Search

Objectives To identify a group of palliative care doctors who perform well on a prognostic test and to understand how they make their survival predictions. Design Prospective observational study and two cross-sectional online studies. Setting Phase I: an online prognostic test, developed from a prospective observational study of patients referred to palliative care. Phase II: an online judgement task consisting of 50 hypothetical vignettes. Participants All members of the Association of Palliative Medicine (APM) were eligible (n=~1100). 99 doctors completed the prognostic test and were included in the phase I analysis. The top 20% were invited to participate in phase II; 14/19 doctors completed the judgement task and were included in the phase II analysis. Measures Phase I: participants were asked to give a probability of death within 72 hours (0%-100%) for all 20 cases. Accuracy on the prognostic test was measured with the Brier score which was used to identify the 'expert' group (scale range: 0 (expert)-1 (non-expert)). Phase II: participants gave a probability of death within 72 hours (0%-100%). A mixed model regression analysis was completed using the percentage estimate as the outcome and the patient information included in the vignettes as the predictors. Results The mean Brier score of all participants was 0.237 (95% CI 0.235 to 0.239). The mean Brier score of the 'experts' was 0.184 (95% CI 0.176 to 0.192). Six of the seven prognostic variables included in the hypothetical vignettes were significantly associated with clinician predictions of death. The Palliative Performance Score was identified as being the most influential in the doctors' prognostic decision making (β=0.48, p<0.001). Conclusions This study identified six clinical signs and symptoms which influenced the judgement policies of palliative care doctors. These results may be used to teach novice doctors how to improve their prognostic skills. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose The laser in glaucoma and ocular hypertension (LiGHT) trial aims to establish whether initial treatment with selective laser trabeculoplasty (SLT) is superior to initial treatment with topical medication for primary open angle glaucoma (POAG) or ocular hypertension (OHT). Design LiGHT is a prospective unmasked, multicentre, pragmatic, randomised controlled trial (RCT). Participants 718 previously untreated patients with POAG or OHT were recruited at 6 UK centres between 2012 and 2014. Methods Patients were randomised to initial SLT followed by medical therapy or medical therapy without laser. Participants will be monitored for 3 years, according to routine clinical practice. The primary outcome is EQ-5D-5L. Secondary outcomes are treatment pathway cost and cost-effectiveness, Glaucoma Utility Index (GUI), Glaucoma Symptom Scale, Glaucoma Quality of Life (GQL), pathway effectiveness, visual function, safety and concordance. Results A total of 555 patients had POAG and 163 OHT; 518 patients had both eyes eligible. The mean age for patients with POAG was 64 years and for OHT 58 years. 70% of all participants were white. Median IOP for OHT eyes was 26 mm Hg and 23 mm Hg for POAG eyes. Median baseline visual field mean deviation was -0.81 dB for OHT eyes and -2.82 dB for POAG eyes. There was no difference between patients with POAG and patients with OHT on the EQ-5D-5DL; the difference between OHT and POAG on the GUI was -0.02 and 1.23 on the GQL. Conclusions The LiGHT trial is the first RCT to compare the two treatment options in a real-world setting. The baseline characteristics of the LiGHT cohort compare well with other landmark glaucoma studies. Trial registration number ISRCTN32038223, Pre-results. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background Many people with dementia die in nursing homes, but quality of care may be suboptimal. We developed the theory-driven ‘Compassion Intervention’ to enhance end-of-life care in advanced dementia. Objectives To (1) understand how the Intervention operated in nursing homes in different health economies; (2) collect preliminary outcome data and costs of an interdisciplinary care leader (ICL) to facilitate the Intervention; (3) check the Intervention caused no harm. Design A naturalistic feasibility study of Intervention implementation for 6 months. Settings Two nursing homes in northern London, UK. Participants Thirty residents with advanced dementia were assessed of whom nine were recruited for data collection; four of these residents’ family members were interviewed. Twenty-eight nursing home and external healthcare professionals participated in interviews at 7 (n=19), 11 (n=19) and 15 months (n=10). Intervention An ICL led two core Intervention components: (1) integrated, interdisciplinary assessment and care; (2) education and support for paid and family carers. Data collected Process and outcome data were collected. Symptoms were recorded monthly for recruited residents. Semistructured interviews were conducted at 7, 11 and 15 months with nursing home staff and external healthcare professionals and at 7 months with family carers. ICL hours were costed using Department of Health and Health Education England tariffs. Results Contextual differences were identified between sites: nursing home 2 had lower involvement with external healthcare services. Core components were implemented at both sites but multidisciplinary meetings were only established in nursing home 1. The Intervention prompted improvements in advance care planning, pain management and person-centred care; we observed no harm. Six-month ICL costs were £18 255. Conclusions Implementation was feasible to differing degrees across sites, dependent on context. Our data inform future testing to identify the Intervention’s effectiveness in improving end-of-life care in advanced dementia. