Dataset Information

Gynecologic oncology patient perspectives and knowledge on advance care planning: A quality improvement intervention.

ABSTRACT:

Objectives

Assess and improve advance care planning (ACP) awareness and uptake among gynecologic oncology patients.

Methods

Using a quality improvement Plan-Do-Check-Act framework, we completed a single institution needs assessment and intervention. The needs assessment was a 26-question survey assessing baseline ACP knowledge and preferences of gynecologic oncology patients. We used this survey to implement an outpatient intervention in which patients were offered ACP resources (pamphlet, discussion with their gynecologic oncologist, and/or social work referral). We conducted a post-intervention survey among patients who had and had not received ACP resource(s) to assess whether our intervention increased ACP knowledge, discussions, or uptake.

Results

Among 106 patients surveyed in the needs assessment, 33 % had ACP documents, 26 % had discussed ACP with a physician, and 82 % thought discussing ACP was important. The majority preferred these conversations in the outpatient setting (52 %) with their gynecologic oncologist (80 %) instead of nurses or trainees. In the intervention, 526 patients were offered ACP resources. Compared to women who did not receive resources (n = 324), patients who received ACP resource(s) (n = 202) were more likely to have ACP discussions with their gynecologic oncologist (38 % vs 68 %, P = 0.001) and had greater proficiency regarding how to create ACP documents (median score 5/10 vs 8/10, P = 0.048), although they were no more likely to have ACP documented in their electronic medical record (27 % vs 9 %, p = 0.08).

Conclusions

ACP uptake among gynecologic oncology patients is low, but ACP discussions with an oncologist during outpatient visits are important to patients and improve their knowledge regarding completing ACP documents.

SUBMITTER: Huepenbecker SP

PROVIDER: S-EPMC9399146 | biostudies-literature | 2022 Oct

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Gynecologic oncology patient perspectives and knowledge on advance care planning: A quality improvement intervention.

Huepenbecker Sarah P SP Lewis Sophia S Valentine Mark C MC Palisoul Marguerite L ML Thaker Premal H PH Hagemann Andrea R AR McCourt Carolyn K CK Fuh Katherine C KC Powell Matthew A MA Mutch David G DG Kuroki Lindsay M LM

Gynecologic oncology reports 20220805

<h4>Objectives</h4>Assess and improve advance care planning (ACP) awareness and uptake among gynecologic oncology patients.<h4>Methods</h4>Using a quality improvement Plan-Do-Check-Act framework, we completed a single institution needs assessment and intervention. The needs assessment was a 26-question survey assessing baseline ACP knowledge and preferences of gynecologic oncology patients. We used this survey to implement an outpatient intervention in which patients were offered ACP resources ( ...[more]

PMID: 36032812

Similar Datasets

Project description:ImportanceThe Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) implemented advance care planning (ACP) billing codes in 2016 to encourage practitioners to conduct and document ACP conversations, and included ACP as a quality metric in the CMS Bundled Payments for Care Improvement Initiative in 2018. Use of this billing code in the inpatient setting has not been studied.ObjectiveTo determine whether a quality improvement intervention to increase inpatient ACP is effective in increasing ACP billing rates or changing hospital treatment plans or patient outcomes.Design, settings, and participantsThis nationwide cohort study and difference-in-differences analyses compared changes in ACP billing, treatment, and outcomes in Medicare fee-for-service beneficiaries aged 65 years and older who were hospitalized and cared for by 3 different groups: practitioners employed by a national acute care staffing organization who underwent an ACP quality improvement intervention, nonintervention practitioners at the same hospital, and control group practitioners from other hospitals. Using data from the Master Beneficiary Summary File, acute care hospital stays for nonsurgical conditions were linked to Medicare enrollment, claims, and vital status data from 1-year preadmission to 1-year postadmission from 2015 to 2019. The ACP billing rates for each group were assessed for associations with 6 inpatient treatments and 4 outcomes. Data analyses were performed from January 2022 to December 2024.Main outcomes and measuresBilled ACP conversations, receipt of intensive care and life support (intensive care unit admission, gastrostomy tube placement, mechanical ventilation, tracheostomy), treatment limitations (newly initiated do-not-resuscitate orders) and outcomes (discharge to hospice, inpatient death, 30-day postadmission death, and 1-year postadmission death).ResultsThe total study sample included 109 intervention hospitals, 1691 control hospitals, nearly 12 million Medicare fee-for-service beneficiaries aged 65 years and older, and 738 309 practitioners associated with admissions from 2016 to 2018. ACP billing rates increased more for the intervention (1.3% in preintervention to 14.0% in postintervention; P < .001) than for the nonintervention (same hospitals) and control groups (odds ratio [OR], 2.6; 95% CI, 1.7-4.1 intervention vs control). Increased ACP billing rates were significantly associated with decreased rates of inpatient death in the intervention group (OR, 0.95; 95% CI, 0.90-1.00) compared to the nonintervention (OR, 1.10; 95% CI, 1.04-1.17) and control groups (reference). All other associations were nonsignificant.Conclusions and relevanceThis nationwide cohort study suggests that while the ACP quality initiative increased ACP billing, changes in clinical outcomes were inconsistent with the hypotheses. Further study is needed to address questions regarding confounding by unobserved measures of care quality.

