ArticleCJC pediatric and congenital heart disease2024
Advance Care Planning for Adults With Moderate-to-Severe Congenital Heart Disease: Readiness Trial.
Article in CJC pediatric and congenital heart disease, 2024. 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.
- Trigger Criteria for Advance Care Planning in Adults With Congenital Heart Disease: A Systematic Review.CJC pediatric and congenital heart disease · 2026Review
- Trigger Criteria for Advance-Care Planning in ACHD: The Time Is Now.CJC pediatric and congenital heart disease · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Adults with congenital heart disease (CHD) are growing in number and living longer with complex lesions; however, many are at risk of death in midlife. Conversations about advance care planning (ACP) in this population have been found to be infrequent and not part of regular outpatient care. The intent of this study was to explore readiness of patients with adult CHD (ACHD) to discuss ACP and assess the impact of interventions to support ACP conversations. Methods: We conducted a prospective, randomized, single-centre trial of adults with moderate to severe CHD. Simply, the control group was asked if they were ready to discuss their wishes if they were to become seriously ill. The intervention group was provided 2 additional resources with the readiness question, the modified Lyon Family-Centered ACP survey and a patient-partner created ACHD-ACP video. Results: A total of 111 responses (control [n = 59] and intervention group [n = 52]) were collected for analysis. Women represented 59.0% of the participants. The mean age was 39.6 years (standard deviation = 14.8 years). No significant difference was found between the control and experimental groups' readiness (94.9% and 90.4%, respectively). Most participants (92.8%) responded positively towards initiating conversations related to end-of-life and ACP discussions. Conclusions: We found that adults with CHD are ready to have ACP conversations as part of their outpatient care. Patient preferences and values should guide ACP conversations; further research is needed to determine whether the modified Lyon Family-Centered ACP survey and ACHD-ACP video are helpful adjuncts for ACP in outpatient clinics.
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.