Home › Research › End-of-life care
A qualitative study: professionals' experiences of advance care planning in dementia and palliative care, 'a good idea in theory but ...'
Robinson L, Dickinson C, Bamford C, Clark A, Hughes J, Exley C.. Palliative medicine, 2012-11-21
Topic: Risk, prevention and care in population studies
Background Advance care planning comprises discussions about an individual's wishes for future care while they have capacity. Aim To explore professionals' experiences on the implementation of advance care planning in two areas of clinical care, dementia and palliative care. Design Qualitative study, focus groups and individual interviews. Setting North East of England. Sample Ninety-five participants from one Primary Care Trust, two acute National Health Service Hospital Trusts, one Ambulance Trust, one Local Authority and voluntary organisations and the legal sector. Results Fourteen focus groups and 18 interviews were held with 95 participants. While professionals agreed that advance care planning was a good idea in theory, implementation in practice presented them with significant challenges. The majority expressed uncertainty over the general value of advance care planning, whether current service provision could meet patient wishes, their individual roles and responsibilities and which aspects of advance care planning were legally binding; the array of different advance care planning forms and documentation available added to the confusion. In dementia care, the timing of when to initiate advance care planning discussions was an added challenge. Conclusions This study has identified the professional, organisational and legal factors that influence advance care planning implementation; professional training should target these specific areas. There is an urgent need for standardisation of advance care planning documentation. Greater clarity is also required on the roles and responsibilities of different professional groups. More complex aspects of advance care planning may be better carried out by those with specialist skills and experience than by generalists caring for a wide range of patient groups with different disease trajectories.
Cite this study APA, Vancouver, BibTeX · download .bib or .ris
APA 7th
Robinson, L., Dickinson, C., Bamford, C., Clark, A., Hughes, J., & Exley, C. (2013). A qualitative study: professionals' experiences of advance care planning in dementia and palliative care, 'a good idea in theory but ...'. Palliative medicine. https://doi.org/10.1177/0269216312465651
Vancouver
Robinson L, Dickinson C, Bamford C, Clark A, Hughes J, Exley C. A qualitative study: professionals' experiences of advance care planning in dementia and palliative care, 'a good idea in theory but ...'. Palliative medicine. 2013. doi:10.1177/0269216312465651. PMID: 23175508.
BibTeX
@article{robinson2013-23175508,
author = {Robinson, L. and Dickinson, C. and Bamford, C. and Clark, A. and Hughes, J. and Exley, C.},
title = {{A qualitative study: professionals' experiences of advance care planning in dementia and palliative care, 'a good idea in theory but ...'}},
journal = {Palliative medicine},
year = {2013},
doi = {10.1177/0269216312465651},
pmid = {23175508},
url = {https://doi.org/10.1177/0269216312465651}
}
Built from the record alzhub holds for this paper, not looked up. Volume, issue and page numbers are not held in the record. Check the citation against the original before you use it.
Key findings
- Results Fourteen focus groups and 18 interviews were held with 95 participants.
- While professionals agreed that advance care planning was a good idea in theory, implementation in practice presented them with significant challenges.
Study details
- Participants95
- Evidence strengthLow
How this study scored 43/100
Published in a peer-reviewed journal. Scored zero for study design, effect reported and randomised / blinded because the record does not state it. We have no data on journal's citation record, times cited, citations per year, impact for its field and year, cited by studies here, still being cited, senior author's track record, institution's track record and multi-centre collaboration, so those were left out: it earned 25 of the 58 points we could judge it on, which is 43 out of 100.
| Component | Points | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Journal tier | 7 / 10 | Tier 3 — peer-reviewed journal (Palliative medicine) |
| Journal's citation record | — / 4 | No journal record from OpenAlex — left out of this score |
| Study design | 0 / 12 | No study design recorded — scores zero, not guessed (not stated in the record — scored 0) |
| Strength of evidence | 1 / 5 | Rated “low” in our summary |
| Peer-review validation | 10 / 10 | Peer-reviewed. Published as an article in a named peer-reviewed journal. |
| How recent | 1 / 5 | 2013 — within 20 year(s) of the newest study here |
| Sample size | 1 / 4 | 95 participants |
| Effect reported | 0 / 3 | No effect size reported — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0) |
| Studied in people | 3 / 3 | Studied in people (participant count stated) |
| Randomised / blinded | 0 / 2 | No randomisation or blinding stated — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0) |
| Times cited | — / 7 | No citation count (not found in OpenAlex) — left out of this score |
| Citations per year | — / 5 | No citation count or no year — left out of this score |
| Impact for its field and year | — / 6 | No field-weighted citation impact (OpenAlex has none yet) — left out of this score |
| Cited by studies here | — / 6 | Not yet checked against this library's citation graph — left out of this score |
| Still being cited | — / 4 | No yearly citation counts — left out of this score |
| Senior author's track record | — / 4 | Senior author's record not available — left out of this score |
| Institution's track record | — / 3 | No institution listed in OpenAlex — left out of this score |
| Multi-centre collaboration | — / 3 | Institutions not listed — left out of this score |
| Indexed in PubMed | 2 / 2 | Indexed in PubMed (PMID 23175508) |
| Free to read | 0 / 2 | Behind a paywall — scores zero |
| Points | 25 / 58 | Scored on 11 of 20 parts. We have no data for the rest, so they are left out: 25 of the 58 points we could judge it on is 43 out of 100. |
| Total | 43 / 100 | — |
What each of these 20 components measures, and what this score is not →
Read the original
Free copy unknown: no free-copy check has an answer for this record yet. That does not mean it is paywalled.
Related studies in End-of-life care
Also tagged “care”
996 studies in the library carry the topic tag “care”; these are this study's neighbours in a fixed, alphabetical-by-hash tour of them, not the closest in content. All 996 tagged studies.