Randomized trial of a hospice video decision aid for patients with advanced cancer and their caregivers

Abstract only 11513 Background: Although hospice provides high-quality end-of-life (EOL) care for patients with advanced cancer and their family caregivers, the service remains underutilized in part due to lack of adequate information provided to patients and families about hospice care. Methods: We...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published inJournal of clinical oncology Vol. 37; no. 15_suppl; p. 11513
Main Authors El-Jawahri, Areej, Vanbenschoten, Olivia, Fenech, Alyssa L., Jankowski, Amanda L., Markovitz, Netana, Traeger, Lara, Greer, Joseph, Volandes, Angelo E., Temel, Jennifer S.
Format Journal Article
LanguageEnglish
Published 20.05.2019
Online AccessGet full text

Cover

Loading…
More Information
Summary:Abstract only 11513 Background: Although hospice provides high-quality end-of-life (EOL) care for patients with advanced cancer and their family caregivers, the service remains underutilized in part due to lack of adequate information provided to patients and families about hospice care. Methods: We conducted a single-site randomized clinical trial of a hospice video decision aid versus a verbal description in 150 hospitalized patients with advanced cancer and their caregivers. Patients without an available caregiver were still eligible to participate. Intervention participants (75 patients; 18 caregivers) received a verbal description about hospice plus a six-minute video depicting hospice care. Control participants (75 patients; 26 caregivers) received only the verbal description. The primary endpoint was patient preference for hospice care immediately after the intervention, adjusting for baseline preferences. Secondary outcomes included patient and caregiver knowledge and perceptions of hospice (Hospice Perception and Knowledge Questionnaire). Results: Between 2/2017 and 1/2019, we enrolled 55.7% (150/269) of potentially eligible patients and 44 caregivers. Post-intervention, patients assigned to the video group were more likely to prefer hospice care at the EOL (86.7% vs. 82.7%, OR = 2.85, P = 0.08), but this was not statistically significant. Patients in the video group reported greater knowledge about hospice (B = 0.50, P = 0.024) and were less likely to endorse that hospice care is only about death (6.7% vs. 21.6%, OR = 0.28, P = 0.035). Post-intervention, caregivers assigned to the video were more likely to prefer hospice care for their loved ones (94.4% vs. 65.4%, P = 0.031), reported greater knowledge about hospice (B = 1.94, P < 0.001), and were less likely to endorse that hospice care is only about death (0.0% vs. 23.1%, P = 0.066). Conclusions: Patients with advanced cancer and their caregivers who viewed a hospice video decision support tool were more informed about hospice care and reported more favorable perceptions of hospice. Future work should examine the impact of the video on hospice utilization and length-of-stay among patients with advanced cancer. Clinical trial information: NCT03040102.
ISSN:0732-183X
1527-7755
DOI:10.1200/JCO.2019.37.15_suppl.11513