Project description:BackgroundThe Renal Physicians Association's clinical practice guideline recommends that physicians address advance care planning with dialysis patients. However, data are lacking about how best to implement this recommendation.Study designQuality improvement project.Settings & participantsNephrologists caring for patients treated with maintenance hemodialysis at 2 dialysis facilities identified patients who might benefit most from advance care planning using the "surprise" question ("Would I be surprised if this patient died in the next year?").Quality improvement planPatients identified with a "no" response to the surprise question were invited to participate in nephrologist-facilitated advance care planning, including completion of a Medical Orders for Life-Sustaining Treatment (MOLST) form.OutcomesChange in MOLST completion rate and identification of preferences for limits on life-sustaining treatment.MeasurementsPre- and postintervention code status, MOLST completion rate, and vital status at 1 year.ResultsNephrologists answered "no" to the surprise question for 50 of 201 (25%) hemodialysis patients. Of these, 41 (82%) patients had a full-code status and 9 (18%) had a do-not-resuscitate (DNR) status. Encounters lasted 15 to 60 minutes. Following the encounter, 21 (42%) patients expressed preference for a DNR status and 29 (58%) maintained full-code status (P=0.001). The MOLST completion rate increased from 10% to 90%. One-year survival for patients whose nephrologists answered "no" to the surprise question was 58% compared to 92% for those with a "yes" answer (P<0.001).LimitationsSample size and possible nonrepresentative dialysis population.ConclusionsNephrologist-facilitated advance care planning targeting hemodialysis patients with limited life expectancy led to significant changes in documented patient preferences for cardiopulmonary resuscitation and limits on life-sustaining treatment. These changes demonstrate the benefit of advance care planning with dialysis patients and likely reflect better understanding of end-of-life treatment options.

Project description:BackgroundSocial determinants of health are known to contribute to disparities in health outcomes. Routine screening for basic social needs is not a part of standard care; however, the association of those needs with increased healthcare utilization and poor compliance with guideline-directed care is well established.ObjectiveIn this study, we aimed to assess the prevalence of basic social resource needs identified through a quality improvement initiative in a gynecologic oncology outpatient clinic. In addition, we aimed to identify clinical and demographic factors associated with having basic social resource needs.Study designWe performed a prospective cohort study of women presenting to a gynecologic oncology clinic at an urban academic institution who were screened for basic social resource needs as part of a quality improvement initiative from July 2017 to May 2018. The following 8 domains of resource needs were assessed: food insecurity, housing insecurity, utility needs, financial strain, transportation, childcare, household items, and difficulty reading hospital materials. Women with needs were referred to resources to address those needs. Demographic and clinical information were collected for each patient. The prevalence of needs and successful follow-up interventions were calculated. Patient factors independently associated with having at least 1 basic social resource need were identified using multivariable Poisson regression.ResultsA total of 752 women were screened in the study period, of whom 274 (36%) reported 1 or more basic social resource need, with a median of 1 (range, 1-7) need. Financial strain was the most commonly reported need (171 of 752, 23%), followed by transportation (119 of 752, 16%), difficulty reading hospital materials (54 of 752, 7%), housing insecurity (31 of 752, 4%), food insecurity (28 of 752, 4%), household items (22 of 752, 3%), childcare (15 of 752, 2%), and utility needs (13 of 752, 2%). On multivariable analysis, independent factors associated with having at least 1 basic social resource need were being single, divorced or widowed, nonwhite race, current smoker, nonprivate insurance, and a history of anxiety or depression. A total of 36 of 274 (13%) women who screened positive requested assistance and were referred to resources to address those needs. Of the 36 women, 25 (69%) successfully accessed a resource or felt equipped to address their needs, 9 (25%) could not be reached despite repeated attempts, and 2 (6%) declined assistance.ConclusionBasic social resource needs are prevalent in women presenting to an urban academic gynecologic oncology clinic and can be identified and addressed through routine screening. To help mitigate ongoing disparities in this population, screening for and addressing basic social resource needs should be incorporated into routine comprehensive care in gynecologic oncology clinics.

Dataset Information

Gynecologic oncology patient perspectives and knowledge on advance care planning: A quality improvement intervention.

Objectives

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Publications

Gynecologic oncology patient perspectives and knowledge on advance care planning: A quality improvement intervention.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets