Original Article
Physician Advance Care Planning Experiences and Beliefs by General Specialty Status and Sex
Abstract
Objectives: Advance care planning (ACP) involvement could be substantially different by physician specialty or sex group, with implications for training and methods to increase ACP activities. The objective of this article is to compare primary care physicians (PCPs) and other specialty physicians and female compared with male physicians’ views and interactions surrounding ACP.Methods: This was a secondary analysis of an online anonymous survey distributed through a survey link to healthcare providers in hospital, ambulatory, and hospice settings in the greater Dayton, Ohio area in preparation for a community-wide advance care planning multitiered intervention. The measures included demographic data and questions regarding personal ACP decisions/experiences, opinions surrounding ACP in healthcare settings, and willingness to facilitate ACP with patients.
Results: There were 129 physician respondents, of which 39 (30.2%) were PCPs, and 33 (25.6%) were women. Most expressed interest in ACP, responding positively to a desire for more training, and approximately 25% were willing to be trained to teach others. The respondents by specialty group were similar in age and race, the presence or absence of religious affiliation, and stated frequency of ACP conversations. More than half (52.5%) reported having ACP conversations at least twice per month. The female physicians were younger and more likely to be in primary care. Female physicians also were more likely to discuss ACP with patients (P = 0.017), report formal training for ACP (P = 0.025), and be more willing to permit other healthcare provider types to be involved with ACP. PCPs reported time as a barrier more frequently than specialty physicians (P = 0.012). Other barriers to ACP were reported, including space, personal discomfort, and concerns about patient or family distress or disagreement.
Conclusions: Many physicians, regardless of specialty type or sex, are interested in undertaking more ACP conversations and being trained to do so. Overall, more female physicians than male physicians were involved and interested in various aspects of ACP, and they were more accepting of the involvement of nonphysician healthcare professionals in ACP. Multiple barriers for clinicians, patients, and families were identified that will need to be addressed by work settings or through education to increase ACP.
This content is limited to qualifying members.
Existing members, please login first
If you have an existing account please login now to access this article or view purchase options.
Purchase only this article ($25)
Create a free account, then purchase this article to download or access it online for 24 hours.
Purchase an SMJ online subscription ($75)
Create a free account, then purchase a subscription to get complete access to all articles for a full year.
Purchase a membership plan (fees vary)
Premium members can access all articles plus recieve many more benefits. View all membership plans and benefit packages.
References
1. Heyland DK, Barwich D, Pichora D, et al. Failure to engage hospitalized elderly patients and their families in advance care planning. JAMA Intern Med 2013;173:778-787.
2. Ankuda CK, Petterson SM, Wingrove P, et al. Regional variation in primary care involvement at the end of life. Ann Fam Med 2017;15:63-67.
3. Silveira MJ, Forman J. End-of-life care from the perspective of primary care providers. J Gen Intern Med 2012;27:1287-1293.
4. Periyakoil VS, Neri E, Kraemer H. No easy talk: a mixed methods study of doctor reported barriers to conducting effective end-of-life conversations with diverse patients. PLoS One 2015;10:e0122321.
5. Snyder S, Hazelett S, Allen K, et al. Physician knowledge, attitude and experience with advance care planning, palliative care, and hospice: results of a primary care survey. Am J Hosp Palliat Care 2012;30:419-424.
6. PerryUndem Research/Communication. Physicians’ views toward advance care planning and end-of-life care conversations. Finds from a national survey among physicians who regularly treat patients 65 and older. https://www.johnahartford.org/images/uploads/resources/ConversationStopper_Poll_Memo.pdf. Published April 2016. Accessed September 24, 2018.
7. Walczak A, Butow PN, Bu S, et al. A systematic review of evidence for end-of-life communication interventions: who do they target, how are they structured and do they work? Patient Educ Couns 2016;99:3-16.
8. Barnes S, Gardiner C, Gott M, et al. Enhancing patient-professional communication about end-of-life issues in life-limiting conditions: a critical review of the literature. J Pain Symptom Manage 2012;44:866-879.
9. Aleksova N, Demers C, Strachan PH, et al. Barriers to goals of care discussions with hospitalized patients with advanced heart failure: feasibility and performance of a novel questionnaire. ESC Heart Fail 2016;3:245-252.
10. Harris PA, Taylor R, Thielke R, et al. Research electronic data capture (REDCap)-a metadata-driven methodology and workflow process for providing translational research informatics support. J Biomed Inform 2009;42:377-381.
11. Silveira MJ, Kim SY, Langa KM. Advance directives and outcomes of surrogate decision making before death. N Engl J Med 2010;362:1211-1218.
12. Mebane EW, Oman RF, Kroonen LT, et al. The influence of physician race, age, and gender on physician attitudes toward advance care directives and preferences for end-of-life decision-making. J Am Geriatr Soc 1999;47:579-591.
13. Gallo JJ, Straton JB, Klag MJ, et al. Life-sustaining treatments: what do physicians want and do they express their wishes to others? J Am Geriatric Soc 2003;51:961-969.
14. Griffen S, Cubanski J, Neuman T, et al. Medicare and end-of-life care. JAMA 2016;316:1754.
15. Bowman MA, Katz A. Advance care planning for the medical office. J Med Pract Manag 2017;33:187-192.
