Sharda D Ramsaroop1, M C Reid, Ronald D Adelman. 1. Division of Geriatrics and Gerontology, Weill Medical College of Cornell University, New York, New York 10021, USA. sdr1031@aol.com
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To systematically review studies designed to increase advance directive completion in the primary care setting and employ meta-analytic techniques to quantify their effects. DESIGN: Extensive bibliographic searches of English-language literature published from January 1991 through July 2005 were conducted. Investigators abstracted prespecified information (e.g., design, study duration, types of interventions employed) and advance directive completion rates for intervention and control arms in each investigation and calculated absolute rate differences (i.e., difference in completion rates between the two groups) for each study. Individual study and pooled-effect sizes were also calculated, along with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). SETTING: Literature review. RESULTS: Eighteen studies were retained in the final sample. Most studies employed multimodal interventions. The most common approach consisted of educational materials directed at patients (through mailing or at visit) coupled with a patient-healthcare provider interaction in a group or individual setting (n=7). Absolute differences in completion rates varied from a high of 44% (favors intervention) to a low of -2% (favors control). Effect sizes could be calculated for 15 of the 18 studies. The pooled effect size was 0.50 (95% CI=0.17-0.83), indicating a moderate overall effect in favor of the intervention. CONCLUSION: The majority of studies demonstrated statistically significant effects associated with the advance directive intervention. The most successful interventions incorporated direct patient-healthcare professional interactions over multiple visits. Passive education of patients using written materials (without direct counseling) was a relatively ineffective method for increasing advance directive completion rates in the primary care setting.
OBJECTIVES: To systematically review studies designed to increase advance directive completion in the primary care setting and employ meta-analytic techniques to quantify their effects. DESIGN: Extensive bibliographic searches of English-language literature published from January 1991 through July 2005 were conducted. Investigators abstracted prespecified information (e.g., design, study duration, types of interventions employed) and advance directive completion rates for intervention and control arms in each investigation and calculated absolute rate differences (i.e., difference in completion rates between the two groups) for each study. Individual study and pooled-effect sizes were also calculated, along with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). SETTING: Literature review. RESULTS: Eighteen studies were retained in the final sample. Most studies employed multimodal interventions. The most common approach consisted of educational materials directed at patients (through mailing or at visit) coupled with a patient-healthcare provider interaction in a group or individual setting (n=7). Absolute differences in completion rates varied from a high of 44% (favors intervention) to a low of -2% (favors control). Effect sizes could be calculated for 15 of the 18 studies. The pooled effect size was 0.50 (95% CI=0.17-0.83), indicating a moderate overall effect in favor of the intervention. CONCLUSION: The majority of studies demonstrated statistically significant effects associated with the advance directive intervention. The most successful interventions incorporated direct patient-healthcare professional interactions over multiple visits. Passive education of patients using written materials (without direct counseling) was a relatively ineffective method for increasing advance directive completion rates in the primary care setting.
Authors: Jane R Schubart; Benjamin H Levi; Fabian Camacho; Megan Whitehead; Elana Farace; Michael J Green Journal: J Palliat Med Date: 2012-04-18 Impact factor: 2.947
Authors: Hillary D Lum; Rebecca L Sudore; Daniel D Matlock; Elizabeth Juarez-Colunga; Jacqueline Jones; Molly Nowels; Robert S Schwartz; Jean S Kutner; Cari R Levy Journal: J Am Board Fam Med Date: 2017 Jul-Aug Impact factor: 2.657
Authors: Adam D Schickedanz; Dean Schillinger; C Seth Landefeld; Sara J Knight; Brie A Williams; Rebecca L Sudore Journal: J Am Geriatr Soc Date: 2009-01 Impact factor: 5.562
Authors: Rebecca L Sudore; Daren K Heyland; Hillary D Lum; Judith A C Rietjens; Ida J Korfage; Christine S Ritchie; Laura C Hanson; Diane E Meier; Steven Z Pantilat; Karl Lorenz; Michelle Howard; Michael J Green; Jessica E Simon; Mariko A Feuz; John J You Journal: J Pain Symptom Manage Date: 2017-09-01 Impact factor: 3.612
Authors: Jennifer Hagerty Lingler; Karen B Hirschman; Linda Garand; Mary Amanda Dew; James T Becker; Richard Schulz; Steven T Dekosky Journal: Am J Geriatr Psychiatry Date: 2008-08 Impact factor: 4.105