Louise Jones

Objective: Advance care planning (ACP) provides patients with an opportunity to consider, discuss, and plan their future care with health professionals. Numerous policy documents recommend that ACP should be available to all with life-limiting illness.Method: Forty patients with recurrent progressive cancer completed one or more ACP discussions with a trained planning mediator using a standardized topic guide. Fifty-two interviews were transcribed verbatim and analyzed for qualitative thematic content.Results: Most patients had not spoken extensively to health professionals or close persons about the future. Their concerns related to experiencing distressing symptoms or worrying how family members would cope. Some patients wished for more accurate information and were unaware of their options for care. Many felt it was doctors' responsibility to initiate such discussions, but perceived that their doctors were reluctant to do so. However, some patients felt that the time was not yet right for these conversations.Significance of results: This article reports on the recorded content of ACP discussions. The extent to which patients want to engage in ACP is variable, and support and training are needed for health professionals to initiate such discussions. Our findings do not fully support the current United Kingdom policy of introducing ACP early in life-threatening disease.

Objective: Little is known about the effectiveness of advance care planning in the United Kingdom, although policy documents recommend that it should be available to all those with life-limiting illness.Method: An exploratory patient preference randomized controlled trial of advance care planning discussions with an independent mediator (maximum three sessions) was conducted in London outpatient oncology clinics and a nearby hospice. Seventy-seven patients (mean age 62 years, 39 male) with various forms of recurrent progressive cancer participated, and 68 (88%) completed follow-up at 8 weeks. Patients completed visual analogue scales assessing perceived ability to discuss end-of-life planning with healthcare professionals or family and friends (primary outcome), happiness with the level of communication, and satisfaction with care, as well as a standardized measure of anxiety and depression.Results: Thirty-eight patients (51%) showed preference for the intervention. Discussions with professionals or family and friends about the future increased in the intervention arms, whether randomized or preference, but happiness with communication was unchanged or worse, and satisfaction with services decreased. Trial participation did not cause significant anxiety or depression and attrition was low.Significance of results: A randomized trial of advance care planning is possible. This study provides new evidence on its acceptability and effectiveness for patients with advanced cancer.

The end of life care received by patients with advanced dementia and their carers is of increasing importance as the incidence of dementia is set to rise in the next 30 years. Currently, inappropriate admissions to hospital are common in the UK and patients are less likely to be referred to palliative care services, receive less pain control but undergo more invasive interventions compared to their cognitively intact counterparts. Patients and families are seldom informed of the terminal nature of dementia and advance care planning discussions are rare. The aim of this study was to improve the understanding of end of life care needs for this patient group and their carers, and to use this information to devise an intervention to improve care. Qualitative data were obtained from relatives of 20 patients with advanced dementia admitted to an inner London teaching hospital acute National Health Service (NHS) Trust and 21 health care professionals involved in their care. Framework analysis was used to analyse the transcripts. The results showed that participants’ understanding of dementia and its likely progress was poor. Provision of information regarding the future was rare despite high information needs. Attitudes regarding end of life care were often driven by the participant’s illness awareness. These attitudes served to guide the decision making process and appear to be a major barrier to the provision of more appropriate care. Implications for patient care are discussed and suggestions for future interventions are made.

There is increasing interest in improving the quality of care that patients with advanced dementia receive when they are dying. Our understanding of the palliative care needs of these patients and the natural history of advanced disease is limited. Many people with advanced dementia have unplanned emergency admissions to the acute hospital; this is a critical event: half will die within 6 months. These patients have complex needs but often lack capacity to express their wishes. Often carers are expected to make decisions. Advance care planning discussions are rarely performed, despite potential benefits such more consistent supportive healthcare, a reduction in emergency admissions to the acute hospital and better resolution of carer bereavement.

There is growing recognition that patients should have greater opportunity to plan their future care, a process known as advance care planning. The aims of this phase I qualitative focus group study were (1) to explore the acceptability of an interview schedule, designed to encourage conversations regarding future care; and (2) to explore the suitability of such discussions and inquire about their possible timing, nature and impact. Purposive sampling was used to achieve a balanced sample of 22 palliative care and oncology patients, relatives and user group members. The results showed that, although some patients welcome the opportunity to discuss end-of-life care, others may not feel ready or able to do so. The timing of a discussion is likely to influence its acceptability and effect. A discussion might best be initiated after recurrence of disease. The person initiating discussion should be skilled in responding to the cues of the patient, and should enable the patient to close the topic down at the end of the discussion, in order to avoid dwelling too much on the end of life. Advance care planning should take place over a number of meetings, and be conducted by an appropriately trained professional with sufficient time to talk through the issues raised, and with the knowledge and skills to answer questions, tailor the discussion to the individual, and avoid destroying hope. Advance decisions to refuse treatment should not be the focus of the discussion, but one component of a broader conversation about end-of-life issues. If patients make an advance decision to refuse certain treatments, they should be given the opportunity to change their minds in the future.