BACKGROUND: General practice is often recommended as an ideal setting to initiate advance care planning (ACP), but uptake of ACP in this setting is low. ACP-GP is a complex intervention to facilitate ACP for patients with chronic, life-limiting illness in Belgian general practice. It aims to increase patient ACP engagement and general practitioner (GP) ACP self-efficacy. In a cluster-randomized controlled trial, the intervention was not superior to control in increasing these outcomes. A parallel process evaluation aimed to enhance understanding of how the intervention was implemented, and which factors might have influenced trial results.
METHODS: We conducted a mixed-methods process evaluation following the Reach, Effectiveness, Adoption, Implementation, Maintenance (RE-AIM) framework. Data sources include recruitment and implementation monitoring, questionnaires for patients and GPs, and semi-structured (focus group) interviews with patients and GPs. Questionnaire data were analyzed descriptively. Qualitative data were first analyzed inductively; themes were then assigned deductively to RE-AIM dimensions.
RESULTS: Thirty-five GPs and 95 patients were recruited to the trial; GP reach was low. Sixteen GPs and 46 patients provided questionnaire data at 3 months post-baseline; qualitative data were transcribed for 14 GPs and 11 patients. Adoption of intervention components was moderate to good, with the exception of the documentation template for GPs. Interviews revealed varying patient attitudes towards ACP, but patients nonetheless emphasized that conversations made them feel reassured. GPs especially valued a positive framing of ACP. When adopted, the intervention was well-implemented and participant satisfaction was high. However, intention for maintenance was moderate, with GPs raising questions of how to sustainably implement ACP conversations in the future.
CONCLUSIONS: Implementing the complex ACP-GP intervention in general practice is feasible, and can be successful. However, the implementation process is challenging and the sustainability is suboptimal. Our findings will guide future research and recommendations for facilitating and implementing ACP in general practice.
BACKGROUND: ISRCTN12995230; prospectively registered on 19/06/2020.

UNASSIGNED: Patient satisfaction remains a key area of interest worldwide; utilizing a patient-centered communication approach, particularly with patients with chronic life-limiting illnesses may be one way to achieve this. However, there is a dearth of empirical information on the effect of patient-centered communication strategies in patients with chronic life-limiting illnesses in Kenya on patient satisfaction.
UNASSIGNED: The objective of this study was to assess the impact of patient-centered communication on patient satisfaction.
UNASSIGNED: We conducted our study at a tertiary teaching and referral hospital in Kenya. We utilized a quasi-experimental pre-test post-test study design and engaged 301 adult medical in-patients with chronic life limiting conditions. We randomized them to receive patient-centered communication, and evaluated the change in patient satisfaction scores using an adapted Medical Interview satisfaction Scale 21 (MISS 21).
UNASSIGNED: Two hundred and seventy-eight out of 301 recruited participants completed the study. The baseline characteristics of the participants randomized to the control and intervention arms were similar. Although both the control and intervention arms had a decline in the mean difference scores, the intervention arm recorded a larger decline, -15.04 (-20.6, -9.47) compared to -7.87 (-13.63, -2.12), with a statistically significant mean difference between the two groups at -7.16 (-9.67, -4.46). Participants in the intervention arm were less likely to: understand the cause of their illness (p < 0.001), understand aspects of their illness (p < 0.001), understand the management plan (p < 0.001), receive all the relevant information on their health (p < 0.001), and to receive adequate self-care information (p < 0.001). They were also less likely to acknowledge a good interpersonal relationship with the healthcare providers (p < 0.001), to feel comfortable discussing private issues (p < 0.004), and to feel that the consultation time was adequate (p < 0.001).
UNASSIGNED: Contrary to expectation, patient-centered communication did not result in improved patient satisfaction scores. Further studies can evaluate factors affecting and explaining this relationship and assess intermediate and long-term effects of provision of a patient-centered communication in diverse global contexts.