Advance care planning for residents in aged care facilities: what is best practice and how can evidence-based...

Background  Advance care planning in a residential care setting aims to assist residents to make decisions about future healthcare and to improve end-of-life care through medical and care staff knowing and respecting the wishes of the resident. The process enables individuals and others who are important to them, to reflect on what is important to the resident including their beliefs/values and preferences about care when they are dying. This paper describes a project conducted as part of the Joanna Briggs Institute Clinical Aged Care Fellowship Program implemented at the Manningham Centre in metropolitan Melbourne in a unit providing services for 46 low and high care residents. Objectives  The objectives of the study were to document implementation of best practice in advance care planning in a residential aged care facility using a cycle of audit, feedback and re-audit cycle audit with a clinical audit software program, the Practical Application of Clinical Evidence System. The evidence-based guidelines found in 'Guidelines for a Palliative Approach in Residential Aged Care' were used to inform the process of clinical practice review and to develop a program to implement advance care planning. Results  The pre-implementation audit results showed that advance care planning practice was not based on high level evidence as initial compliance with five audit criteria was 0%. The barriers to implementation that became apparent during the feedback stage included the challenge of creating a culture where advance care planning policy, protocols and guidelines could be implemented, and advance care planning discussions held, by adequately prepared health professionals and carers. Opportunities were made to equip the resident to discuss their wishes with family, friends and healthcare staff. Some residents made the decision to take steps to formally document those wishes and/or appoint a Medical Enduring Power of Attorney to act on behalf of the resident when they are unable to communicate wishes. The post-implementation audit showed a clear improvement as compliance ranged from 15-100% for the five audit criteria. Strong leadership by the project team was effective in engaging staff in this quality improvement program. Conclusion  The outcomes of the project were extremely positive and demonstrate a genuine improvement in practice. All audit criteria indicate that the Manningham Centre is now positively working towards improved practice based on the best available evidence. It is hoped that as the expertise developed during this project is shared, other areas of gerontological practice will be similarly improved and more facilities caring for the older person will embrace evidence-based practice.