Effect of Behavior Change Techniques Targeting Clinicians to Improve Advance Care Planning in Heart Failure: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
Schichtel M., Wee B., Perera R., Onakpoya I., Albury C.
Abstract Background National and international guidelines recommend advance care planning (ACP) for patients with heart failure. But clinicians seem hesitant to engage with ACP. Purpose Our aim was to identify behavioral interventions with the greatest potential to engage clinicians with ACP in heart failure. Methods A systematic review and meta-analysis. We searched CINAHL, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Database of Systematic Reviews, Embase, ERIC, Ovid MEDLINE, Science Citation Index, and PsycINFO for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) from inception to August 2018. Three reviewers independently extracted data, assessed risk of bias (Cochrane risk of bias tool), the quality of evidence (Grading of Recommendation Assessment, Development, and Evaluation), and intervention synergy according to the behavior change wheel and behavior change techniques (BCTs). Odds ratios (ORs) were calculated for pooled effects. Results Of 14,483 articles screened, we assessed the full text of 131 studies. Thirteen RCTs including 3,709 participants met all of the inclusion criteria. The BCTs of prompts/cues (OR: 4.18; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 2.03–8.59), credible source (OR: 3.24; 95% CI: 1.44–7.28), goal setting (outcome; OR: 2.67; 95% CI: 1.56–4.57), behavioral practice/rehearsal (OR: 2.64; 95% CI: 1.50–4.67), instruction on behavior performance (OR: 2.49; 95% CI: 1.63–3.79), goal setting (behavior; OR: 2.12; 95% CI: 1.57–2.87), and information about consequences (OR: 2.06; 95% CI: 1.40–3.05) showed statistically significant effects to engage clinicians with ACP. Conclusion Certain BCTs seem to improve clinicians’ practice with ACP in heart failure and merit consideration for implementation into routine clinical practice.