"I'd rather wait and see what's around the corner": A multi-perspective qualitative study of treatment escalation planning in frailty

PLoS One. 2023 Sep 21;18(9):e0291984. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0291984. eCollection 2023.

Abstract

Introduction: People living with frailty risk adverse outcomes following even minor illnesses. Admission to hospital or the intensive care unit is associated with potentially burdensome interventions and poor outcomes. Decision-making during an emergency is fraught with complexity and potential for conflict between patients, carers and clinicians. Advance care planning is a process of shared decision-making which aims to ensure patients are treated in line with their wishes. However, planning for future care is challenging and those living with frailty are rarely given the opportunity to discuss their preferences. The aim of the ProsPECT (Prospective Planning for Escalation of Care and Treatment) study was to explore perspectives on planning for treatment escalation in the context of frailty. We spoke to people living with frailty, their carers and clinicians across primary and secondary care.

Methods: In-depth online or telephone interviews and online focus groups. The topic guide explored frailty, acute decision-making and planning for the future. Data were thematically analysed using the Framework Method. Preliminary findings were presented to a sample of study participants for feedback in two online workshops.

Results: We spoke to 44 participants (9 patients, 11 carers and 24 clinicians). Four main themes were identified: frailty is absent from treatment escalation discussions, planning for an uncertain future, escalation in an acute crisis is 'the path of least resistance', and approaches to facilitating treatment escalation planning in frailty.

Conclusion: Barriers to treatment escalation planning include a lack of shared understanding of frailty and uncertainty about the future. Emergency decision-making is focussed on survival or risk aversion and patient preferences are rarely considered. To improve planning discussions, we recommend frailty training for non-specialist clinicians, multi-disciplinary support, collaborative working between patients, carers and clinicians as well as broader public engagement.

Publication types

  • Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't

MeSH terms

  • Advance Care Planning*
  • Focus Groups
  • Frailty*
  • Humans
  • Prospective Studies
  • Qualitative Research

Grants and funding

This project was funded by two grants, HW received funding from the NIHR Imperial Biomedical Research Centre (NIHR203323) https://imperialbrc.nihr.ac.uk/. SJB received funding from the Imperial College Healthcare Trust Research Capability Fund (WSAA_P83429) https://www.imperial.nhs.uk/. The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript. HW is an NIHR Senior Investigator and acknowledges support from the NIHR ARC Northwest London and the NIHR School of Public Health Research. BP receives general support from the UKRI CDT in AI for Healthcare (EP/S023283/1) http://ai4health.io.