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: In the UK approximately 700 000 people are living with, and a third of people aged over 65 will die with, dementia. People with dementia may receive poor quality care towards the end of life. We applied a realist approach and used mixed methods to develop a complex intervention to improve care for people with advanced dementia and their family carers. Consensus on intervention content was achieved using the RAND UCLA appropriateness method and mapped to sociological theories of process and impact. Core components are: (1) facilitation of integrated care, (2) education, training and support, (3) investment from commissioners and care providers. We present the protocol for an exploratory phase I study to implement components 1 and 2 in order to understand how the intervention operates in practice and to assess feasibility and acceptability. Methods and analysis: An 'Interdisciplinary Care Leader (ICL)' will work within two care homes, alongside staff and associated professionals to facilitate service integration, encourage structured needs assessment, develop the use of personal and advance care plans and support staff training. We will use qualitative and quantitative methods to collect data for a range of outcome and process measures to detect effects on individual residents, family carers, care home staff, the intervention team, the interdisciplinary team and wider systems. Analysis will include descriptive statistics summarising process and care home level data, individual demographic and clinical characteristics and data on symptom burden, clinical events and quality of care. Qualitative data will be explored using thematic analysis. Findings will inform a future phase II trial. Ethics and dissemination: Ethical approval was granted (REC reference 14/LO/0370). We shall publish findings at conferences, in peer-reviewed journals, on the Marie Curie Cancer Care website and prepare reports for dissemination by organisations involved with end-of-life care and dementia. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: The Prognosis in Palliative care Study II (PiPS2) was a large multicentre observational study validating prognostic tools in patients with advanced cancer. Many palliative care studies fail to reach their recruitment target. To inform future studies, PiPS2 rigorously monitored and identified any potential recruitment barriers., Methods: Key recruitment stages (ie, whether patients were eligible for the study, approached by the researchers and whether consent was obtained for enrolment) were monitored via comprehensive screening logs at participating sites (inpatient hospices, hospitals and community palliative care teams). The reasons for patients' ineligibility, inaccessibility or decision not to consent were documented., Results: 17 014 patients were screened across 27 participating sites over a 20-month recruitment period. Of those, 4642 (27%) were ineligible for participation in the study primarily due to non-cancer diagnoses. Of 12 372 eligible patients, 9073 (73%) were not approached, the most common reason being a clinical decision not to do so. Other reasons included patients' death or discharge before they were approached by the researchers. Of the 3299 approached patients, 1458 (44%) declined participation mainly because of feeling too unwell, experiencing severe distress or having other competing priorities. 11% (n=1841/17 014) of patients screened were enrolled in the study, representing 15% (n=1841/12 372) of eligible patients. Different recruitment patterns were observed across inpatient hospice, hospital and community palliative care teams., Conclusions: The main barrier to recruitment was 'accessing' potentially eligible patients. Monitoring key recruitment stages may help to identify barriers and facilitators to enrolment and allow results to be put into better context., Trial Registration Number: ISRCTN13688211., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2021. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Background: Approximately 460 000 people die annually in England. Three-quarters of these deaths are expected. Health Education England is prioritising upskilling of clinical staff in response to reports of poor care quality in the last days of life in acute hospitals, where almost half of all deaths occur. This study explores the impact of an end-of-life care (EoLC) educational intervention, Milestones , in acute hospital trusts in Greater London., Methods: This is a mixed methods study. Learners completed a questionnaire pre- (n=452), immediately post- (n=488) and 3 to 8 months post- (n=37) intervention. The questionnaire measured learner confidence in EoLC covering the National Health Service adopted 'Priorities for the Care of the Dying Person'. Paired t-tests were used to determine statistically significant difference in learner confidence pre- and post-intervention. A convenience sample of learners (n=7) and educators (n=5) were recruited to qualitative semi-structured interviews that sought to understand if, how and why Milestones worked. Data were analysed using a thematic approach., Results: A statistically significant increase in learner confidence across all five priorities of care' was sustained up to 8 months (p<0.001). Interviewees wanted to discuss wider challenges in EoLC related to the organisations and cultural contexts in which they worked. Concerns included balancing hope when decision-making, learning as a multidisciplinary team and emotional impact., Conclusion: The findings suggest that Milestones is a flexible, beneficial resource for teaching EoLC that facilitates enhanced learner engagement. Understanding generated about wider concerns can inform future educational material development, organisational process and research study design., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2020. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)