Effect of "Speak Up" educational tools to engage patients in advance care planning in outpatient healthcare settings: A prospective before-after study.

BACKGROUND: Tools for advance care planning (ACP) are advocated to help ensure patient values guide healthcare decisions. Evaluation of the effect of tools introduced to patients in clinical settings is needed. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the effect of the Canadian Speak Up Campaign tools on engagement in advance care planning (ACP), with patients attending outpatient clinics. Patient involvement: Patients were not involved in the problem definition or solution selection in this study but members of the public were involved in development of tools. The measurement of impacts involved patients. METHODS: This was a prospective pre-post study in 15 primary care and two outpatient cancer clinics. The outcome was scores on an Advance Care Planning Engagement Survey measuring Behavior Change Process on 5-point scales and Actions (0-21-point scale) administered before and six weeks after using a tool, with reminders at two or four weeks. RESULTS: 177 of 220 patients (81%) completed the study (mean 68 years of age, 16% had cancer). Mean Behavior Change Process scores were 2.9 at baseline and 3.5 at follow-up (mean change 0.6, 95% confidence interval 0.5 to 0.7; large effect size of 0.8). Mean Action Measure score was 3.7 at baseline and 4.8 at follow-up (mean change 1.1, 95% confidence interval 0.6-1.5; small effect size of 0.2). PRACTICAL VALUE: Publicly available ACP tools may have utility in clinical settings to initiate ACP among patients. More time and motivation may be required to stimulate changes in patient behaviors related to ACP.

Correction: Communication Tools for End-of-Life Decision-Making in Ambulatory Care Settings: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

[This corrects the article DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0150671.].

Educational interventions to train healthcare professionals in end-of-life communication: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Practicing healthcare professionals and graduates exiting training programs are often ill-equipped to facilitate important discussions about end-of-life care with patients and their families. We conducted a systematic review to evaluate the effectiveness of educational interventions aimed at providing healthcare professionals with training in end-of-life communication skills, compared to usual curriculum. METHODS: We searched MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, ERIC and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials from the date of inception to July 2014 for randomized control trials (RCT) and prospective observational studies of educational training interventions to train healthcare professionals in end-of-life communication skills. To be eligible, interventions had to provide communication skills training related to end-of-life decision making; other interventions (e.g. breaking bad news, providing palliation) were excluded. Our primary outcomes were self-efficacy, knowledge and end-of-life communication scores with standardized patient encounters. Sufficiently similar studies were pooled in a meta-analysis. The quality of evidence was assessed using GRADE. RESULTS: Of 5727 candidate articles, 20 studies (6 RCTs, 14 Observational) were included in this review. Compared to usual teaching, educational interventions to train healthcare professionals in end-of-life communication skills were associated with greater self-efficacy (8 studies, standardized mean difference [SMD] 0.57;95% confidence interval [CI] 0.40-0.75; P < 0.001; very low quality evidence), more knowledge (4 studies, SMD 0.76;95% CI 0.40-1.12; p < 0.001; low quality evidence), and improvements in communication scores (8 studies, SMD 0.69; 95% CI 0.41-0.96; p < 0.001; very low quality evidence). There was insufficient evidence to determine whether these educational interventions affect patient-level outcomes. CONCLUSION: Very low to low quality evidence suggests that end-of-life communication training may improve healthcare professionals' self-efficacy, knowledge, and EoL communication scores compared to usual teaching. Further studies comparing two active educational interventions are recommended with a continued focus on contextually relevant high-level outcomes. TRIAL REGISTRATION: PROSPERO CRD42014012913.

Communication tools for end-of-life decision-making in the intensive care unit: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: For many patients admitted to the intensive care unit (ICU), preferences for end-of-life care are unknown, and clinicians and substitute decision-makers are required to make decisions about the goals of care on their behalf. We conducted a systematic review to determine the effect of structured communication tools for end-of-life decision-making, compared to usual care, upon the number of documented goals of care discussions, documented code status, and decisions to withdraw life-sustaining treatments, in adult patients admitted to the ICU. METHODS: We searched multiple databases including MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, ERIC, and Cochrane from database inception until July 2014. Two reviewers independently screened articles, assessed eligibility, verified data extraction, and assessed risk of bias using the tool described by the Cochrane Collaboration and the Newcastle Ottawa Scale. Pooled estimates of effect (relative risk, standardized mean difference, or mean difference), were calculated where sufficient data existed. GRADE was used to evaluate the overall quality of evidence for each outcome. RESULTS: We screened 5785 abstracts and reviewed the full text of 424 articles, finding 168 eligible articles, including 19 studies in the ICU setting. The use of communication tools increased documentation of goals-of-care discussions (RR 3.47, 95% CI 1.55, 7.75, p = 0.020, very low-quality evidence), but did not have an effect on code status documentation (RR 1.03, 95% CI 0.96, 1.10, p = 0.540, low-quality evidence) or decisions to withdraw or withhold life-sustaining treatments (RR 0.98, 95% CI 0.89, 1.08, p = 0.70, low-quality evidence). The use of such tools was associated with a decrease in multiple measures of health care resource utilization, including duration of mechanical ventilation (MD -1.9 days, 95% CI -3.26, -0.54, p = 0.006, very low-quality evidence), length of ICU stay (MD -1.11 days, 95% CI -2.18, -0.03, p = 0.04, very low-quality evidence), and health care costs (SMD -0.32, 95% CI -0.5, -0.15, p < 0.001, very low-quality evidence). CONCLUSIONS: Structured communication tools may improve documentation of EOL decision making and may result in lower resource use. The supporting evidence is low to very low in quality. Further high-quality randomized studies of simple communication interventions are needed to determine whether structured, rather than ad hoc, approaches to end-of-life decision-making improve patient-level, family-level, and system-level outcomes. TRIAL REGISTRATION: PROSPERO CRD42014012913.

