Search

Background: COPD causes high morbidity and mortality, emphasizing the need for palliative care., Aim: To assess the effectiveness of palliative care in patients with COPD., Design: Cluster randomized controlled trial (COMPASSION study; Netherlands Trial Register (NTR): NL7644, 07-04-2019). Healthcare providers within the intervention group were trained to implement palliative care components into routine COPD care. Patients completed questionnaires at baseline, after 3 and 6 months; medical records were assessed after 12 months. The primary outcome was quality of life (FACIT-Pal). Secondary outcomes were anxiety, depression, spiritual well-being, satisfaction with care, acute healthcare use, documentation of life-sustaining treatment preferences and place of death. Generalized linear mixed modelling was used for analyses., Setting: Eight hospital regions in the Netherlands., Participants: Patients hospitalized for an acute exacerbation of COPD and positive ProPal-COPD score., Results: Of 222 patients included, 106 responded to the questionnaire at 6 months. Thirty-six of 98 intervention patients (36.7%) received the intervention. Intention-to-treat-analysis showed no effect on the primary outcome (adjusted difference: 1.09; 95% confidence interval: -5.44 to 7.60). In the intervention group, fewer intensive care admissions for COPD took place (adjusted odds ratio: 0.21; 95% confidence interval: 0.03-0.81) and strong indications were found for fewer hospitalizations (adjusted incidence rate ratio: 0.69; 95% confidence interval: 0.46-1.03)., Conclusions: We found no evidence that palliative care improves quality of life in patients with COPD. However, it can potentially reduce acute healthcare use. The consequences of the COVID-19 pandemic led to suboptimal implementation and insufficient power, and may have affected some of our findings.

Background: Patients receiving palliative care value attention given to their spiritual needs. However, these needs often remain unexplored as healthcare professionals lack the skills to identify and explore them and to integrate this information into care plans., Aim: To evaluate the effects of an interactive communication training intervention for palliative care teams in order to identify and explore the spiritual dimension and integrate it in patients' care plans., Design: A mixed methods pre-post study, including self-assessment questionnaires, evaluation of videos with simulated consultations (applied competence) and medical record review (implementation)., Setting/participants: Three palliative care teams including nurses ( N  = 21), physicians ( N  = 14) and spiritual caregivers ( N  = 3)., Results: The questionnaires showed an improvement on 'Patient and family-centred communication' of the End-of-life professional caregiver survey (+0.37, p  < 0.01; the 8-item S-EOLC (+0.54, p  < 0.01) and regarding the Spiritual Care Competence Scale, on the three subscales used (+0.27, p  < 0.01, +0.29, p  < 0.01 and +0.32, p  < 0.01). Video evaluations showed increased attention being paid to patient's aims and needs. The medical record review showed an increase in anticipation on the non-somatic dimension (OR: 2.2, 95% CI: 1.2-4.3, p  < 0.05) and, using the Mount Vernon Cancer Network assessment tool, addressing spiritual issues (OR: 10.9, 95% CI: 3.7-39.5, p  < 0.001)., Conclusions: Our training intervention resulted in increased palliative care professionals' competence in identifying and exploring patients' spiritual issues, and their integration in multidimensional proactive palliative care plans. The intervention directly addresses patients' spiritual concerns and adds value to their palliative care plans.

Background: The Surprise Question ('Would I be surprised if this patient died within 12 months?') identifies patients in the last year of life. It is unclear if 'surprised' means the same for each clinician, and whether their responses are internally consistent., Aim: To determine the consistency with which the Surprise Question is used., Design: A cross-sectional online study of participants located in Belgium, Germany, Italy, The Netherlands, Switzerland and UK. Participants completed 20 hypothetical patient summaries ('vignettes'). Primary outcome measure: continuous estimate of probability of death within 12 months (0% [certain survival]-100% [certain death]). A threshold (probability estimate above which Surprise Question responses were consistently 'no') and an inconsistency range (range of probability estimates where respondents vacillated between responses) were calculated. Univariable and multivariable linear regression explored differences in consistency. Trial registration: NCT03697213., Setting/participants: Registered General Practitioners (GPs). Of the 307 GPs who started the study, 250 completed 15 or more vignettes., Results: Participants had a consistency threshold of 49.8% (SD 22.7) and inconsistency range of 17% (SD 22.4). Italy had a significantly higher threshold than other countries ( p  = 0.002). There was also a difference in threshold levels depending on age of clinician, for every yearly increase, participants had a higher threshold. There was no difference in inconsistency between countries ( p  = 0.53)., Conclusions: There is variation between clinicians regarding the use of the Surprise Question. Over half of GPs were not internally consistent in their responses to the Surprise Question. Future research with standardised terms and real patients is warranted.

