ObjectivesTo conduct an up-to-date systematic review of all randomised controlled trials assessing efficacy of advance care planning (ACP) in improving patient outcomes, healthcare use/costs and documentation.DesignNarrative synthesis conducted for randomised controlled trials. We searched electronic databases (MEDLINE/PubMed, Embase and Cochrane databases) for English-language randomised or cluster randomised controlled trials on 11 May 2020 and updated it on 12 May 2021 using the same search strategy. Two reviewers independently extracted data and assessed methodological quality. Disagreements were resolved by consensus or a third reviewer.ResultsWe reviewed 132 eligible trials published between 1992 and May 2021; 64% were high-quality. We categorised study outcomes as patient (distal and proximal), healthcare use and process outcomes. There was mixed evidence that ACP interventions improved distal patient outcomes including end-of-life care consistent with preferences (25%; 3/12 with improvement), quality of life (0/14 studies), mental health (21%; 4/19) and home deaths (25%; 1/4), or that it reduced healthcare use/costs (18%; 4/22 studies). However, we found more consistent evidence that ACP interventions improve proximal patient outcomes including quality of patient–physician communication (68%; 13/19), preference for comfort care (70%; 16/23), decisional conflict (64%; 9/14) and patient-caregiver congruence in preference (82%; 18/22) and that it improved ACP documentation (a process outcome; 63%; 34/54).ConclusionThis review provides the most comprehensive evidence to date regarding the efficacy of ACP on key patient outcomes and healthcare use/costs. Findings suggest a need to rethink the main purpose and outcomes of ACP.PROSPERO registration numberCRD42020184080.
Objective: To delineate the trajectories of physical symptoms and psychological distress among patients with a solid metastatic cancer during the last year of life. Methods:We used data of 345 decedents from a prospective cohort of 600 patients with a Stage IV solid cancer. Using group-based trajectory modelling, we assessed (a) demographic (age, gender, education, cancer site) predictors of trajectory membership, (b) shift in trajectories associated with planned and unplanned hospitalizations, emergency room visits and chemotherapy, and (c) the association between trajectory membership and place of death. Results:We identified three trajectories of physical symptoms-"persistent mild" (56%), "progressive moderate" (36%), and "progressive severe" (8%), and two for psychological distress-"persistent mild" (72%) and "progressive distress" (28%). Females (β = 1.40 [SE = 0.55], p-value = 0.01) and highly educated patients (β = 1.46 [SE = 0.62], p-value = 0.02) were more likely to experience progressive severe symptoms compared to persistent mild symptoms. Older patients were less likely (β = −1.01 [SE = 0.33], p-value = 0.003), while those with gynecological cancers (β = 1.51 [SE = 0.65], p-value = 0.02) were more likely to experience progressive distress compared to persistent mild distress. Planned and unplanned hospitalizations, emergency room visits, and chemotherapy were associated with a worsening in trajectories. Patients with higher distress were more likely to die in a hospice compared to a hospital. Conclusions: Interventions to improve physical symptoms and distress can focus on patients at risk of being in worse trajectories and at critical time points in the last year of life-hospitalizations, emergency room visits, and chemotherapy.
ContextCaregivers make difficult end-of-life (EOL) decisions for patients, often adversely affecting their own psychological health. Understanding whether advance care planning (ACP) interventions benefit caregivers can enable healthcare systems to use these approaches to better support them.ObjectiveWe conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to identify and quantify the impacts of ACP interventions on caregiver outcomes.MethodsWe searched MEDLINE, Embase and Cochrane databases for English-language randomised or cluster randomised controlled trials (RCTs) published until May 2021. Two reviewers independently assessed methodological quality using the Physiotherapy Evidence-Based Database Scale. We conducted a narrative synthesis for each outcome. Difference between arms with a p value of <0.05 was considered statistically significant.ResultsOf the 3487 titles reviewed, 35 RCTs met eligibility; 68.6% were rated high quality. Included RCTs were heterogeneous in intervention characteristics, setting and disease. Meta-analysis of 17 RCTs showed that ACP had large and significant improvement in congruence in EOL care preferences between caregivers and patients (standardised mean difference 0.73, 95% CI 0.42 to 1.05). The effect of ACP on this outcome, however, declined over time. We also found some evidence that ACP improved bereavement outcomes (three of four RCTs), satisfaction with care quality/communication (four of the six RCTs), reduced decisional conflict (two of the two RCTs) and burden (one RCT). No study showed that mental health of caregivers were adversely affected.ConclusionThe review provides most comprehensive evidence about the efficacy of ACP on caregiver outcomes. Findings suggest some evidence of benefit of ACP on caregiver outcomes.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.