The long term impact of an end-of-life communication intervention among veterans with COPD.

Reinke LF, Feemster LC, McDowell J, Gunnink E, Tartaglione EV, Udris E, Curtis JR, Au DH. The long term impact of an end-of-life communication intervention among veterans with COPD. Heart & lung : the journal of critical care. 2017 Jan 1; 46(1):30-34.

Dimensions for VA is a web-based tool available to VA staff that enables detailed searches of published research and research projects.

If you have VA-Intranet access, click here for more information vaww.hsrd.research.va.gov/dimensions/

VA staff not currently on the VA network can access Dimensions by registering for an account using their VA email address.    Search Dimensions for VA for this citation
* Don't have VA-internal network access or a VA email address? Try searching the free-to-the-public version of Dimensions

Search for Abstract from PubMed

---

Abstract:

OBJECTIVE: To assess if an end-of-life communication intervention with patients with COPD led to higher long-term documentation of advance care planning discussions at the end-of-life. BACKGROUND: We previously demonstrated that providing clinicians a patient-specific feedback form about patients'' communication preferences improved the occurrence and quality of clinician communication about end-of-life care. METHODS: Among those individuals enrolled in the intervention study (2004-2007) who had died during the follow-up period (up to 2013), we assessed if patients in the intervention arm had more goals of care discussions and formal advance directives completed as compared to controls. We conducted logistic models accounting for provider level clustering, adjusting for age, FEV1, and race. RESULTS: Among the 376 patients in the study, 157 died (76 in the intervention arm, 81 in the control arm). Over an average duration of 3.6 years (from the time of the first study appointment to death), 115 (73%) patients engaged in 451 unique end-of-life care discussions. The intervention was not associated with a higher percentage of patients with documented end-of-life conversations (I:C 75% vs 72%, p  =  0.63) or completion of advance care directives (26% vs 29%, p  =  0.55). CONCLUSIONS: Despite initially improving the occurrence of end-of-life conversations, the intervention did not increase the documentation of subsequent conversations about end-of-life care, nor did it improve documentation of advance directives. Future research should focus on testing multi-faceted, longitudinal, system-level interventions to enhance conversations about goals of care that promote goal-concurrent care.