Background: In 2020, the COVID-19 pandemic caused an acute risk of deterioration and dying for many, and an urgent need to start advance care planning., Aim: To explore how general practitioners (GPs) experienced discussing values, goals and preferences with patients during COVID-19., Design and Setting: Qualitative research in general practice., Methods: Semi-structured interviews for which Dutch GPs were recruited via purposive sampling. Content analysis was used., Results: Fifteen GPs were interviewed. Six themes were identified: (i) urge of advance care planning, (ii) the GP's perceived role in it, (iii) preparations for it, (iv) (proactively) discussing it, (v) essentials for good communication and (vi) advance care planning in the (near) future. Calls for proactively discussing advance care planning in the media and in COVID-guidelines caused awareness of it's importance. GPs envisaged an important role for themselves in initiating it, especially with patients at risk to deteriorate or die from COVID-19. Timing advance care planning appeared difficult but crucial. The recommended digital way of communication was considered problematic due to missing nonverbal communication and difficulties in involving relatives. It was noted that admission to the ICU, which was hardly discussed before the COVID-19 pandemic, should remain a topic during advance care planning., Conclusion: The COVID-19 pandemic brought advance care planning into a new light, GPs were more experienced with discussing it and patients were more aware of their frailty. Because of the nearing 'grey wave', advance care planning should remain top priority. Therefore, it should be central in GP and post-academic training.

Background: The Surprise Question (" Would I be surprised if this patient were to die within the next 12   months?" ) is widely used to identify palliative patients, though with low predictive value. To improve timely identification of palliative care needs, we propose an additional Surprise Question (" Would I be surprised if this patient is still alive after 12   months?" ) if the original Surprise Question is answered with "no." The combination of the two questions is called the Double Surprise Question., Aim: To examine the prognostic accuracy of the Double Surprise Question in outpatients with cancer., Design: A prospective study., Participants: Twelve medical oncologists completed the Double Surprise Question for 379 patients., Results: In group 1 (original Surprise Question "yes": surprised if dead) 92.1% (176/191) of the patients were still alive after 1 year, in group 2a (original and additional Surprise Question "no": not surprised if dead and not surprised if alive) 60.0% (63/105), and in group 2b (original Surprise Question "no," additional Surprise Question "yes": surprised if alive) 26.5% (22/83) ( p  < 0.0001). The positive predictive value increased by using the Double Surprise Question; 74% (61/83) vs 55% (103/188). Anticipatory palliative care provision and Advance Care Planning items were most often documented in group 2b., Conclusions: The Double Surprise Question is a promising tool to more accurately identify outpatients with cancer at risk of dying within 1 year, and therefore, those in need of palliative care. Studies should reveal whether the implementation of the Double Surprise Question leads to more timely palliative care.

Background: Although guidelines recommend palliative care for patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, there is little evidence for the effectiveness of palliative care interventions for this patient group specifically., Aim: To describe the characteristics of palliative care interventions for patients with COPD and their informal caregivers and review the available evidence on effectiveness and implementation outcomes., Design: Systematic review and narrative synthesis (PROSPERO CRD42017079962)., Data Sources: Seven databases were searched for articles reporting on multi-component palliative care interventions for study populations containing ⩾30% patients with COPD. Quantitative as well as qualitative and mixed-method studies were included. Intervention characteristics, effect outcomes, implementation outcomes and barriers and facilitators for successful implementation were extracted and synthesized qualitatively., Results: Thirty-one articles reporting on twenty unique interventions were included. Only four interventions (20%) were evaluated in an adequately powered controlled trial. Most interventions comprised of longitudinal palliative care, including care coordination and comprehensive needs assessments. Results on effectiveness were mixed and inconclusive. The feasibility level varied and was context-dependent. Acceptability of the interventions was high; having someone to call for support and education about breathlessness were most valued characteristics. Most frequently named barriers were uncertainty about the timing of referral due to the unpredictable disease trajectory (referrers), time availability (providers) and accessibility (patients)., Conclusion: Little high-quality evidence is yet available on the effectiveness and implementation of palliative care interventions for patients with COPD. There is a need for well-conducted effectiveness studies and adequate process evaluations using standardized methodologies to create higher-level evidence and inform successful implementation.

