Çevik Hüsna Sarıca, Muente Catharina, Muehlensiepen Felix, Birtwistle Jacqueline, Pachanov Alexander, Pieper Dawid, Allsop Matthew J
Leeds Institute of Health Sciences, School of Medicine, Faculty of Medicine and Health, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK.
Department of Family Medicine, Ankara University Faculty of Medicine, Ankara, Turkey.
Prog Palliat Care. 2024 Apr 26;32(3):149-159. doi: 10.1080/09699260.2024.2339106. eCollection 2024.
Digital approaches to support advance care planning (ACP) documentation and sharing are increasingly being used, with a lack of research to characterise their design, content, and use. This study aimed to characterise how digital approaches are being used to support ACP documentation and sharing internationally. A scoping review was performed in accordance with the JBI (formerly Joanna Briggs Institute) guidelines and the PRISMA 2020 checklist, prospectively registered on Open Science Framework (https://osf.io/xnrg3). MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO, ACM Digital, IEEE Xplore and CINAHL were searched in February 2023. Only publications in English, published from 2008 onwards were considered. Eligibility criteria included a focus on ACP and electronic systems. Out of 2,393 records, 34 reports were included, predominantly from the USA (76.5%). ACP documentation is typically stored in electronic health records (EHRs) (67.6%), with a third (32.4%) enabling limited patient access. Non-standard approaches ( = 15;44.1%) were the commonest study design of included reports, with outcome measures focusing on the influence of systems on the documentation (i.e. creation, quantity, quality, frequency or timing) of ACP information ( = 23;67.6%). Digital approaches to support ACP are being implemented and researched internationally with an evidence base dominated by non-standard study designs. Future research is needed to extend outcome measurement to consider aspects of care quality and explore whether the content of existing systems aligns with aspects of care that are valued by patients.
支持预立医疗计划（ACP）文档记录与共享的数字方法正越来越多地被使用，但缺乏对其设计、内容和使用情况进行描述的研究。本研究旨在描述数字方法在国际上是如何被用于支持ACP文档记录与共享的。根据JBI（原乔安娜·布里格斯研究所）指南和PRISMA 2020清单进行了一项范围综述，并在开放科学框架（https://osf.io/xnrg3）上进行了前瞻性注册。2023年2月检索了MEDLINE、EMBASE、PsycINFO、ACM数字图书馆、IEEE Xplore和CINAHL。仅考虑2008年以后发表的英文出版物。纳入标准包括聚焦于ACP和电子系统。在2393条记录中，纳入了34份报告，主要来自美国（76.5%）。ACP文档通常存储在电子健康记录（EHRs）中（67.6%），其中三分之一（32.4%）允许患者有限访问。非标准方法（n = 15；44.1%）是纳入报告中最常见的研究设计，结果测量主要关注系统对ACP信息文档记录（即创建、数量、质量、频率或时间）的影响（n = 23；67.6%）。支持ACP的数字方法正在国际上得到实施和研究，其证据基础以非标准研究设计为主。未来需要开展研究，扩展结果测量以考虑护理质量方面，并探讨现有系统的内容是否与患者重视的护理方面相一致。
