IMPORTANCE Less than 25% of African American individuals have completed advance directives and are thus vulnerable to poor end-of-life care. Low-cost interventions are needed to increase engagement in advance care planning (ACP).OBJECTIVES To investigate whether an end-of-life conversation game motivates African American attendees to engage in ACP and to assess whether the game is well received and endorsed.EXPOSURES Attendance at an end-of-life conversation game (Hello) played in groups of 4 to 6 participants for 60 minutes. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS Prospective, mixed-methods cohort study conducted from 2018 to 2019 with a 3-to 11-month follow-up interview. Game events were held in 53 community venues across the US; 15 were purposively sampled for onsite research procedures. Of 428 attendees at purposively sampled sites, 386 (90%) consented to research procedures (6 attendees were removed from analysis for protocol deviation). Of 367 attendees who provided accurate contact information, 232 (63%) were contacted, and 220 were included in follow-up analyses. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURESThe primary outcome was advance directive completion rates after the intervention. Secondary outcomes included rates of other ACP behaviors, ACP engagement, conversation satisfaction and realism, and participants' Net Promoter Score (a measure of endorsement). Follow-up telephone interviews explored the game experience and relevant ACP behaviors of attendees. RESULTS Of 380 individuals who participated (mean [SD] age, 62.2 [13.8] years; 304 were female [80%], and 348 were [92%] African American), none withdrew because of an adverse event. After the intervention, 91 of 220 attendees (41%) completed a new advance directive; 176 of 220 attendees (80%) discussed end-of-life wishes with loved ones, and 214 of 219 attendees (98%) completed at least 1 ACP behavior. There was a moderate increase in the self-efficacy domain on the ACP Engagement Survey (mean [SD] change from before to after the game, 0.54 [0.98]; P < .001).The mean (SD) conversation satisfaction score was 6.21 (0.93) (range, 1-7, with 7 being highest satisfaction), and the overall Net Promoter Score was 57.89 (range, −100 to 100, with 100 being highest endorsement). Interviews revealed 5 themes about the game: (1) it was a useful forum for ACP; (2) it provided new information and perspective; (3) it was emotionally beneficial; (4) it increased appreciation for ACP; and (5) it empowered and motivated participants to perform ACP.Mixed-methods integration showed convergence across data sets. (continued) Key Points Question Can a low-cost, easily scaled, end-of-life conversation game motivate underserved African American individuals to engage in advance care planning? Findings This national mixed-methods cohort study reaching 384 underserved African American individuals found that high rates of advance care planning behavior were associated with participation in game events at community venues. Meaning The end-of-life conversation game may be a useful tool for engaging und...

No abstract

No abstract

BACKGROUND: African Americans have low engagement in advance care planning (ACP). This has been attributed to healthcare distrust and skepticism about ACP. A better understanding of these attitudes is needed to address health disparities related to end-of-life care. OBJECTIVE: To explore the ACP-related values and beliefs of diverse African American communities across the USA and then the perceived value of an inexpensive end-of-life conversational game. DESIGN: Prospective, convergent, mixed methods cohort study involving fifteen underserved, African American communities across the USA. PARTICIPANTS: Of the 428 who attended events at purposively sampled sites, 90% consented to the research; 37% participated in one of 15 focus groups (n = 141). INTERVENTION: An end-of-life conversation game, played in groups of 4-6. MAIN MEASURES: The validated, 7-item ACP values and beliefs questionnaire (scaled 7 = least skeptical, 49 = most skeptical) was administered pre-game. Post-game focus groups explored perceptions about ACP and the intervention. KEY RESULTS: Participants had positive attitudes (low skepticism) about ACP with a median score of 12.00 (7.00, 20.00). Values and beliefs did not significantly differ by geographical region; however, rural areas were observed to be slightly more skeptical than urban areas (median score 14.00 vs. 11.00, p = 0.002). Themes from focus groups converged with survey data showing participants valued the ACP process and consider further engagement in ACP to be worthwhile. Subthemes emphasized the need for and value of ACP.CONCLUSIONS: Skepticism about ACP may contribute to low rates of ACP engagement in underserved African American communities. The positive attitudes uncovered in our study either negate previous findings or suggest reduced skepticism. TRIAL REGISTRATION: This study has been registered at clinicaltrials.gov (NCT03456921)

Background: Advance care planning (ACP) is a process involving conversations between patients, loved ones, and healthcare providers that consider patient preferences for the types of medical therapies received at the end of life. Underserved populations, including Black, Hispanic, rural, and low-income communities are less likely to engage in ACP than other communities, a health inequity that results in lower quality care and reduced hospice utilization. The purpose of this trial is to compare efficacy of two interventions intended to motivate ACP (particularly advance directive completion) for those living in underserved communities. Methods: This 3-armed cluster, randomized controlled mixed methods design is being conducted in 75 community venues in underserved communities across the US. The goal of the trial is to compare the efficacy of two interventions at motivating ACP. Arm 1 uses an end-of-life conversation game (Hello); Arm 2 uses a nationally utilized workshop format for ACP conversations (The Conversation Project); and Arm 3 uses an attention control game (TableTopics). Events are held in partnership with 75 local community-based host organizations and will involve 1500 participants (n=20 per event). The primary outcome is completion of a visually-verified advance directive at 6 months post-event. Primary analyses compare efficacy of each intervention to each other and the control arm. Secondary mixed methods outcomes include: a) other ACP behaviors and engagement; b) communication quality; c) impact of sociocultural environment on ACP (via qualitative interviews); and d) implementation and sustainability. Subgroup analyses examine outcomes for Black, Hispanic, and rural groups in particular.Discussion: This trial will add to the evidence base behind various conversational ACP interventions, examine potential mechanisms of action for such interventions, and provide qualitative data to better understand the sociocultural environment of how community-based ACP interventions are experienced by underserved populations. Results will also provide important data for future researchers to learn whether visual verification of advance directives is necessary or whether reliance on self-reported outcomes is of comparable value. Data from this study will inform ways to effectively motivate underserved communities to participate in advance care planning.Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04612738. Registered on October 12, 2020.