Skip to main content

Table 2 Participants, timepoint, method and assessments

From: Contextual factors influencing advance care planning in home care: process evaluation of the cluster-randomised controlled trial STADPLAN

Participants (n main trial)

t0

t1

t2

Method

Assessments

Domains of the logic model

Assessments pre-randomisation

 Home care Service (HCS)a

(n = 27)

22

  

Questionnaire

Basic characteristics of the HCS

Context home care service

 Head of HCSb

(n = 27)

20

  

Semi structured interview, partly in groups

Experiences with ACP, implementation of ACP in the HCS, motivation and expectation regarding study participation

Context home care service

Context nurses

Context patients and caregivers

 Nursesb (not documented)

22

  

Semi structured interview, partly in groups

Attitudes and experiences with ACP, motivation and expectation regarding study participation

Context home care service

Context nurses

Context patients and caregivers

 Nurses (not documented)

30

  

Questionnaire

Formal qualification, work experience

Context nurses

 Patients (n = 380)

79

  

Questionnaire

Experiences and expectations regarding ACP and study participation, ACP knowledge, control preferences, satisfaction with HCS

Context patients

Assessments post-randomisation

 

 NF educational programme day 1 (IG)

 

23

 

Questionnaire

Evaluation of the educational programme, knowledge on ACP, motivation, and self-efficacy regarding the intervention

Implementation

Process outcomes NFs

 Educational programme day 1

 

6

 

Observation

Duration, alertness of participants and unplanned changes of the programme

Implementation

Fidelity

 NF educational programme day 2 (IG)

 

7

 

5 focus groups, 2 semi structured interviews

Experiences with the intervention and study participation in general

Context HCS

Context NFs

Implementation

Context patients and caregivers

Intervention

Process outcomes patients and caregivers

Process outcomes NFs

Process outcomes HCS

Macro context

 NF educational programme day 2 (IG)

 

17

 

Questionnaire

Evaluation of the educational programme, knowledge on ACP

Implementation

Process outcomes NFs

 Educational programme day 2

 

5

 

Observation

Duration, alertness of participants and unplanned changes of the programme

Implementation

Fidelity

 NF, ACP conversation 1

 

184

 

Secondary data extracted from conversations topic guides

Duration

Adverse events

Intervention

 NF, ACP conversation 2

 

147

 

Secondary data extracted from conversations topic guides

Duration

Adverse events

Intervention

 Patients (IG) (n = 210)

 

41

 

Questionnaire

Experiences regarding ACP and study participation, ACP knowledge, control preferences, satisfaction with HCS, satisfaction with ACP conversations

Context patients

Intervention

Process outcomes patients

 Patients (CG) (n = 170)

 

42

 

Questionnaire

Experiences regarding ACP and study participation, ACP knowledge, control preferences, satisfaction with HCS

Context patients

 Caregivers (IG) (not documented)

12

11

 

Semi structured interview

Experiences and expectations regarding ACP and study participation, ACP knowledge, caregiver burden, satisfaction with HCS

Context patients and caregivers

Intervention

 Head of HCS (CG and IG) (n = 27)

  

22

Semi structured interview, partly in groups

Experiences with ACP, implementation of ACP in the HCS, experiences within the study and further plans regarding ACP

Context HCS

Implementation

Process outcomes NFs

Context patients and caregivers

Intervention

Process outcomes patients and caregivers

Process outcomes HCS

Macro context

  1. ACP Advance care planning, NF Trained nurse ACP facilitator; CG Control group, HCS Home care service, IG Intervention group. T1: six months after t0, t2: twelve months after t0
  2. aBasic characteristics at t2 not included into the analysis due to low response (10 of 27)
  3. bIn some home care services head nurses and staff wanted to be interviewed together (n = 7). We excluded these interviews from the analysis because of the methodological difference in the data collection