Evaluation of a Novel Hospice-Specific Patient Decision Aid

Author:

Tate Channing E.12ORCID,Mami Gwendolyn34,McNulty Monica1,Rinehart Deborah J.25,Yasui Robin2,Rondinelli Nicole6,Treem Jonathan6,Fairclough Diane1,Matlock Daniel D.78

Affiliation:

1. Adult and Child Center for Outcomes Research and Delivery Science (ACCORDS), School of Medicine, University of Colorado, Aurora, CO, USA

2. Division of General Internal Medicine, University of Colorado School of Medicine, Aurora, CO, USA

3. President and CEO, Global Collaborations, LLC, Denver, CO, USA

4. Advisory Team Chair, Zion Senior Center, Denver, CO, USA

5. Center for Health Systems Research, Office of Research, Denver Health and Hospital Authority, Denver, CO, USA

6. Division of Palliative Care, University of Colorado School of Medicine, Aurora, CO, USA

7. Division of Geriatrics, University of Colorado School of Medicine, Aurora, CO, USA

8. VA Eastern Colorado Geriatric Research Education and Clinical Center, Aurora, CO, USA

Abstract

Background: We tested a novel hospice-specific patient decision aid to determine whether the decision aid could improve hospice knowledge, opinions of hospice, and decision self-efficacy in making decisions about hospice. Methods: Two patient-level randomized studies were conducted using two different cohorts. Recruitment was completed from March 2019 through May 2020. Cohort #1 was recruited from an academic hospital and a safety-net hospital and Cohort #2 was recruited from community members. Participants were randomized to review a hospice-specific patient decision aid. The primary outcomes were change in hospice knowledge, hospice beliefs and attitudes, and decision self-efficacy Wilcoxon signed rank tests were used to evaluate differences on the primary outcomes between baseline and 1-month. Participants: Participants were at least 65 years of age. A total of 266 participants enrolled (131 in Cohort #1 and 135 in Cohort #2). Participants were randomized to the intervention group (n = 156) or control group (n = 109). The sample was 74% (n = 197) female, 58% (n = 156) African American and mean age was 74.9. Results: Improvements in hospice knowledge between baseline and 1-month were observed in both the intervention and the control groups with no differences between groups (.43 vs .275 points, P = .823). There were no observed differences between groups on Hospice Beliefs and Attitudes scale (3.29 vs 3.08, P = .076). In contrast, Decision Self-Efficacy improved in both groups and the effect of the intervention was significant (8.04 vs 2.90, P = −.027). Conclusions: The intervention demonstrated significant improvements in decision self-efficacy but not in hospice knowledge or hospice beliefs and attitudes.

Funder

National Institute on Aging

Publisher

SAGE Publications

Subject

General Medicine

Reference46 articles.

1. Centers for Medicare Medicaid Services. National Health Expenditures 2011 Highlights. Baltimore, MD: Centers for Medicare Medicaid Services. www.cms.gov/Research-Statistics-Data-and-Systems/Statistics-Trendsand-Reports/NationalHealthExpendData/Downloads/highlights.pdf. Accessed.2013:6.

2. Effects of a Palliative Care Intervention on Clinical Outcomes in Patients With Advanced Cancer

3. Hospice care delivered at home, in nursing homes and in dedicated hospice facilities: A systematic review of quantitative and qualitative evidence

Cited by 1 articles. 订阅此论文施引文献 订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3