Table 5 Results feasibility assessment
Pulmonology department | Geriatrics department | |
|---|---|---|
Acceptability of the intervention | ||
1. Are treating physicians able to select frail patients by using the SQ? | 759 visits from 755 individual patients were screened in 55 days. In 52 of the 755 (6.9%) patients the pulmonologist answered the SQ with “no.” One patient was included after a resident answered the SQ with “no” | 65 visits from 54 individual patients were screened in 20 days. In 34 of the 54 (63.0%) patients the geriatrician answered the SQ with “no.” One patient was included despite the answer to the SQ being “yes.” |
All physicians experienced answering the SQ as positive | ||
2. Are treating physicians willing to inform and invite patients to the ACP intervention? | 36/52 (69.2%) of the patients were not informed | 10/34 (29.4%) of the patients were not informed |
3. Are patients willing to participate in the ACP intervention? | 11/17 (64.7%) of the invited patients wanted to participate | 13/25 (52.0%) of the invited patients wanted to participate |
4. How is the preparation of the ACP intervention evaluated by patients? | The information folder is perceived as positive by 11/18 (61.1%) of the patients and neutral by 4/18 (22.2%) of the patients. Three patients answered negatively, one did not receive the preparation, one explained it was not very useful and one stated that it contained too much information The preparatory questionnaire is perceived as positive by 14/19 (73.7%) of the patients and neutral by 3/19 (15.8%) of the patients. Two patients answered negatively, one did not receive the preparation and one explained that the questions were hard to answer | |
5. Is the construction of the ACP intervention feasible? | The physician was able to join the ACP conversation in 18/20 (90.0%) of the conversations. 18/19 (94.7%) of the patients agreed that the benefits of the ACP conversation outweighed the potential burdens compared to 12/20 (60.0%) of the nurses and 11/16 (68.8%) of the physicians | |
6. Is documentation of the ACP conversation feasible? | In all cases, a reference was made to the more extensive letter in which the conversation was documented. 13/16 (81.3%) of the nurses experienced documentation as positive and 3/16 (18.8%) as neutral. 10/11 (90.9%) of physicians experienced documentation as positive, one as neutral. There were no negative responses | |
Acceptability of the evaluation of the intervention | ||
7. Is the evaluation method of the ACP intervention feasible? | The response rate was 19/20 (95.0%) for patients, 20/20 (100%) for nurses and 16/18 (88.9%) for physicians | |