Article Text

Download PDFPDF

OP13 Evaluating experiences of advance care planning facilitators: results from the international ACTION study
  1. CA Christensen1,2,
  2. M Adsersen1,2,
  3. AT Johnsen2,3,
  4. J Seymour4,
  5. F Bulli5,
  6. B Cerv6,
  7. L Deliens7,
  8. A Van der Heide8,
  9. I Korfage8,
  10. U Lunder6,
  11. K Pollock9,
  12. NJ Preston10,
  13. MN Verkissen7,
  14. M Zwakman11 and
  15. M Groenvold1,2
  1. 1University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark
  2. 2Bispebjerg and Frederiksberg Hospital, Copenhagen, Denmark
  3. 3University of Southern Denmark, Odense, Denmark
  4. 4University of Sheffield, Sheffield, UK
  5. 5ISPO, Florence, Italy
  6. 6University Clinic for Respiratory and Allergic Diseases Golnik, Golnik, Denmark
  7. 7Vrije Universiteit Brussel (VUB) and Ghent University, Brussels, Belgium
  8. 8Erasmus Medical Center, Rotterdam, Netherlands
  9. 9University of Nottingham, Nottingham, UK
  10. 10Lancaster University, Lancaster, UK
  11. 11University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, Netherlands


Background The ACTION trial evaluates the effect of the ACTION Respecting Choices (RC) advance care planning (ACP) intervention in patients with advanced cancer in six European countries. Systematic evaluations of such ACP conversations by facilitators are currently lacking. We developed and applied a 10-item facilitator-reported instrument.

Methods The instrument asked about the facilitator’s perception of the patient’s and the personal representative’s (PR) reactions to and engagement with the intervention and satisfaction with the intervention.

Results From March 2016 until February 2018, 272 conversations took place. Of these, 265 were evaluated. According to the facilitators, 32% of the patients did not appear to understand all questions asked (29% understood most, 3% understood about half), and 36% were not able to answer all questions (31% answered most, 4% answered about half, 1% answered fewer). Furthermore, 38% of the patients and 27% of the PRs did not appear to perceive all questions as OK (patients: 33% perceived most as OK, 3% about half, 2% fewer; PR: 24% most, 3% about half). Facilitator perception of patient satisfaction, PR satisfaction and their own satisfaction with ACP conversations ranged 40–54% for ‘very much’, 41–49% for ‘quite a bit’ and 5–11% for ‘a little’.

Conclusion To our knowledge, this is the first clinical trial to systematically evaluate the feasibility of ACP conversations from the facilitator perspective. Parts of the ACP intervention appeared to be challenging for patients and PRs. These results, together with qualitative data, will help understand the outcomes of the ACTION trial.

Funding EU’s FP7.

Statistics from

Request Permissions

If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.