J E Simon1,2, S Ghosh3,4, D Heyland5,6, T Cooke7, S Davison8, J Holroyd-Leduc2, E Wasylenko1,9, J Howlett10, K Fassbender11,12. 1. Division of Palliative Medicine, Department of Oncology, University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta, Canada. 2. Department of Medicine, Department of Community Health Sciences, University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta, Canada. 3. Department of Medical Oncology, Department of Mathematical and Statistical Sciences, University of Alberta, Edmonton, Alberta, Canada. 4. Alberta Health Services-Cancer Control. 5. Clinical Evaluation Research Unit, Department of Medicine, Kingston General Hospital, Kingston, Ontario, Canada. 6. Department of Community Health and Epidemiology, Queen's University, Kingston, Ontario, Canada. 7. Health Quality Council of Alberta, Calgary, Alberta, Canada. 8. Division of Nephrology, Department of Medicine, University of Alberta, Edmonton, Alberta, Canada. 9. John Dossetor Health Ethics Centre, University of Alberta, Edmonton, Alberta, Canada. 10. Department of Cardiac Sciences, University of Calgary, and Libin Cardiovascular Institute, Calgary, Alberta, Canada. 11. Covenant Health Palliative Institute, Edmonton, Alberta, Canada. 12. Division of Palliative Care Medicine, Department of Oncology, University of Alberta, Edmonton, Alberta, Canada.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Advance care planning (ACP) encompasses both verbal and written communications expressing preferences for future health and personal care and helps prepare people for healthcare decision-making in times of medical crisis. Healthcare systems are increasingly promoting ACP as a way to inform medical decision-making, but it is not clear how public engagement in ACP activities is changing over time. METHODS: Raw data from 3 independently conducted public polls on ACP engagement, in the same Canadian province, were analysed to assess whether participation in ACP activities changed over 6 years. RESULTS: Statistically significant increases were observed between 2007 and 2013 in: recognising the definition of ACP (54.8% to 80.3%, OR 3.37 (95% CI 2.68 to 4.24)), discussions about healthcare preferences with family (48.4% to 59.8%, OR 1.41 (95% CI 1.17 to 1.69)) and with healthcare providers (9.1% to 17.4%, OR 1.98 (95% CI 1.51 to 2.59)), written ACP plans (21% to 34.6%, OR 1.77 (95% CI 1.45 to 2.17)) and legal documentation (23.4% to 42.7%, OR 2.13 (95% CI 1.75 to 2.59)). These remained significant after adjusting for age, education and self-rated health status. CONCLUSIONS: ACP engagement increased over time, although the overall frequency remains low in certain elements such as discussing ACP with healthcare providers. We discuss factors that may be responsible for the increase and provide suggestions for healthcare systems or other public bodies seeking to stimulate engagement in ACP. Published by the BMJ Publishing Group Limited. For permission to use (where not already granted under a licence) please go to http://www.bmj.com/company/products-services/rights-and-licensing/.
BACKGROUND: Advance care planning (ACP) encompasses both verbal and written communications expressing preferences for future health and personal care and helps prepare people for healthcare decision-making in times of medical crisis. Healthcare systems are increasingly promoting ACP as a way to inform medical decision-making, but it is not clear how public engagement in ACP activities is changing over time. METHODS: Raw data from 3 independently conducted public polls on ACP engagement, in the same Canadian province, were analysed to assess whether participation in ACP activities changed over 6 years. RESULTS: Statistically significant increases were observed between 2007 and 2013 in: recognising the definition of ACP (54.8% to 80.3%, OR 3.37 (95% CI 2.68 to 4.24)), discussions about healthcare preferences with family (48.4% to 59.8%, OR 1.41 (95% CI 1.17 to 1.69)) and with healthcare providers (9.1% to 17.4%, OR 1.98 (95% CI 1.51 to 2.59)), written ACP plans (21% to 34.6%, OR 1.77 (95% CI 1.45 to 2.17)) and legal documentation (23.4% to 42.7%, OR 2.13 (95% CI 1.75 to 2.59)). These remained significant after adjusting for age, education and self-rated health status. CONCLUSIONS: ACP engagement increased over time, although the overall frequency remains low in certain elements such as discussing ACP with healthcare providers. We discuss factors that may be responsible for the increase and provide suggestions for healthcare systems or other public bodies seeking to stimulate engagement in ACP. Published by the BMJ Publishing Group Limited. For permission to use (where not already granted under a licence) please go to http://www.bmj.com/company/products-services/rights-and-licensing/.