compare triggers for GPs to initiate ACP, we analysed the health record documentation around the moments of the recorded actual timing of ACP initiation and the perceived optimal timing of ACP initiation. We combined quantitative descriptive statistics with qualitative content analysis.

resultsThe recorded actual timing of ACP initiation was significantly closer to death than the perceived optimal timing in patients with cancer (median 88 vs. 111 days before death (p = 0.049)), organ failure (227 vs. 306 days before death (p = 0.02)) and multimorbidity (113 vs. 338 days before death (p = 0.006)). Triggers for recorded actual versus perceived optimal timing were similar across the three groups, the most frequent being 'expressions of patients' reflections or wishes' (14% and 14% respectively) and 'appropriate setting' (10% and 13% respectively).

conclusionACP in general practice was initiated and recorded later in the illness trajectory than considered optimal, especially in patients with organ failure or multimorbidity. As triggers were similar for recorded actual and perceived optimal timing, we recommend that GPs initiate ACP shortly after a trigger is noticed the first time, rather than wait for additional or more evident triggers when the illness is in an advanced stage.

Indexed as

Advance Care PlanningGeneral PracticeNeoplasmsCommunicationDocumentationHumansAdvance care planningCancerElectronic health recordGeneral practiceMultimorbidityOrgan failure

Identifiers

PMID36514002
PMCPMC9749277
OpenAlexW4311347402

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.