Boateng Kubi1, Alexandra C Istl2, Kimberley T Lee3,4, Alison Conca-Cheng5, Fabian M Johnston5. 1. Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD. 2. Department of Surgery, Western University, London, Ontario, Canada. 3. Bloomberg School of Public Health, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD. 4. Sidney Kimmel Comprehensive Cancer Center, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD. 5. Department of Surgery, Johns Hopkins Hospital, Baltimore, MD.
Abstract
PURPOSE: Opportunities for advance care planning (ACP) discussions continue to be missed despite the demonstrated benefit of such conversations. This is in part because of a poor understanding of patient preferences. We aimed to determine oncology patients' preferences surrounding ACP with a focus on the choice of which health care providers to have the conversation with and the timing of conversations. METHODS: A cross-sectional 19-question survey of surgical and medical oncology patients in a tertiary care hospital was conducted that assessed knowledge, experience, and preferences surrounding ACP. Quantitative variables were reported with descriptive statistics, and a coding structure was developed to analyze qualitative data. RESULTS: Two hundred patients were surveyed. Only 24% of patients reported previously having ACP discussions with their physicians despite 82.5% reporting a wish to do so. Patients felt that these discussions were a priority for them (to alleviate familial guilt, maintain control, and prevent others' values from guiding end-of-life care), but they reported that previous experiences with ACP had been neither comprehensive nor effective. Most patients (43.5%) preferred to have ACP discussions with their primary care providers (PCPs) compared with 7% preferring their surgeon and 5.5% preferring their oncologist. Trust and familiarity with PCPs arose as the dominant theme underlying this selection. Most patients (94%) preferred to have ACP discussions early, with 45% wishing such a discussion had been initiated before their cancer diagnosis. CONCLUSION: Patients with cancer prefer to have ACP discussions with their PCPs and prefer to do so early in their disease course.
PURPOSE: Opportunities for advance care planning (ACP) discussions continue to be missed despite the demonstrated benefit of such conversations. This is in part because of a poor understanding of patient preferences. We aimed to determine oncology patients' preferences surrounding ACP with a focus on the choice of which health care providers to have the conversation with and the timing of conversations. METHODS: A cross-sectional 19-question survey of surgical and medical oncology patients in a tertiary care hospital was conducted that assessed knowledge, experience, and preferences surrounding ACP. Quantitative variables were reported with descriptive statistics, and a coding structure was developed to analyze qualitative data. RESULTS: Two hundred patients were surveyed. Only 24% of patients reported previously having ACP discussions with their physicians despite 82.5% reporting a wish to do so. Patients felt that these discussions were a priority for them (to alleviate familial guilt, maintain control, and prevent others' values from guiding end-of-life care), but they reported that previous experiences with ACP had been neither comprehensive nor effective. Most patients (43.5%) preferred to have ACP discussions with their primary care providers (PCPs) compared with 7% preferring their surgeon and 5.5% preferring their oncologist. Trust and familiarity with PCPs arose as the dominant theme underlying this selection. Most patients (94%) preferred to have ACP discussions early, with 45% wishing such a discussion had been initiated before their cancer diagnosis. CONCLUSION:Patients with cancer prefer to have ACP discussions with their PCPs and prefer to do so early in their disease course.
Authors: Cheng-Pei Lin; Jen-Kuei Peng; Ping-Jen Chen; Hsien-Liang Huang; Su-Hsuan Hsu; Shao-Yi Cheng Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2020-10-29 Impact factor: 3.390
Authors: Willemijn Tros; Jenny T van der Steen; Janine Liefers; Reinier Akkermans; Henk Schers; Mattijs E Numans; Petra G van Peet; A Stef Groenewoud Journal: Palliat Med Date: 2021-12-30 Impact factor: 4.762
Authors: Sarah P Huepenbecker; Sophia Lewis; Mark C Valentine; Marguerite L Palisoul; Premal H Thaker; Andrea R Hagemann; Carolyn K McCourt; Katherine C Fuh; Matthew A Powell; David G Mutch; Lindsay M Kuroki Journal: Gynecol Oncol Rep Date: 2022-08-05
Authors: Sarah S Nouri; Deborah E Barnes; Ying Shi; Aiesha M Volow; Nikita Shirsat; Anne L Kinderman; Heather A Harris; Rebecca L Sudore Journal: Cancer Date: 2021-06-02 Impact factor: 6.921