Seth F Einterz1, Robin Gilliam2, Feng Chang Lin3, J Marvin McBride4, Laura C Hanson5. 1. Cecil G. Sheps Center for Health Services Research, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, NC; Georgetown University School of Medicine, Washington, DC. 2. Cecil G. Sheps Center for Health Services Research, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, NC. 3. Department of Biostatistics, School of Public Health, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, NC. 4. Division of Geriatric Medicine and Center for Aging and Health, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, NC. 5. Cecil G. Sheps Center for Health Services Research, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, NC; Division of Geriatric Medicine and Center for Aging and Health, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, NC; Palliative Care Program, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, NC. Electronic address: lhanson@med.unc.edu.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: Decision aids are effective to improve decision-making, yet they are rarely tested in nursing homes (NHs). Study objectives were to (1) examine the feasibility of a goals of care (GOC) decision aid for surrogate decision-makers (SDMs) of persons with dementia; and (2) to test its effect on quality of communication and decision-making. DESIGN: Pre-post intervention to test a GOC decision aid intervention for SDMs for persons with dementia in NHs. Investigators collected data from reviews of resident health records and interviews with SDMs at baseline and 3-month follow-up. SETTING: Two NHs in North Carolina. PARTICIPANTS: Eighteen residents who were over 65 years of age, had moderate to severe dementia on the global deterioration scale (5, 6, or 7), and an English-speaking surrogate decision-maker. INTERVENTION: (1) GOC decision aid video viewed by the SDM and (2) a structured care plan meeting between the SDM and interdisciplinary NH team. MEASUREMENTS: Surrogate knowledge, quality of communication with health care providers, surrogate-provider concordance on goals of care, and palliative care domains addressed in the care plan. RESULTS: Eighty-nine percent of the SDMs thought the decision aid was relevant to their needs. After viewing the video decision aid, SDMs increased the number of correct responses on knowledge-based questions (12.5 vs 14.2; P < .001). At 3 months, they reported improved quality of communication scores (6.1 vs 6.8; P = .01) and improved concordance on primary goal of care with NH team (50% vs 78%; P = .003). The number of palliative care domains addressed in the care plan increased (1.8 vs 4.3; P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: The decision-support intervention piloted in this study was feasible and relevant for surrogate decision-makers of persons with advanced dementia in NHs, and it improved quality of communication between SDM and NH providers. A larger randomized clinical trial is underway to provide further evidence of the effects of this decision aid intervention.
OBJECTIVES: Decision aids are effective to improve decision-making, yet they are rarely tested in nursing homes (NHs). Study objectives were to (1) examine the feasibility of a goals of care (GOC) decision aid for surrogate decision-makers (SDMs) of persons with dementia; and (2) to test its effect on quality of communication and decision-making. DESIGN: Pre-post intervention to test a GOC decision aid intervention for SDMs for persons with dementia in NHs. Investigators collected data from reviews of resident health records and interviews with SDMs at baseline and 3-month follow-up. SETTING: Two NHs in North Carolina. PARTICIPANTS: Eighteen residents who were over 65 years of age, had moderate to severe dementia on the global deterioration scale (5, 6, or 7), and an English-speaking surrogate decision-maker. INTERVENTION: (1) GOC decision aid video viewed by the SDM and (2) a structured care plan meeting between the SDM and interdisciplinary NH team. MEASUREMENTS: Surrogate knowledge, quality of communication with health care providers, surrogate-provider concordance on goals of care, and palliative care domains addressed in the care plan. RESULTS: Eighty-nine percent of the SDMs thought the decision aid was relevant to their needs. After viewing the video decision aid, SDMs increased the number of correct responses on knowledge-based questions (12.5 vs 14.2; P < .001). At 3 months, they reported improved quality of communication scores (6.1 vs 6.8; P = .01) and improved concordance on primary goal of care with NH team (50% vs 78%; P = .003). The number of palliative care domains addressed in the care plan increased (1.8 vs 4.3; P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: The decision-support intervention piloted in this study was feasible and relevant for surrogate decision-makers of persons with advanced dementia in NHs, and it improved quality of communication between SDM and NH providers. A larger randomized clinical trial is underway to provide further evidence of the effects of this decision aid intervention.
Authors: Angelo E Volandes; Gary H Brandeis; Aretha Delight Davis; Michael K Paasche-Orlow; Muriel R Gillick; Yuchiao Chang; Elizabeth S Walker-Corkery; Eileen Mann; Susan L Mitchell Journal: J Palliat Med Date: 2012-05-04 Impact factor: 2.947
Authors: Dawn Stacey; Carol L Bennett; Michael J Barry; Nananda F Col; Karen B Eden; Margaret Holmes-Rovner; Hilary Llewellyn-Thomas; Anne Lyddiatt; France Légaré; Richard Thomson Journal: Cochrane Database Syst Rev Date: 2011-10-05
Authors: Jane C Weeks; Paul J Catalano; Angel Cronin; Matthew D Finkelman; Jennifer W Mack; Nancy L Keating; Deborah Schrag Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2012-10-25 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Susan L Mitchell; Joan M Teno; Dan K Kiely; Michele L Shaffer; Richard N Jones; Holly G Prigerson; Ladislav Volicer; Jane L Givens; Mary Beth Hamel Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2009-10-15 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Laura C Hanson; Sheryl Zimmerman; Mi-Kyung Song; Feng-Chang Lin; Cherie Rosemond; Timothy S Carey; Susan L Mitchell Journal: JAMA Intern Med Date: 2017-01-01 Impact factor: 21.873
Authors: Andrea J Loizeau; Nathan Theill; Simon M Cohen; Stefanie Eicher; Susan L Mitchell; Silvio Meier; Michelle McDowell; Mike Martin; Florian Riese Journal: Age Ageing Date: 2019-01-01 Impact factor: 10.668
Authors: Joshua D Niznik; Jacob N Hunnicutt; Xinhua Zhao; Maria K Mor; Florentina Sileanu; Sherrie L Aspinall; Sydney P Springer; Mary J Ersek; Walid F Gellad; Loren J Schleiden; Joseph T Hanlon; Joshua M Thorpe; Carolyn T Thorpe Journal: J Am Geriatr Soc Date: 2020-02-17 Impact factor: 5.562
Authors: Laura C Hanson; Seth F Einterz; Robin Gilliam; Feng Chang Lin; J Marvin McBride Journal: J Am Med Dir Assoc Date: 2014-04-13 Impact factor: 4.669
Authors: Krista L Harrison; Theresa A Allison; Sarah B Garrett; Nicole Thompson; Rebecca L Sudore; Christine S Ritchie Journal: J Palliat Med Date: 2020-03-04 Impact factor: 2.947