Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40492938›Full record

ArticleJournal of evaluation in clinical practice2025

Barriers and Facilitators to the Implementation of Advance Care Planning: A Qualitative Study at National and Organizational Levels.

Linn Brøderud, Reidun Førde, Maria Romøren, Astrid Klopstad Wahl, Reidar Pedersen

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of evaluation in clinical practice, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing 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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. PEC innovation · 2026
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. 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.

Linn BrøderudCentre for Medical Ethics, Institute of Health and Society, Faculty of Medicine, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway.ORCID 0009-0002-2107-2428
Reidun FørdeCentre for Medical Ethics, Institute of Health and Society, Faculty of Medicine, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway.
Maria RomørenCentre for Medical Ethics, Institute of Health and Society, Faculty of Medicine, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway.
Astrid Klopstad WahlDepartment for Interdisciplinary Health Sciences, Institute of Health and Society, Faculty of Medicine, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway.ORCID 0000-0002-5545-5710
Reidar PedersenCentre for Medical Ethics, Institute of Health and Society, Faculty of Medicine, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway.

Funding

The study is funded by the Norges Forskningsråd.
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAging population, enhanced medical opportunities, increased costs and emphasis on patient participation make advance care planning (ACP) important and it provides an evidence-based framework to ensure patient autonomy in future healthcare decisions. Despite the extensive international research literature supporting ACP, implementation seems challenging. Implementing complex interventions like ACP probably requires a system-wide approach. However, there is scarce research on the barriers and facilitators to ACP implementation as perceived at national and organizational levels.

aimTo explore the barriers and facilitators affecting ACP implementation as perceived at national and organizational levels.

methodsFifteen in-depth individual interviews were conducted with stakeholders at national and organizational levels. A semi-structured interview guide was used, targeting overarching conditions and framework factors that could have an impact. Data was analysed using thematic analysis.

resultsBarriers to ACP implementation described by participants included: Lack of prioritization of ACP at all levels; paradigms and culture of healthcare delivery, personal barriers and attitudes, and lack of competence; lack of collaboration and documentation between levels of healthcare; and lack of systems, routines, time and resources within healthcare services. Facilitators included: Cultural change; support in priority setting; national guideline and incentives; management commitment and support; systems, routines and local implementation efforts; ACP capacity building, implementation competence, and ethical reflection; dissemination of the benefits of ACP, including public education; and better collaboration and communication between levels of healthcare.

conclusionThere appear to be significant barriers and facilitators to ACP implementation as perceived at the national and organizational levels of healthcare. Although ACP implementation appears to require a combination of top-down and bottom-up initiatives, national and organizational barriers and facilitators seem important in setting priorities in clinical practice, with an emphasis on financial incentives. An overarching cultural change of healthcare delivery that supports interventions such as ACP appears to be critical for improved implementation.

Indexed as

Advance Care PlanningDelivery of Health CareFemaleHumansInterviews as TopicMaleOrganizational CulturePatient ParticipationQualitative Researchadvance care planningcomplex interventionsfrail older adultsgeriatricsimplementation sciencepatient participation

Identifiers

PMID40492938
PMCPMC12150899

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.