Communication Tools for End-of-Life Decision-Making in Ambulatory Care Settings: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Patients with serious illness, and their families, state that better communication and decision-making with healthcare providers is a high priority to improve the quality of end-of-life care. Numerous communication tools to assist patients, family members, and clinicians in end-of-life decision-making have been published, but their effectiveness remains unclear. OBJECTIVES: To determine, amongst adults in ambulatory care settings, the effect of structured communication tools for end-of-life decision-making on completion of advance care planning. METHODS: We searched for relevant randomized controlled trials (RCTs) or non-randomized intervention studies in MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, ERIC, and the Cochrane Database of Randomized Controlled Trials from database inception until July 2014. Two reviewers independently screened articles for eligibility, extracted data, and assessed risk of bias. Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) was used to evaluate the quality of evidence for each of the primary and secondary outcomes. RESULTS: Sixty-seven studies, including 46 RCTs, were found. The majority evaluated communication tools in older patients (age >50) with no specific medical condition, but many specifically evaluated populations with cancer, lung, heart, neurologic, or renal disease. Most studies compared the use of communication tools against usual care, but several compared the tools to less-intensive advance care planning tools. The use of structured communication tools increased: the frequency of advance care planning discussions/discussions about advance directives (RR 2.31, 95% CI 1.25-4.26, p = 0.007, low quality evidence) and the completion of advance directives (ADs) (RR 1.92, 95% CI 1.43-2.59, p<0.001, low quality evidence); concordance between AD preferences and subsequent medical orders for use or non-use of life supporting treatment (RR 1.19, 95% CI 1.01-1.39, p = 0.028, very low quality evidence, 1 observational study); and concordance between the care desired and care received by patients (RR 1.17, 95% CI 1.05-1.30, p = 0.004, low quality evidence, 2 RCTs). CONCLUSIONS: The use of structured communication tools may increase the frequency of discussions about and completion of advance directives, and concordance between the care desired and the care received by patients. The use of structured communication tools rather than an ad-hoc approach to end-of-life decision-making should be considered, and the selection and implementation of such tools should be tailored to address local needs and context. REGISTRATION: PROSPERO CRD42014012913.

What do Canadians think of advanced care planning? Findings from an online opinion poll.

BACKGROUND: Advance care planning (ACP) has the potential to increase patient-centred care, reduce caregiver burden, and reduce healthcare costs at the end of life. Current levels of public participation in ACP activities are unknown. The purpose of this study was to determine the level of engagement of average Canadians in ACP activities. METHODS: Data come from an on-line opinion poll of a national sample of respondents who were asked five questions on ACP activities along with their sociodemographic characteristics. RESULTS: Respondents were from all provinces of Canada, 52% were women, and 33% were between 45 years and 54 years of age. Of 1021 national sample respondents, 16% were aware of the term, ACP (95% CI 13% to 18%), 52% had discussions with their family or friends (95% CI 49% to 55%), and 10% had discussions with healthcare providers (95% CI 8% to 12%). Overall, 20% (95% CI 18% to 22%) of respondents had a written ACP and 47% (95% CI 44% to 50%) had designated a substitute decision maker. Being older was associated with significantly more engagement in ACP activities and there were significant differences in ACP engagement across Canada. CONCLUSIONS: Although only a small proportion of Canadians are aware of the formal term, ACP, a higher percentage of Canadians are actually engaged in ACP, through either having discussions or making decisions about end-of-life care. Older citizens are more likely to be engaged in ACP and there are geographic differences in the level of ACP engagement across Canada.

Development of advance care planning research priorities: a call to action.

The objective of this study was to develop a national, prioritized research agenda for advance care planning (ACP). We first identified a list of comprehensive ACP research topics and determined priority criteria through focus groups. We next conducted a survey wherein importance weights were assigned to priority criteria and each ACP topic was rated. We combined weights and ratings into overall scores. A total of 17 ACP topics were developed and placed into four categories: patients and family members, the general public, professionals, and the healthcare system. Four main priority criteria were created: feasibility, consistency with ethical and societal values, economic considerations, and impact. Of the 100 individuals we invited to participate in the survey, 62 accepted. Prioritized topics centred largely on the impact of ACP on health resource utilization, communicating advance care planning across settings, and the preferred manner of engaging patients in ACP.

