Trial reportAcademic emergency medicine : official journal of the Society for Academic Emergency Medicine2025
Exploring Patients' Perceptions of an Advance Care Planning Intervention in the Emergency Department: A Qualitative Study.
Trial report in Academic emergency medicine : official journal of the Society for Academic Emergency Medicine, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT05209880 (An Advance Care Planning Intervention in the Emergency Department), which is not on this map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
An Advance Care Planning Intervention in the Emergency Department: a Randomized Controlled Trial
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
14 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectivesEmergency department (ED) visits offer opportunities for seriously ill patients to formulate future medical care goals, yet ED clinicians lack practical strategies for these conversations. ED GOAL, a behavioral intervention, engages seriously ill yet clinically stable older adults in the ED to address advance care planning (ACP) with their outpatient clinicians. In a randomized trial, goals-of-care documentation was significantly higher in the intervention group compared to controls after three (24.3% vs. 9.9%, p = 0.03) and 6 months (31.4% vs. 12.7%, p < 0.01). This study is a sub-analysis to learn about intervention arm participants' perceived benefits and obstacles of the intervention.
methodsWe conducted semi-structured interviews between October 2022 and August 2024 (N = 52) with intervention-arm patients aged 50+ years at three hospitals in Boston, Massachusetts. Using rapid qualitative analyses, we identified themes in intervention-arm participants' comments to open-ended questions about the intervention's benefits and obstacles to continue ACP outside the ED.
resultsOf 70 intervention-arm participants, 52 completed interviews, of which two were surrogates. ED GOAL motivated most patients to initiate ACP with outpatient clinicians and loved ones and improved the quality of conversations by clarifying patients' wishes and improving patient-clinician relations. Barriers to continuing ACP were the lack of clinician availability and patient/surrogate readiness. Those with clear care goals found the intervention less useful yet harmless.
conclusionsThe intervention provided participants with insights into actionable ACP steps. To address the lack of clinician availability, these conversations may be completed by non-physician clinicians or through non-personnel resources. Better tailored ACP interventions may improve patients' readiness.
trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT05209880.
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.