Search

Introduction: In order to facilitate GPs in their work and increase the possibilities for patients to remain at home, it is important to identify the obstacles which hinder the delivery of primary palliative care. From previous research we learned about some of the problems experienced by GPs. In this survey we aimed to identify the prevalence of such problems in providing palliative care and its determinants. Methods: The prevalence of obstacles and its determinants were identified by a questionnaire to 320 GPs in three regions of the Netherlands. Obstacles were grouped as follows: communication, organisation & co-ordination of care, knowledge & expertise, integrated care, time for relatives. The potential determinants were GP characteristics and expertise development activities. Results: The response rate was 62.3%. GPs experienced considerable obstacles in all aspects of palliative care. The most prevalent were: problems with bureaucratic procedures (83.9%), the time necessary to arrange home care technology (61.1%) and the difficulties accompanied with the wish or necessity to obtain extra care (56.3%). In general, more years of GP experience and the participation in (multidisciplinary) case discussions were associated with less perceived obstacles. Discussion: Based on the results of our survey policymakers and practitioners can plan and set priorities in handling the obstacles. There is a high necessity of firstly overcoming the barriers within organisation and coordination of care. Furthermore, our study can help in choosing the (additional) expertise needed in the future and in the realisation of the preferred expertise advancement activities. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: General practitioners (GPs) play a crucial part in palliative care. The quality of care can be improved by investigating and addressing barriers perceived by GPs in daily practice. The aim of this study was to investigate GPs' task perception and barriers involved in palliative care. Methods: Qualitative focus group study. We gathered together a group of GPs representing a broad range of experience in palliative care. Content analysis was performed to derive a comprehensive view of tasks and barriers in daily palliative care. Results: GPs described their palliative care tasks as satisfactory and varied, but burdensome. Palliative care tasks included somatic and psychosocial care. Opinions differed with respect to whether the coordination of care belonged to the primary GP tasks. Barriers were classified according to three levels: (1) personal: barriers related to knowledge, skills, emotions; (2) relational: barriers concerning communication and collaboration; (3) organizational: barriers related to the organization of care and compartmentalization in healthcare. Conclusions: This study revealed a complex web of tasks and barriers. It may be possible to trace back a problem (lack of knowledge, for example) on the personal level to an isolated knowledge gap, but the problem may well have originated from communication or compartmentalization problems. To maintain GPs' feeling of being at ease with palliative care requires helping them acquire the appropriate balance between technical and organizational interventions and a compassionate orientation to their terminally ill patients. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The number of older people dying in long-term care facilities is increasing; however, care at the end of life can be suboptimal. Interventions to improve palliative care delivery within these settings have been shown to be effective in improving care, but little is known about their implementation. Aim: The aim of this study was to describe the nature of implementation strategies and to identify facilitators and/or barriers to implementing palliative care interventions in long-term care facilities. Design: Scoping review with a thematic synthesis, following the ENTREQ guidelines. Data sources: Published literature was identified from electronic databases, including MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO and CINAHL. Controlled, non-controlled and qualitative studies and evaluations of interventions to improve palliative care in long-term care facilities were included. Studies that met the inclusion criteria were sourced and data extracted on the study characteristics, the implementation of the intervention, and facilitators and/or barriers to implementation. Results: The review identified 8902 abstracts, from which 61 studies were included in the review. A matrix of implementation was developed with four implementation strategies (facilitation, education/training, internal engagement and external engagement) and three implementation stages (conditions to introduce the intervention, embedding the intervention within day-to-day practice and sustaining ongoing change). Conclusion: Incorporating an implementation strategy into the development and delivery of an intervention is integral in embedding change in practice. The review has shown that the four implementation strategies identified varied considerably across interventions; however, similar facilitators and barriers were encountered across the studies identified. Further research is needed to understand the extent to which different implementation strategies can facilitate the uptake of palliative care interventions in long-term care facilities. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

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. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

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. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]