ArticleHealth science reports2025
Views of Family Caregivers on Advance Care Planning in Advanced Dementia Care in Hong Kong: A Qualitative Thematic Content Analysis Study.
Article in Health science reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
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: Advance care planning (ACP) can be useful for person-centered dementia care, but it is unfamiliar in Hong Kong. Without advanced discussion of care preferences, it can add stress to family caregivers in decision-making for future care and impact patients' quality of life. The study aimed to explore family caregivers' views on ACP as well as to understand their perceived outcomes. Methods: This qualitative study involved 23 interviews with family caregivers who attended the ACP information talks. The interviews were transcribed and then coded using a thematic content analysis framework. Results: Emerging themes include (1) receptive to ACP, (2) mixed emotions, (3) barriers to ACP, (4) family consensus in decision-making, and (5) benefits of ACP. Family caregivers were open to ACP when initiated by the healthcare team, particularly if patients had previously expressed a desire to forgo treatments, experienced prior crisis episodes, or had multiple hospital admissions. They found starting the conversation challenging, and local culture evaded the topic. Other barriers included the interpretation of filial expectation, building family consensus, and ACP knowledge gap. They needed to overcome internal emotional struggle and related barriers to progress the ACP process. The benefits of ACP included family cohesiveness, enhanced family communication, as well as better preparation for the patient's death, such as minimized unfinished business. For families that could not work through the barriers, the ACP process could become stagnant. Healthcare providers could play a pivotal role in facilitating ACP by addressing the ACP barriers. Conclusions: Healthcare professionals can encourage ACP discussion in early dementia care. ACP can raise family caregivers' expectations in end-of-life care. The ACP outcome of quality care is more important than documentation of forgoing life-sustaining treatments or advance (medical) directives. Proper training for healthcare professionals is crucial for initiating and facilitating ACP as well as upholding quality end-of-life care.
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.