Division of Geriatrics, Department of Medicine, University of California, San Francisco, California, USA; Veteran Affairs Medical Center, San Francisco, California, USA.
Department of Critical Care Medicine, Queen's University, Clinical Evaluation Research Unit, Kingston General Hospital, Ontario, Canada.
J Pain Symptom Manage. 2018 Feb;55(2):245-255.e8. doi: 10.1016/j.jpainsymman.2017.08.025. Epub 2017 Sep 1.
Standardized outcomes that define successful advance care planning (ACP) are lacking.
The objective of this study was to create an Organizing Framework of ACP outcome constructs and rate the importance of these outcomes.
This study convened a Delphi panel consisting of 52 multidisciplinary, international ACP experts including clinicians, researchers, and policy leaders from four countries. We conducted literature reviews and solicited attendee input from five international ACP conferences to identify initial ACP outcome constructs. In five Delphi rounds, we asked panelists to rate patient-centered outcomes on a seven-point "not-at-all" to "extremely important" scale. We calculated means and analyzed panelists' input to finalize an Organizing Framework and outcome rankings.
Organizing Framework outcome domains included process (e.g., attitudes), actions (e.g., discussions), quality of care (e.g., satisfaction), and health care (e.g., utilization). The top five outcomes included 1) care consistent with goals, mean 6.71 (±SD 0.04); 2) surrogate designation, 6.55 (0.45); 3) surrogate documentation, 6.50 (0.11); 4) discussions with surrogates, 6.40 (0.19); and 5) documents and recorded wishes are accessible when needed 6.27 (0.11). Advance directive documentation was ranked 10th, 6.01 (0.21). Panelists raised caution about whether "care consistent with goals" can be reliably measured.
A large, multidisciplinary Delphi panel developed an Organizing Framework and rated the importance of ACP outcome constructs. Top rated outcomes should be used to evaluate the success of ACP initiatives. More research is needed to create reliable and valid measurement tools for the highest rated outcomes, particularly "care consistent with goals."
缺乏能够定义成功的预先医疗照护计划(ACP)的标准化结果。
本研究的目的是创建一个 ACP 结果结构的组织框架,并对这些结果的重要性进行评分。
本研究召集了一个由 52 名多学科、国际 ACP 专家组成的 Delphi 小组,包括来自四个国家的临床医生、研究人员和政策领导人。我们进行了文献回顾,并从五个国际 ACP 会议中征求了与会者的意见,以确定初始 ACP 结果结构。在五个 Delphi 轮次中,我们要求小组成员对以七点制(从“完全不重要”到“极其重要”)评估患者为中心的结果。我们计算了平均值并分析了小组成员的意见,以确定最终的组织框架和结果排名。
组织框架的结果领域包括过程(如态度)、行动(如讨论)、护理质量(如满意度)和医疗保健(如利用率)。排名前五的结果包括 1)符合目标的护理,平均 6.71(±SD 0.04);2)指定代理人,6.55(0.45);3)代理人文件记录,6.50(0.11);4)与代理人的讨论,6.40(0.19);5)需要时文件和记录的意愿是可访问的,6.27(0.11)。预先指令文件记录排名第十,6.01(0.21)。小组成员对“符合目标的护理”是否可以可靠测量提出了警告。
一个大型的、多学科的 Delphi 小组制定了一个组织框架,并对 ACP 结果结构的重要性进行了评分。排名靠前的结果应该用于评估 ACP 计划的成功。需要更多的研究来创建针对最高评分结果(特别是“符合目标的护理”)的可靠和有效的衡量工具。