Why are advance care planning decisions not implemented? Insights from interviews with Australian general practitioners

Joel J. Rhee, Nicholas A. Zwar, Lynn A. Kemp

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleResearchpeer-review

5 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Background: Advance care planning (ACP) is thought to enhance patient autonomy and improve end-of-life care. However, there is evidence that when patients engage in ACP, the resultant plans are often not implemented. This has been attributed to either nonadherence by health professionals or inadequacies in ACP such as inaccessibility of the plans, plans providing ambiguous or conflicting instructions, and inappropriate focus on the completion of documents rather than communication. However, it is not known whether these postulated reasons are consistent with the experiences and views of health care professionals providing end-of-life care in the community. Objective: Our aim was to explore the perspectives of general practitioners (GPs) on factors influencing the implementation of ACPs. Methods: We conducted semi-structured, open-ended interviews of a purposive sample of 17 Australian GPs. Interview transcripts were analysed using constructionist grounded theory utilizing NVivo 9 software. Results: Factors that were considered to have an important influence on the implementation of ACPs include: ACP factors such as form, legal standing, accessibility, clarity, currency, and specificity; illness factors such as quality of life, function, diagnosis, prognosis, and prognostic certainty; family factors such as family attitudes to ACP and different conceptualizations on whether care is provided to individuals or to a family unit; and organizational and care setting factors such as health care facility's attitudes and policies in relation to end-of-life care. Conclusions: Problems in implementation of ACPs are multifactorial and not necessarily due to deliberate nonadherence by health professionals. Potential solutions to improve the clinical impact of ACP are discussed.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)1197-1204
Number of pages8
JournalJournal of Palliative Medicine
Volume16
Issue number10
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 1 Oct 2013
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Advance Care Planning
General Practitioners
Interviews
Terminal Care
Delivery of Health Care
Health Facilities
Health
Software
Communication
Quality of Life

Cite this

@article{fc9a5e9c09bd4951908e58c7e89b1a27,
title = "Why are advance care planning decisions not implemented? Insights from interviews with Australian general practitioners",
abstract = "Background: Advance care planning (ACP) is thought to enhance patient autonomy and improve end-of-life care. However, there is evidence that when patients engage in ACP, the resultant plans are often not implemented. This has been attributed to either nonadherence by health professionals or inadequacies in ACP such as inaccessibility of the plans, plans providing ambiguous or conflicting instructions, and inappropriate focus on the completion of documents rather than communication. However, it is not known whether these postulated reasons are consistent with the experiences and views of health care professionals providing end-of-life care in the community. Objective: Our aim was to explore the perspectives of general practitioners (GPs) on factors influencing the implementation of ACPs. Methods: We conducted semi-structured, open-ended interviews of a purposive sample of 17 Australian GPs. Interview transcripts were analysed using constructionist grounded theory utilizing NVivo 9 software. Results: Factors that were considered to have an important influence on the implementation of ACPs include: ACP factors such as form, legal standing, accessibility, clarity, currency, and specificity; illness factors such as quality of life, function, diagnosis, prognosis, and prognostic certainty; family factors such as family attitudes to ACP and different conceptualizations on whether care is provided to individuals or to a family unit; and organizational and care setting factors such as health care facility's attitudes and policies in relation to end-of-life care. Conclusions: Problems in implementation of ACPs are multifactorial and not necessarily due to deliberate nonadherence by health professionals. Potential solutions to improve the clinical impact of ACP are discussed.",
author = "Rhee, {Joel J.} and Zwar, {Nicholas A.} and Kemp, {Lynn A.}",
year = "2013",
month = "10",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1089/jpm.2013.0156",
language = "English",
volume = "16",
pages = "1197--1204",
journal = "Journal of Palliative Medicine",
issn = "1096-6218",
publisher = "Mary Ann Liebert Inc",
number = "10",

}

Why are advance care planning decisions not implemented? Insights from interviews with Australian general practitioners. / Rhee, Joel J.; Zwar, Nicholas A.; Kemp, Lynn A.

In: Journal of Palliative Medicine, Vol. 16, No. 10, 01.10.2013, p. 1197-1204.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleResearchpeer-review

TY - JOUR

T1 - Why are advance care planning decisions not implemented? Insights from interviews with Australian general practitioners

AU - Rhee, Joel J.

AU - Zwar, Nicholas A.

AU - Kemp, Lynn A.

PY - 2013/10/1

Y1 - 2013/10/1

N2 - Background: Advance care planning (ACP) is thought to enhance patient autonomy and improve end-of-life care. However, there is evidence that when patients engage in ACP, the resultant plans are often not implemented. This has been attributed to either nonadherence by health professionals or inadequacies in ACP such as inaccessibility of the plans, plans providing ambiguous or conflicting instructions, and inappropriate focus on the completion of documents rather than communication. However, it is not known whether these postulated reasons are consistent with the experiences and views of health care professionals providing end-of-life care in the community. Objective: Our aim was to explore the perspectives of general practitioners (GPs) on factors influencing the implementation of ACPs. Methods: We conducted semi-structured, open-ended interviews of a purposive sample of 17 Australian GPs. Interview transcripts were analysed using constructionist grounded theory utilizing NVivo 9 software. Results: Factors that were considered to have an important influence on the implementation of ACPs include: ACP factors such as form, legal standing, accessibility, clarity, currency, and specificity; illness factors such as quality of life, function, diagnosis, prognosis, and prognostic certainty; family factors such as family attitudes to ACP and different conceptualizations on whether care is provided to individuals or to a family unit; and organizational and care setting factors such as health care facility's attitudes and policies in relation to end-of-life care. Conclusions: Problems in implementation of ACPs are multifactorial and not necessarily due to deliberate nonadherence by health professionals. Potential solutions to improve the clinical impact of ACP are discussed.

AB - Background: Advance care planning (ACP) is thought to enhance patient autonomy and improve end-of-life care. However, there is evidence that when patients engage in ACP, the resultant plans are often not implemented. This has been attributed to either nonadherence by health professionals or inadequacies in ACP such as inaccessibility of the plans, plans providing ambiguous or conflicting instructions, and inappropriate focus on the completion of documents rather than communication. However, it is not known whether these postulated reasons are consistent with the experiences and views of health care professionals providing end-of-life care in the community. Objective: Our aim was to explore the perspectives of general practitioners (GPs) on factors influencing the implementation of ACPs. Methods: We conducted semi-structured, open-ended interviews of a purposive sample of 17 Australian GPs. Interview transcripts were analysed using constructionist grounded theory utilizing NVivo 9 software. Results: Factors that were considered to have an important influence on the implementation of ACPs include: ACP factors such as form, legal standing, accessibility, clarity, currency, and specificity; illness factors such as quality of life, function, diagnosis, prognosis, and prognostic certainty; family factors such as family attitudes to ACP and different conceptualizations on whether care is provided to individuals or to a family unit; and organizational and care setting factors such as health care facility's attitudes and policies in relation to end-of-life care. Conclusions: Problems in implementation of ACPs are multifactorial and not necessarily due to deliberate nonadherence by health professionals. Potential solutions to improve the clinical impact of ACP are discussed.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84885713792&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1089/jpm.2013.0156

DO - 10.1089/jpm.2013.0156

M3 - Article

VL - 16

SP - 1197

EP - 1204

JO - Journal of Palliative Medicine

JF - Journal of Palliative Medicine

SN - 1096-6218

IS - 10

ER -