↓ Skip to main content

GPs’ perceptions of advance care planning with frail and older people: a qualitative study

Overview of attention for article published in British Journal of General Practice, December 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (85th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (76th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
20 tweeters
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
8 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
52 Mendeley
Title
GPs’ perceptions of advance care planning with frail and older people: a qualitative study
Published in
British Journal of General Practice, December 2017
DOI 10.3399/bjgp17x694145
Pubmed ID
Authors

Tim Sharp, Alexandra Malyon, Stephen Barclay

Abstract

Frail and older people are estimated to account for 40% of deaths. Despite conversations about end-of-life care being an important component of the national End of Life Care Strategy, there is a marked disparity between the majority who would like to discuss advance care plans, and the minority who currently have this opportunity. To investigate the attitudes of GPs to advance care planning (ACP) discussions with frail and older individuals. Focus group study with GPs in Cambridgeshire between September 2015 and January 2016. Five focus groups with 21 GPs were purposively sampled to maximise diversity. Framework analysis was used to analyse transcripts and develop themes. Although some GPs were concerned it might cause distress, the majority felt that raising ACP was important, especially as preparation for future emergencies. Knowing the individuals, introducing the idea as part of ongoing discussions, and public awareness campaigns were all facilitators identified. Several considered that service limitations made it difficult to fulfil patients' wishes and risked raising unrealistic patient expectations. Other barriers identified included uncertainty over prognosis and difficulties ensuring that individuals' wishes were respected. Most GPs viewed ACP as important. However, their enthusiasm was tempered by experience. This study highlights the difficulties for GPs of encouraging dialogue and respecting individuals' wishes within the constraints of the existing health and social care system. National publicity campaigns and encouraging patients to prioritise healthcare outcomes could help GPs raise care preferences without causing a detrimental impact on patients or raising unrealistic expectations. Once patients agree their care preferences, they need to be documented, accessible, and reviewed by all relevant health and social care providers to ensure that their wishes are respected, and plans amended as their circumstances change.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 20 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 52 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 52 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 14 27%
Other 8 15%
Student > Master 8 15%
Unspecified 5 10%
Researcher 4 8%
Other 13 25%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 17 33%
Social Sciences 10 19%
Unspecified 9 17%
Nursing and Health Professions 7 13%
Sports and Recreations 3 6%
Other 6 12%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 12. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 24 April 2019.
All research outputs
#1,352,576
of 13,652,000 outputs
Outputs from British Journal of General Practice
#681
of 2,965 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#56,769
of 391,801 outputs
Outputs of similar age from British Journal of General Practice
#23
of 96 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 13,652,000 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 90th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,965 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.6. This one has done well, scoring higher than 76% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 391,801 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 85% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 96 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 76% of its contemporaries.