Practice Variability in the SHARING Choices Pragmatic Trial of Primary Care Advance Care Planning

IF 4.5 2区 医学 Q1 GERIATRICS & GERONTOLOGY
Journal of the American Geriatrics Society Pub Date : 2026-04-14 Epub Date: 2026-02-09 DOI:10.1111/jgs.70341
Sydney M. Dy, Danny Scerpella, Jennifer L. Wolff, Martha Abshire Saylor, Erin R. Giovannetti, Valecia Hanna, Jessica L. Colburn, David L. Roth
{"title":"Practice Variability in the SHARING Choices Pragmatic Trial of Primary Care Advance Care Planning","authors":"Sydney M. Dy,&nbsp;Danny Scerpella,&nbsp;Jennifer L. Wolff,&nbsp;Martha Abshire Saylor,&nbsp;Erin R. Giovannetti,&nbsp;Valecia Hanna,&nbsp;Jessica L. Colburn,&nbsp;David L. Roth","doi":"10.1111/jgs.70341","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Background</h3>\n \n <p>Barriers to advance care planning intervention implementation and impact on outcomes at the patient, clinician, and health system levels are well-documented. Understanding practice-level variation in implementation and outcomes could elucidate relevant contextual factors and potential strategies for improving future implementation. We therefore examined practice variation and associations between processes and outcomes in the pragmatic trial of SHARING Choices, a primary care advance care planning (ACP) and communication intervention for older adults.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Methods</h3>\n \n <p>We conducted an explanatory sequential mixed-methods analysis of quantitative variation among intervention practices in trial processes and outcomes, and qualitative interview analysis of ACP facilitators' perceptions of variation in implementation. We evaluated variation in key processes: (1) reach (phone contact between ACP facilitator and patient/family) and (2) uptake (facilitator-led ACP conversations) and outcomes: (1) new electronic health record (EHR)-documented advance directives (ADs) at 12 months and (2) receipt of potentially burdensome care within 6 months of death for Maryland residents with serious illness who died. We examined practice-level correlations among processes and outcomes.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Results</h3>\n \n <p>Variation among practices was substantial for key processes (ACP facilitator reach and uptake) and outcomes (new EHR AD documentation and potentially burdensome care at end of life; all <i>p</i> &lt; 0.01). Processes of reach and uptake were significantly correlated with the outcome of new EHR AD documentation but not with potentially burdensome care at end of life. ACP facilitators perceived variation in practice engagement with the intervention related to practice relationships and teams, relative priority of ACP, and resources such as space.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Conclusions</h3>\n \n <p>Practice variation in processes and mixed associations with outcomes highlight pragmatic trial implementation challenges and the impact and complexity of ACP. Future ACP trials should consider accounting for and evaluating practice variation in study design, implementation, and analysis.</p>\n </section>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":17240,"journal":{"name":"Journal of the American Geriatrics Society","volume":"74 4","pages":"1033-1040"},"PeriodicalIF":4.5000,"publicationDate":"2026-04-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of the American Geriatrics Society","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://agsjournals.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/jgs.70341","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2026/2/9 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"GERIATRICS & GERONTOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background

Barriers to advance care planning intervention implementation and impact on outcomes at the patient, clinician, and health system levels are well-documented. Understanding practice-level variation in implementation and outcomes could elucidate relevant contextual factors and potential strategies for improving future implementation. We therefore examined practice variation and associations between processes and outcomes in the pragmatic trial of SHARING Choices, a primary care advance care planning (ACP) and communication intervention for older adults.

Methods

We conducted an explanatory sequential mixed-methods analysis of quantitative variation among intervention practices in trial processes and outcomes, and qualitative interview analysis of ACP facilitators' perceptions of variation in implementation. We evaluated variation in key processes: (1) reach (phone contact between ACP facilitator and patient/family) and (2) uptake (facilitator-led ACP conversations) and outcomes: (1) new electronic health record (EHR)-documented advance directives (ADs) at 12 months and (2) receipt of potentially burdensome care within 6 months of death for Maryland residents with serious illness who died. We examined practice-level correlations among processes and outcomes.

Results

Variation among practices was substantial for key processes (ACP facilitator reach and uptake) and outcomes (new EHR AD documentation and potentially burdensome care at end of life; all p < 0.01). Processes of reach and uptake were significantly correlated with the outcome of new EHR AD documentation but not with potentially burdensome care at end of life. ACP facilitators perceived variation in practice engagement with the intervention related to practice relationships and teams, relative priority of ACP, and resources such as space.

Conclusions

Practice variation in processes and mixed associations with outcomes highlight pragmatic trial implementation challenges and the impact and complexity of ACP. Future ACP trials should consider accounting for and evaluating practice variation in study design, implementation, and analysis.

初级保健提前护理计划共享选择实用试验的实践可变性。
背景:在患者、临床医生和卫生系统层面,阻碍提前护理计划干预实施的障碍和对结果的影响是有据可查的。了解实践层面在实施和结果上的差异,可以阐明相关的背景因素和改善未来实施的潜在策略。因此,我们在老年人初级保健提前护理计划(ACP)和沟通干预的share Choices实用试验中检验了实践差异以及过程和结果之间的关联。方法:我们采用解释性顺序混合方法分析了不同干预实践在试验过程和结果中的定量差异,并对ACP促进者对实施差异的看法进行了定性访谈分析。我们评估了关键过程的变化:(1)接触(ACP调解员与患者/家属之间的电话联系)和(2)吸收(调解员主导的ACP对话)和结果:(1)12个月时新的电子健康记录(EHR)记录的预先指示(ADs)和(2)马里兰州患有严重疾病的死亡居民在死亡后6个月内接受可能负担沉重的护理。我们检查了实践层面的过程和结果之间的相关性。结果:实践之间的差异在关键过程(ACP促进器的覆盖和吸收)和结果(新的EHR AD文件和生命末期潜在的繁重护理)方面是实质性的;所有p结论:过程的实践差异和与结果的混合关联突出了务实的试验实施挑战以及ACP的影响和复杂性。未来的ACP试验应考虑在研究设计、实施和分析中考虑和评估实践差异。
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
CiteScore
10.00
自引率
6.30%
发文量
504
审稿时长
3-6 weeks
期刊介绍: Journal of the American Geriatrics Society (JAGS) is the go-to journal for clinical aging research. We provide a diverse, interprofessional community of healthcare professionals with the latest insights on geriatrics education, clinical practice, and public policy—all supporting the high-quality, person-centered care essential to our well-being as we age. Since the publication of our first edition in 1953, JAGS has remained one of the oldest and most impactful journals dedicated exclusively to gerontology and geriatrics.
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书