Enhancing Advance Care Planning in Primary Care: A Three-Year Implementation Study in Nebraska.

Jungyoon Kim, Valerie Pacino, Thuy Koll, Maria S Mickles, Jane F Potter, Jihyun Ma, Paul Estabrooks
{"title":"Enhancing Advance Care Planning in Primary Care: A Three-Year Implementation Study in Nebraska.","authors":"Jungyoon Kim, Valerie Pacino, Thuy Koll, Maria S Mickles, Jane F Potter, Jihyun Ma, Paul Estabrooks","doi":"10.1111/jgs.19478","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Despite the benefits of discussing patients' preferences on care decisions, the uptake of advance care planning (ACP) in the U.S. is low. This study aimed to (1) identify barriers to ACP implementation, (2) implement two strategies (onsite ACP coordinator and Lightning Report facilitation-a rapid process improvement involving prompt feedback synthesis and timely action), and (3) track ACP outcomes (reach, implementation, and effectiveness).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This study took place at two primary care sites participating in the Nebraska Geriatric Workforce Enhancement Program from 2020 to 2023. We conducted a multi-stage evaluation mixed-methods study guided by the Practical, Robust Implementation and Sustainability Model (PRISM). Qualitative data from clinic staff interviews and focus groups were collected to identify implementation barriers, develop an optimal workflow, and educate providers and patients (implementation). Quantitative data from electronic medical records (EMR) were collected at baseline and every six months thereafter to assess ACP outcomes, including reach (patient-provider discussion of ACP) and effectiveness (ACP document completion). We mapped barriers to implementation strategies, mechanisms, and ACP outcomes based on PRISM domains.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>From 2019 to 2021, ACP outcomes remained consistent: Clinic A (reach: data not available; effectiveness: 20.5%-20.2%) and Clinic B (reach: 2.3%-2.6%; effectiveness: 1.8%-1.9%). After implementing the ACP coordinator and Lightning Report in 2022, moderate-to-high improvements were observed: Clinic A saw a 10-percentage point increase in reach (43.6%-53.6%) and a 2.5 increase in effectiveness (20.2%-22.8%). Clinic B experienced a significant 25.3-percentage point increase in reach (2.6%-27.9%) and a 16.5 increase in effectiveness (1.9%-18.4%). We also updated the clinic workflow to integrate the ACP initiative into standard practice (implementation).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The introduction of an ACP coordinator, along with the Lightning Report approach, may enhance ACP reach, effectiveness, and implementation in primary care settings for older patients.</p>","PeriodicalId":94112,"journal":{"name":"Journal of the American Geriatrics Society","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of the American Geriatrics Society","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/jgs.19478","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Despite the benefits of discussing patients' preferences on care decisions, the uptake of advance care planning (ACP) in the U.S. is low. This study aimed to (1) identify barriers to ACP implementation, (2) implement two strategies (onsite ACP coordinator and Lightning Report facilitation-a rapid process improvement involving prompt feedback synthesis and timely action), and (3) track ACP outcomes (reach, implementation, and effectiveness).

Methods: This study took place at two primary care sites participating in the Nebraska Geriatric Workforce Enhancement Program from 2020 to 2023. We conducted a multi-stage evaluation mixed-methods study guided by the Practical, Robust Implementation and Sustainability Model (PRISM). Qualitative data from clinic staff interviews and focus groups were collected to identify implementation barriers, develop an optimal workflow, and educate providers and patients (implementation). Quantitative data from electronic medical records (EMR) were collected at baseline and every six months thereafter to assess ACP outcomes, including reach (patient-provider discussion of ACP) and effectiveness (ACP document completion). We mapped barriers to implementation strategies, mechanisms, and ACP outcomes based on PRISM domains.

Results: From 2019 to 2021, ACP outcomes remained consistent: Clinic A (reach: data not available; effectiveness: 20.5%-20.2%) and Clinic B (reach: 2.3%-2.6%; effectiveness: 1.8%-1.9%). After implementing the ACP coordinator and Lightning Report in 2022, moderate-to-high improvements were observed: Clinic A saw a 10-percentage point increase in reach (43.6%-53.6%) and a 2.5 increase in effectiveness (20.2%-22.8%). Clinic B experienced a significant 25.3-percentage point increase in reach (2.6%-27.9%) and a 16.5 increase in effectiveness (1.9%-18.4%). We also updated the clinic workflow to integrate the ACP initiative into standard practice (implementation).

Conclusions: The introduction of an ACP coordinator, along with the Lightning Report approach, may enhance ACP reach, effectiveness, and implementation in primary care settings for older patients.

加强初级保健的预先护理计划:内布拉斯加州一项为期三年的实施研究。
背景:尽管讨论患者对护理决策的偏好有好处,但在美国,提前护理计划(ACP)的使用率很低。本研究旨在(1)确定实施ACP的障碍,(2)实施两种策略(现场ACP协调员和闪电报告促进——一种涉及及时反馈综合和及时行动的快速流程改进),以及(3)跟踪ACP结果(覆盖范围、实施和有效性)。方法:本研究于2020年至2023年在参与内布拉斯加州老年劳动力增强计划的两个初级保健站点进行。我们在实用、稳健实施和可持续性模型(PRISM)的指导下进行了一项多阶段评估混合方法研究。从诊所工作人员访谈和焦点小组收集定性数据,以确定实施障碍,制定最佳工作流程,并教育提供者和患者(实施)。在基线时收集电子病历(EMR)的定量数据,此后每六个月收集一次,以评估ACP结果,包括覆盖范围(患者-提供者对ACP的讨论)和有效性(ACP文件完成情况)。我们基于PRISM域绘制了实施策略、机制和ACP结果的障碍。结果:从2019年到2021年,ACP结果保持一致:临床A(到达:无数据;有效率:20.5%-20.2%)和B诊所(达标率:2.3%-2.6%;效率:1.8% - -1.9%)。在2022年实施ACP协调器和闪电报告后,观察到中度到高度的改善:A诊所的覆盖率提高了10个百分点(43.6%-53.6%),有效性提高了2.5个百分点(20.2%-22.8%)。B诊所的覆盖率显著提高了25.3个百分点(2.6%-27.9%),有效性显著提高了16.5个百分点(1.9%-18.4%)。我们还更新了临床工作流程,将ACP计划整合到标准实践(实施)中。结论:ACP协调员的引入,以及闪电报告方法,可以提高ACP在老年患者初级保健机构的覆盖范围、有效性和实施。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊介绍:
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信