Background: The delivery of palliative care interventions is not widely integrated in chronic heart failure care as the recognition of palliative care needs is perceived as difficult. Tools may facilitate healthcare professionals to identify patients with palliative care needs in advanced chronic heart failure., Aim: To identify tools to help healthcare professionals recognize palliative care needs in patients with advanced chronic heart failure., Design: This systematic review was registered in the PROSPERO database (CRD42019131896). Evidence of tools' development, evaluation, feasibility, and implementation was sought and described., Data Sources: Electronic searches to identify references of tools published until June 2019 were conducted in MEDLINE, CINAHL, and EMBASE. Hand-searching of references and citations was undertaken. Based on the identified tools, a second electronic search until September 2019 was performed to check whether all evidence about these tools in the context of chronic heart failure was included., Results: Nineteen studies described a total of seven tools. The tools varied in purpose, intended user and properties. The tools have been validated to a limited extent in the context of chronic heart failure and palliative care. Different health care professionals applied the tools in various settings at different moments of the care process. Guidance and instruction about how to apply the tool revealed to be relevant but may be not enough for uptake. Spiritual care needs were perceived as difficult to assess., Conclusion: Seven tools were identified which showed different and limited levels of validity in the context of palliative care and chronic heart failure.

Background: Strong family bonds are part of the Indonesian culture. Family members of patients with cancer are intensively involved in caring, also in hospitals. This is considered "normal": a societal and religious obligation. The values underpinning this might influence families' perception of it., Aim: To explore and model experiences of family caregivers of patients with cancer in Indonesia in performing caregiving tasks., Design: A grounded theory approach was applied. The constant comparative method was used for data analysis and a paradigm scheme was employed for developing a theoretical model., Setting/participants: The study was conducted in three hospitals in Indonesia. The participants were family caregivers of patients with cancer., Results: A total of 24 family caregivers participated. "Belief in caregiving" appeared to be the core phenomenon. This reflects the caregivers' conviction that providing care is an important value, which becomes the will power and source of their strength. It is a combination of spiritual and religious, value and motivation to care, and is influenced by contextual factors. It influences actions: coping mechanisms, sharing tasks, and making sacrifices. Social support influences the process of the core phenomenon and the actions of the caregivers. Both positive and negative experiences were identified., Conclusion: We developed a model of family caregivers' experiences from a country where caregiving is deeply rooted in religion and culture. The model might also be useful in other cultural contexts. Our model shows that the spiritual domain, not only for the patient but also for the family caregivers, should be structurally addressed by professional caregivers.

Background: Nursing homes are among the most common places of death in many countries., Aim: To determine the quality of dying and end-of-life care of nursing home residents in six European countries., Design: Epidemiological survey in a proportionally stratified random sample of nursing homes. We identified all deaths of residents of the preceding 3-month period. Main outcomes: quality of dying in the last week of life (measured using End-of-Life in Dementia Scales - Comfort Assessment while Dying (EOLD-CAD)); quality of end-of-life care in the last month of life (measured using Quality of Dying in Long-Term Care (QoD-LTC) scale). Higher scores indicate better quality., Setting/participants: Three hundred and twenty-two nursing homes in Belgium, Finland, Italy, the Netherlands, Poland and England. Participants were staff (nurses or care assistants) most involved in each resident's care., Results: Staff returned questionnaires regarding 1384 (81.6%) of 1696 deceased residents. The End-of-Life in Dementia Scales - Comfort Assessment while Dying mean score (95% confidence interval) (theoretical 14-42) ranged from 29.9 (27.6; 32.2) in Italy to 33.9 (31.5; 36.3) in England. The Quality of Dying in Long-Term Care mean score (95% confidence interval) (theoretical 11-55) ranged from 35.0 (31.8; 38.3) in Italy to 44.1 (40.7; 47.4) in England. A higher End-of-Life in Dementia Scales - Comfort Assessment while Dying score was associated with country ( p = 0.027), older age ( p = 0.012), length of stay ⩾1 year ( p = 0.034), higher functional status ( p < 0.001). A higher Quality of Dying in Long-Term Care score was associated with country ( p < 0.001), older age ( p < 0.001), length of stay ⩾1 year ( p < 0.001), higher functional status ( p = 0.002), absence of dementia ( p = 0.001), death in nursing home ( p = 0.033)., Conclusion: The quality of dying and quality of end-of-life care in nursing homes in the countries studied are not optimal. This includes countries with high levels of palliative care development in nursing homes such as Belgium, the Netherlands and England.

