Search

Background: Understanding how socioeconomic position influences the symptoms and concerns of patients approaching the end of life is important for planning more equitable care. Data on this relationship is lacking, particularly for patients with non-cancer conditions., Aim: To analyse the association between socioeconomic position and the symptoms and concerns of older adult patients seen by specialist palliative care., Design: Secondary analysis of cross-sectional, routinely collected electronic patient data. We used multivariable linear regression with robust standard errors, to predict scores on the three subscales of the Integrated Palliative care Outcome Scale (IPOS; physical symptoms, emotional symptoms and communication and practical concerns) based on patient level of deprivation, measured using Index of Multiple Deprivation., Setting/participants: Consecutive inpatients aged 60 years and over, seen by specialist palliative care at two large teaching hospitals in London between 1st January 2016 and 31st December 2019., Results: Seven thousand eight hundred and sixty patients were included, 38.3% had cancer. After adjusting for demographic and clinical characteristics, patients living in the most deprived areas had higher (worse) predicted mean scores on the communication and practical subscale than patients living in the least deprived areas, 5.38 (95% CI: 5.10, 5.65) compared to 4.82 (4.62, 5.02) respectively. This effect of deprivation diminished with increasing age. Deprivation was not associated with scores on the physical or emotional symptoms subscales., Conclusions: Targetting resources to address practical and communication concerns could be a strategy to reduce inequalities. Further research in different hospitals and across different settings using patient centred outcome measures is needed to examine inequalities.

Background: Methods to improve care, trust and communication are important in acute hospitals. Complex interventions aimed at improving care of patients approaching the end of life are increasingly common. While evaluating outcomes of complex interventions is essential, exploring healthcare professionals' perceptions is also required to understand how they are interpreted; this can inform training, education and implementation strategies to ensure fidelity and consistency in use., Aim: To explore healthcare professionals' perceptions of using a complex intervention (AMBER care bundle) to improve care for people approaching the end of life and their understandings of its purpose within clinical practice., Design: Qualitative study of healthcare professionals. Analysis informed by Medical Research Council guidance for process evaluations., Setting/participants: A total of 20 healthcare professionals (12 nursing and 8 medical) interviewed from three London tertiary National Health Service hospitals. Healthcare professionals recruited from palliative care, oncology, stroke, health and ageing, medicine, neurology and renal/endocrine services., Results: Three views emerged regarding the purpose of a complex intervention towards the end of life: labelling/categorising patients, tool to change care delivery and serving symbolic purpose indirectly affecting behaviours of individuals and teams. All impact upon potential utility of the intervention. Participants described the importance of training and education alongside implementation of the intervention. However, adequate exposure to the intervention was essential to witness its potential added value or embed it into practice., Conclusion: Understanding differing interpretations of complex interventions is essential. Consideration of ward composition, casemix and potential exposure to the intervention is critical for their successful implementation.

Background: Clinical uncertainty is emotionally challenging for patients and carers and creates additional pressures for those clinicians in acute hospitals. The AMBER care bundle was designed to improve care for patients identified as clinically unstable, deteriorating, with limited reversibility and at risk of dying in the next 1-2 months., Aim: To examine the experience of care supported by the AMBER care bundle compared to standard care in the context of clinical uncertainty, deterioration and limited reversibility., Design: A comparative observational mixed-methods study using semi-structured qualitative interviews and a followback survey., Setting/participants: Three large London acute tertiary National Health Service hospitals. Nineteen interviews with 23 patients and carers (10 supported by AMBER care bundle and 9 standard care). Surveys completed by next of kin of 95 deceased patients (59 AMBER care bundle and 36 standard care)., Results: The AMBER care bundle was associated with increased frequency of discussions about prognosis between clinicians and patients (χ(2) = 4.09, p = 0.04), higher awareness of their prognosis by patients (χ(2) = 4.29, p = 0.04) and lower clarity in the information received about their condition (χ(2) = 6.26, p = 0.04). Although the consistency and quality of communication were not different between the two groups, those supported by the AMBER care bundle described more unresolved concerns about caring for someone at home., Conclusion: Awareness of prognosis appears to be higher among patients supported by the AMBER care bundle, but in this small study this was not translated into higher quality communication, and information was judged less easy to understand. Adequately powered comparative evaluation is urgently needed., (© The Author(s) 2015.)

Our objective was to assess the impact of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) infection in palliative care. The study was conducted at three hospices in south London, totalling 118 beds, and the following two methods were used. Firstly, a retrospective review of the notes of patients who were known to be MRSA positive at admission or were subsequently found to be MRSA positive was taken. Secondly, a prospective study of factors influencing bed occupancy in one hospice was conducted. The proportion of admissions who were MRSA positive ranged from 4% to 8% in the three hospices. Seven of the 43 patients who had MRSA suffered clinically significant infections. Risk factors for colonization and bacteraemia were similar to the general population. Sites of infection were variable and multiple and treatment regimes for eradication were variable, with varying outcomes. MRSA infection appeared to delay admission because of the need for single rooms, of which there are few Time spent cleaning rooms after discharge or death also reduced the number of available beds. It was concluded that MRSA infection is associated with significant morbidity in a small number of palliative care patients. Beds unavailable because of MRSA should be considered in bed occupancy figures, otherwise bed occupancy may appear artificially low. The psychological and financial impact of the infection in palliative care patients needs further evaluation.