Use of routine interventions in labour and birth in Canadian hospitals: comparing results of the 1993 and 2007 Canadian hospital maternity policies and practices surveys.

OBJECTIVES: To compare policies and practices of routine interventions in labour and birth in Canadian hospitals in 1993 and 2007 and to describe trends regarding adherence to evidence-based guidelines. METHODS: We used data from surveys of Canadian hospitals in 1993 and 2007 on routine maternity care practices and policies, including interventions in labour and birth. RESULTS: The response rate of hospitals in 1993 was 91% (523/572), and in 2007 it was 92% (323/353). In 1993, 65% of hospitals (335/516) had a policy that all women should have initial electronic fetal heart rate monitoring, and in 2007, 74% (235/319) had such a policy. In 1993, 55% of hospitals (284/516) used epidural anaesthesia as one of the methods for pain control, and in 2007, 87% of hospitals (278/318) did so. In 1993, 37% of hospitals (193/521) had a "no enema/suppository" policy on admission, and in 2007, 88% (282/322) did. In 1993, 87% of hospitals (450/516) had a policy encouraging the presence of both the woman's partner and other labour support people in the room during the course of labour; in 2007, 80% (259/323) did. In 1993, hospitals estimated that 62% of primiparous women and 44% of multiparous women had an episiotomy in their units. In 2007, the episiotomy rate, irrespective of parity, was 17%. In 1993, 20% of hospitals (98/498) had a policy specifying the length of the second stage of labour, and in 2007, 33% (101/307) had such a policy. CONCLUSION: Positive and negative trends in adherence to best practices were seen in policies and practices of routine interventions during labour and birth in Canadian hospitals between 1993 and 2007.

Breastfeeding policies and practices in Canadian hospitals: comparing 1993 with 2007.

BACKGROUND: The Baby-Friendly Hospital Initiative (BFHI) promotes the World Health Organization International Code of Marketing of Breast-milk Substitutes (WHO Code) and the WHO/UNICEF's Ten Steps to Successful Breastfeeding (Ten Steps). The purpose of this study is to describe and compare maternity hospitals' adherence to the BFHI in 1993 and 2007 for Canada and for each province and territory. METHODS: A survey of all Canadian maternity hospitals was conducted in 1993 and 2007 on routine maternity care practices and policies including infant feeding. RESULTS: The overall response rate was 91 percent (n = 523/572 hospitals) in 1993 and 92 percent (n = 323/353 hospitals) in 2007. Eighty-two percent (415/507) of hospitals in 1993 and 68 percent (198/292) in 2007 had exclusive contracts with formula companies. Fifty-eight percent (302/517) of hospitals in 1993 and 90 percent (289/322) in 2007 never gave breastfeeding mothers sample packs containing formula. Fifty-eight percent (296/507) in 1993 and 85 percent (273/321) in 2007 had written breastfeeding policies (Step 1); 97 percent (503/518) in 1993 and 99 percent (320/322) in 2007 allowed mothers to breastfeed, on cue, whenever the babies indicated an interest 24 hours a day (Step 8); 24 percent (126/519) in 1993 and 64 percent (206/321) in 2007 reported that they did not provide soothers (Step 9); 58 percent (297/513) in 1993 and 68 percent (215/316) in 2007 always offered information on breastfeeding support groups and/or advice at time of discharge (Step 10). CONCLUSIONS: In the 14 years separating the two surveys, Canadian maternity hospitals substantially improved their implementation of the WHO Code and their adherence to the WHO/UNICEF Ten Steps.

RETIRED: Canadian contraception consensus.

This document has been archived because it contains outdated information. It should not be consulted for clinical use, but for historical research only. Please visit the journal website for the most recent guidelines.

SOGC clinical practice guidelines: Canadian contraception consensus.

OBJECTIVE: To provide guidelines for health-care providers on the use of contraceptive methods to prevent pregnancy and sexually transmitted diseases. OUTCOMES: Overall efficacy of cited contraceptive methods, assessing reduction in pregnancy rate, risk of infection, safety, ease of use, and side effects; the effect of cited contraceptive methods on sexual health and general well-being; and the cost and availability of cited contraceptive methods in Canada. EVIDENCE: Medline and the Cochrane Database were searched for articles in English on subjects related to contraception, sexuality, and sexual health from January 1988 to March 2003, in order to update the Report of the Consensus Committee on Contraception published in May-July 1998. Relevant Canadian Government publications and position papers from appropriate health and family planning organizations were also reviewed. VALUES: The quality of the evidence is rated using the criteria described in the Report of the Canadian Task Force on the Periodic Health Examination. Recommendations for practice are ranked according to the method described in this Report.

RETIRED: Canadian contraception consensus.

This document has been archived because it contains outdated information. It should not be consulted for clinical use, but for historical research only. Please visit the journal website for the most recent guidelines.