Background: The provision of high-quality palliative care in nursing homes (NHs) is a major challenge and places demands on the knowledge and skills of the staff., Aim: This study assesses the palliative care knowledge of staff in NHs in Europe., Design: Cross-sectional study using structured survey Setting/participants: Nurses and care assistants working in 322 representative samples of NHs in Belgium, the Netherlands, England, Finland, Poland and Italy. Palliative care knowledge is measured with the Palliative Care Survey. Scores on the scales range between 0 and 1; higher scores indicate more knowledge., Results: A total of 3392 NH-staff were given a questionnaire, and 2275 responded (67%). Knowledge of basic palliative care issues ranged between 0.20 in Poland (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.19; 0.24) and 0.61 in Belgium (95% CI 0.59; 0.63), knowledge of physical aspects that can contribute to pain ranged between 0.81 in Poland (95% CI 0.79; 0.84) and 0.91 in the Netherlands (95% CI 0.89; 0.93), and knowledge of psychological reasons that can contribute to pain ranged between 0.56 in England (95% CI 0.50; 0.62) and 0.87 in Finland (95% CI 0.83; 0.90). Factors associated with knowledge were country, professional role and having undertaken formal training in palliative care., Conclusions: Knowledge of nurses and care assistants concerning basic palliative care issues appears to be suboptimal in all participating countries, although there is substantial heterogeneity. Education of nursing staff needs to be improved across, but each country may require its own strategy to address the unique and specific knowledge gaps.

Background: In cost-effectiveness analyses in healthcare, Quality-Adjusted Life Years are often used as outcome measure of effectiveness. However, there is an ongoing debate concerning the appropriateness of its use for decision-making in palliative care., Aim: To systematically map pros and cons of using the Quality-Adjusted Life Year to inform decisions on resource allocation among palliative care interventions, as brought forward in the debate, and to discuss the Quality-Adjusted Life Year's value for palliative care., Design: The integrative review method of Whittemore and Knafl was followed. Theoretical arguments and empirical findings were mapped., Data Sources: A literature search was conducted in PubMed, EMBASE, and CINAHL, in which MeSH (Medical Subject Headings) terms were Palliative Care, Cost-Benefit Analysis, Quality of Life, and Quality-Adjusted Life Years., Findings: Three themes regarding the pros and cons were identified: (1) restrictions in life years gained, (2) conceptualization of quality of life and its measurement, including suggestions to adapt this, and (3) valuation and additivity of time, referring to changing valuation of time. The debate is recognized in empirical studies, but alternatives not yet applied., Conclusion: The Quality-Adjusted Life Year might be more valuable for palliative care if specific issues are taken into account. Despite restrictions in life years gained, Quality-Adjusted Life Years can be achieved in palliative care. However, in measuring quality of life, we recommend to-in addition to the EQ-5D- make use of quality of life or capability instruments specifically for palliative care. Also, we suggest exploring the possibility of integrating valuation of time in a non-linear way in the Quality-Adjusted Life Year.

Background: A well-organized palliative care service is a prerequisite for offering good palliative care. Reliable and feasible quality indicators are needed to monitor the quality of their organization., Aim: To test feasibility and reliability of a previously developed set of quality indicators in settings and services that provide palliative care across Europe., Methods: A total of 38 quality indicators, applicable in all types of settings, rated in a RAND Delphi process, and operationalized into 38 yes/no questions, were used. Descriptives statistics, factor and reliability analyses, analysis of variance, and chi-square analyses were used., Design: Cross-sectional online survey., Setting/participants: Questionnaires were sent to representatives of 217 palliative care settings in 25 countries. Included settings were hospices, inpatient dedicated palliative care beds, palliative care outpatient clinics, palliative care units, day care centers for palliative care, palliative care home support teams, inpatient palliative care support teams, care homes, and nursing homes., Results: All invited 25 European Association of Palliative Care countries took part. In total, 107 out of 217 participants responded (57%). The quality indicators were reduced to four coherent sub-scales, being "equipment and continuity of care," "structured documentation of essential palliative care elements in the medical record," "training and appraisal of personnel," and "availability of controlled drugs." No significant differences in quality criteria between the different types of settings and services were identified., Conclusion: The set of quality indicators appeared to measure four reliable domains that assess the organization of different palliative care settings. It can be used as a starting point for quality improvement activities., (© The Author(s) 2015.)