Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Randomized Controlled Trial
. 2012 May;60(5):946-50.
doi: 10.1111/j.1532-5415.2012.03917.x. Epub 2012 Mar 28.

Effect of a disease-specific advance care planning intervention on end-of-life care

Affiliations
Randomized Controlled Trial

Effect of a disease-specific advance care planning intervention on end-of-life care

Karin T Kirchhoff et al. J Am Geriatr Soc. 2012 May.

Abstract

Objectives: To compare patient preferences for end-of-life care with care received at the end of life.

Design: A randomized controlled trial was conducted with individuals with congestive heart failure or end-stage renal disease and their surrogates who were randomized to receive patient-centered advance care planning (PC-ACP) or usual care.

Setting: Two centers in Wisconsin with associated clinics and dialysis units.

Participants: Of the 313 individuals and their surrogates who completed entry data, 110 died.

Intervention: During PC-ACP, the trained facilitator assessed individual and surrogate understanding of and experiences with the illness, provided information about disease-specific treatment options and their benefits and burden, assisted in documentation of treatment preferences, and assisted the surrogates in understanding the patient's preferences and the surrogate's role.

Measurements: Preferences were documented and compared with care received at the end of life according to surrogate interviews or medical charts.

Results: Patients (74%) frequently continued to make their own decisions about care to the end. The experimental group had fewer (1/62) cases in which patients' wishes about cardiopulmonary resuscitation were not met than in the control group (6/48) but not significantly so. Significantly more experimental patients withdrew from dialysis than controls.

Conclusion: Patients and their surrogates were generally willing to discuss preferences with a trained facilitator. Most patients received the care they desired at end of life or altered their preferences to be in accord with the care they could receive. A larger sample with surrogate decision-makers is needed to detect significant differences.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Conflict of Interest

Dr. Brown has no conflicts of interest.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Patient outcomes compared to patient choices related to low chance of survival
Figure 2
Figure 2
Patient outcomes compared to patient choices related to Cardiopulmonary resuscitation

Comment in

  • Advance care planning intervention.
    Billings JA. Billings JA. J Am Geriatr Soc. 2013 Jan;61(1):172-3. doi: 10.1111/jgs.12055. J Am Geriatr Soc. 2013. PMID: 23311566 No abstract available.

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Detering KM, Hancock AD, Reade MC, et al. The impact of advance care planning on end of life care in elderly patients: randomised controlled trial. BMJ. 2010;340:c1345. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Cosgriff JA, Pisani M, Bradley EH, et al. The association between treatment preferences and trajectories of care at the end-of-life. J Gen Intern Med. 2007;22:1566–1571. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Fried TR, O’Leary JR. Using the experiences of bereaved caregivers to inform patient- and caregiver-centered advance care planning. J Gen Intern Med. 2008;23:1602–1607. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Danis M, Garrett J, Harris R, et al. Stability of choices about life-sustaining treatments. Ann Intern Med. 1994;120:567–573. - PubMed
    1. Lynn J, Arkes HR, Stevens M, et al. Rethinking fundamental assumptions: SUPPORT’s implications for future reform. Study to understand prognoses and preferences and risks of treatment. J Am Geriatr Soc. 2000;48:S214–221. - PubMed

Publication types