Cookies on this website

We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website. If you click 'Accept all cookies' we'll assume that you are happy to receive all cookies and you won't see this message again. If you click 'Reject all non-essential cookies' only necessary cookies providing core functionality such as security, network management, and accessibility will be enabled. Click 'Find out more' for information on how to change your cookie settings.

<jats:title>Abstract</jats:title> <jats:sec> <jats:title>Background</jats:title> <jats:p>National and international guidelines recommend advance care planning (ACP) for patients with heart failure. But clinicians seem hesitant to engage with ACP.</jats:p> </jats:sec> <jats:sec> <jats:title>Purpose</jats:title> <jats:p>Our aim was to identify behavioral interventions with the greatest potential to engage clinicians with ACP in heart failure.</jats:p> </jats:sec> <jats:sec> <jats:title>Methods</jats:title> <jats:p>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.</jats:p> </jats:sec> <jats:sec> <jats:title>Results</jats:title> <jats:p>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.</jats:p> </jats:sec> <jats:sec> <jats:title>Conclusion</jats:title> <jats:p>Certain BCTs seem to improve clinicians’ practice with ACP in heart failure and merit consideration for implementation into routine clinical practice.</jats:p> </jats:sec>

Original publication




Journal article


Annals of Behavioral Medicine


Oxford University Press (OUP)

Publication Date