Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42117191›Full record

ArticlePalliative & supportive care2026

Impact of nurse-led advance care planning in a primary care setting.

Sumathi Devarajan, Rebecca Rdesinski, Shannon Sweeney, Eriko Onishi, Erin Gallivan, Harry Krulewitch, Seiko Izumi

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Palliative & supportive care, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

7 authors.

Sumathi DevarajanDepartment of Family Medicine, Oregon Health & Science University, Portland, OR, USA.
Rebecca RdesinskiDepartment of Family Medicine, Oregon Health & Science University, Portland, OR, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6159-3909
Shannon SweeneyDepartment of Family Medicine, Oregon Health & Science University, Portland, OR, USA.
Eriko OnishiDepartment of Family Medicine, Oregon Health & Science University, Portland, OR, USA.
Erin GallivanDepartment of Neurology, Oregon Health & Science University, Portland, OR, USA.
Harry KrulewitchDepartment of Family Medicine, Oregon Health & Science University, Portland, OR, USA.
Seiko IzumiSchool of Nursing, Oregon Health & Science University, Portland, OR, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9488-9458

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesWe aimed to evaluate patient and clinician experiences of advance care planning (ACP) conversations facilitated by an ACP nurse coordinator (ACP-NC).

methodsWe used a sequential mixed-methods approach that included a patient survey, patient interviews, and clinician interviews at a family medicine clinic. Patients were invited into the study if they had reached a stable point in their ACP decision-making conversations with the ACP-NC or PCP (i.e. their goals and preferences were considered settled at the time) and were not imminently dying. Invitations to complete a survey were sent within 2 weeks of patients completing their ACP conversations. Patient interviewees were purposefully selected to vary on key attributes such as age, gender, and number of ACP conversations. An iterative sampling strategy was used for both patient and clinician interviews.

resultsNinety-three patients completed the survey, and 10 patients were interviewed. Six clinicians were interviewed. Sixty percent of patient respondents reported being very comfortable having ACP conversations. At the time of the survey, 79% had completed or revised their existing advance directive. The professional groups that patients most preferred to engage with, regarding ACP, were their primary care provider (87%), ACP-NC (70%), and palliative care specialist (61%). Patient interviews indicated that participants appreciated being referred to the ACP-NC within the clinic, describing her as a motivator and generous with her time, which facilitated thoughtful discussion of preferences and wishes. Clinician interviews identified limited time as a key barrier to conducting ACP conversations and saw a dedicated ACP-NC as a major benefit to allow patients to spend more time having these important conversations. SIGNIFICANCE OF

resultsPatients were open to engaging in ACP discussions. Integrating an ACP-NC within primary care teams may represent an acceptable and effective approach to promote the early initiation of ACP in primary care settings.

Indexed as

Advance Care PlanningAdultAgedAged, 80 and overDecision MakingFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedPrimary Health CareQualitative ResearchSurveys and QuestionnairesAdvance care planning (ACP)nurse coordinatorprimary careserious illness conversation (SIC) training

Identifiers

PMID42117191
PMCPMC13202411

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.