Search

ObjectivesOutpatient in-person early palliative care improves quality of life for patients with advanced cancer. The COVID-19 pandemic forced a rapid shift to telehealth visits; however, little is known about how telehealth in outpatient palliative care settings should be optimised beyond the pandemic. We aimed to explore, from the perspective of patients attending an outpatient palliative care clinic, the most appropriate model of care for in-person versus telehealth visits.MethodsA qualitative study using the grounded theory method. One-on-one, semistructured qualitative interviews were conducted with 26 patients attending an outpatient palliative care clinic at a tertiary cancer centre recruited from two groups: (1) those with >1 in-person appointment prior to 1 March 2020 and >1 telehealth appointment after this date (n=17); and (2) patients who had exclusively telehealth appointments (n=9). Purposive sampling was used to incorporate diverse perspectives.ResultsOverall, participants endorsed a flexible hybrid approach incorporating both in-person and telehealth visits. Specific categories were: (1) in-person outpatient palliative care supported building interpersonal connections and trust; (2) telehealth palliative care facilitated greater efficiency, comfort and independence and (3) patient-preferred circumstances for in-person visits (preferred for initial consultations, visits where a physical examination may be required and advance care planning discussions), versus telehealth visits (preferred during periods of relative heath stability).ConclusionsThe elements of in-person and telehealth outpatient palliative care clinic visits described by patients as integral to their care may be used to develop models of hybrid outpatient palliative care delivery beyond the pandemic alongside reimbursement and regulatory guidelines.

ObjectivesPatients who do not attend outpatient palliative care clinic appointments (‘no-shows’) may have unmet needs and can impact wait times. We aimed to describe the characteristics and outcomes associated with no-shows.MethodsWe retrospectively reviewed new no-show referrals to the Princess Margaret Cancer Centre Oncology Palliative Care Clinic (OPCC) in Toronto, Canada, between January 2017 and December 2018, compared with a random selection of patients who attended their first appointment, in a 1:2 ratio. We collected patient information, symptoms, performance status (Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) and outcomes. Univariable and multivariable logistic regression analyses were used to identify significant factors.ResultsCompared with those who attended (n=214), no-shows (n=103), on multivariable analysis, were at higher odds than those who attended of being younger (OR 0.98, 95% CI 0.96 to 1.00, p=0.019), living outside Toronto (OR 2.67, 95% CI 1.54 to 4.62, p<0.001) and having ECOG ≥2 (OR 2.98, 95% CI 1.41 to 6.29, p=0.004). No-shows had a shorter median survival compared with those who attended their first appointment (2.3 vs 8.7 months, p<0.001).ConclusionCompared with patients who attended, no-shows lived further from the OPCC, were younger, and had a poorer ECOG. Strategies such as virtual visits should be explored to reduce no-shows and enable attendance at OPCCs.

ObjectiveWHO recommends early integration of palliative care alongside usual care to improve quality of life, although misunderstanding of palliative care may impede this. We compared the public’s perceived and actual knowledge of palliative care, and examined the relationship of this knowledge to attitudes concerning palliative care.MethodsWe analysed data from a survey of a representative sample of the Canadian public, accessed through a survey panel in May–June 2019. We compared high perceived knowledge (‘know what palliative care is and could explain it’) with actual knowledge of the WHO definition (knew ≥5/8 components, including that palliative care can be provided early in the illness and together with life-prolonging treatments), and examined their associations with attitudes to palliative care.ResultsOf 1518 adult participants residing in Canada, 45% had high perceived knowledge, of whom 46% had high actual knowledge. Participants with high (vs low) perceived knowledge were more likely to associate palliative care with end-of-life care (adjusted OR 2.15 (95% CI 1.66 to 2.79), p<0.0001) and less likely to believe it offered hope (0.62 (95% CI 0.47 to 0.81), p=0.0004). Conversely, participants with high (vs low) actual knowledge were less likely to find palliative care fearful (0.67 (95% CI 0.52 to 0.86), p=0.002) or depressing (0.72 (95% CI 0.56 to 0.93), p=0.01) and more likely to believe it offered hope (1.88 (95% CI 1.46 to 2.43), p<0.0001).ConclusionsStigma regarding palliative care may be perpetuated by those who falsely believe they understand its meaning. Public health education is needed to increase knowledge about palliative care, promote its early integration and counter false assumptions.

BackgroundAlthough the effectiveness of early palliative care for patients with advanced cancer has been demonstrated in several trials, there has been no detailed published description of an early palliative care intervention.MethodIn this paper, we delineate the iterative conception and systematic evaluation of a complex intervention called team-based outpatient early palliative care (TO-EPC), and describe the components of the intervention. The intervention was developed based on palliative care theory, review of previous palliative care interventions and practice guidelines. We conducted feasibility testing and piloting of TO-EPC in a phase 2 trial, followed by evaluation in a large cluster randomised trial and qualitative research with patients and caregivers. The qualitative research informed the iterative refinement of the intervention.ResultsFour principles and four domains of care constitute a conceptual framework for TO-EPC. The main domains of care are: coping and support, symptom control, decision-making and future planning. The main principles are that care is flexible, attentive, patient-led and family-centred. The most prominent domain for the initial consultation is coping and support; follow-up visits focus on symptom control, decision-making to maximise quality of life and future planning according to patient readiness. Key tasks are described in relation to each domain.ConclusionThe description of our intervention may assist palliative care teams seeking to implement it, researchers wishing to replicate or build on it and oncologists hoping to adapt it for their patients.