Table 4.
Study reference | Tool or intervention | Usability or feasibility |
---|---|---|
Burton, 2016 [56] | • CARING criteria are used as a set of prognostic criteria that have been proposed for identification of persons near the end of life upon hospital admission. | Applying the CARING criteria was problematic in a patient population with psychiatric disorders where cancer will almost never be the primary diagnosis. |
Foti, 2005 [57] | • Advance healthcare planning through a structured interview using the Health Care Preferences Questionnaire (HCPQ). • Healthcare proxy designation |
1) Advance healthcare planning with semi-structured interviews such as the HCPQ suggests a standardized approach to advance healthcare planning for people with SMI is feasible and acceptable. 2) Healthcare proxy designation and end-of-life care concerns can be ascertained through a semi-structured interview conducted by mental health providers without adverse effects. The HCPQ is usable within the target group. |
Foti, 2005 [58] | Advance care planning through the HCPQ (see Foti above). Supplemented with two hypothetical health state scenarios, derived from the Quest to Die With Dignity. | 1) Mental health consumers were able to engage in advance healthcare planning through hypothetical health state preference scenarios. Obtaining healthcare preferences by using hypothetical scenarios is feasible. 2) The HCPQ with hypothetical scenarios was usable for people with SMI, although some questions in the interview distressed participants. |
Smits, 2015 [59] | The Palliative Care Standard consists of six building blocks. The Palliative Care Standard covers identification of the palliative phase using the Surprise Question, Advance Care Planning, Individual Care Plan, Shared Decision Making and Quality Indicators for palliative care. | The Palliative Care Standard was usable and feasible, including in a setting for people with a psychiatric disorder. However, recommendations need to be tailored to better suit the specific target groups. |