This page was translated automatically from Turkish. Read the original

This page is an AI-assisted Turkish summary of the study presented at the 26th World Congress of Psychiatry. The study belongs to the presenting authors; please refer to the original source when citing it.

EV0667

Health professionals’ perspectives on psychiatric advance directives: a systematic review

PERSPECTIVES OF HEALTH PROFESSIONALS ON PSYCHIATRIC ADVANCE DIRECTIVES: A SYSTEMATIC REVIEW

Health professionals hold both positive and negative views of psychiatric advance directives; although their benefits are acknowledged, clinical, legal, and ethical concerns limit implementation.

The aim was to examine health professionals’ views and attitudes toward psychiatric advance directives (PADs) and to identify opportunities, benefits, barriers, and challenges in their implementation. In this systematic review, registered with PROSPERO and conducted according to PRISMA guidelines, seven electronic databases were searched. Publications containing original empirical data on health professionals’ perspectives on PADs were included, and the data were analyzed thematically using NVIVO and synthesized narratively. The review included 73 articles, and the themes identified included professionals’ levels of knowledge and training regarding PADs. Reported opportunities and benefits included increased autonomy and control over treatment; empowerment; enhanced responsibility and self-management skills; improved continuity of care, early intervention, and access to care; and stronger communication, collaboration, and therapeutic relationships. Barriers and challenges included conflicts with the clinical principle of beneficence, erosion of trust when PADs are not followed, difficulties with implementation, insufficient time and resources, fear of litigation, and the drawbacks of fixing treatment decisions at a single point in time. Overall, health professionals consider legal, clinical, and ethical factors together when forming their views on PADs. PADs are acknowledged as potentially beneficial to both service users and clinicians, but this recognition is balanced against clinical, legal, and ethical concerns. In conclusion, wider use of PADs requires interventions tailored to these perspectives and aimed at changing professionals’ attitudes and behaviors.

All WCP 2026 summaries