We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
To save content items to your account,
please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies.
If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account.
Find out more about saving content to .
To save content items to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org
is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings
on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part
of your Kindle email address below.
Find out more about saving to your Kindle.
Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations.
‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi.
‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.
Advance care planning (ACP) interventions are supposed to affect patients’ autonomy and family health-care outcomes positively. However, the clinical benefits of ACP actualization and associated contextual factors merit questioning. Therefore, this study explores the critical contextual and procedural factors related to ACP decision-making based on the actual situation of older patients with cancer encountering end-of-life care in Taiwan.
Methods
This retrospective qualitative secondary analysis used the Kipling method (5W1H) to explore further the critical contextual and procedural factors related to ACP decision-making processes. We applied thematic analysis and dual coding for 35 narratives, including 10 patients with cancer, 10 family caregivers, and 15 health-care staff, derived from a preliminary qualitative study regarding palliative care decision-making among patients with advanced cancer, their families, and health-care staff.
Results
We identified 6 domains detailing the contextual factors for ACP decision-making: (1) WHO (decision makers); (2) WHAT (discussion content); (3) WHEN (care plan for which disease stage); (4) WHERE (patient’s situational location); (5) WHY (reasons underpinning the decisions); and (6) HOW (the way to form the decisions).
Significance of results
Using the Kipling method to elaborate the contextual factors for ACP decision-making among older patients with cancer strengthens the understanding of complicated end-of-life care decision-making procedure. This study also demonstrates the dynamic and cultural complexity and the various factors considered during end-of-life care and future ACP discussion.
Recommend this
Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this to your organisation's collection.