Search

Background: The European Association for Palliative Care (EAPC) acknowledges palliative sedation as an important, broadly accepted intervention for patients with life-limiting disease experiencing refractory symptoms. The EAPC therefore developed 2009 a framework on palliative sedation. A revision was needed due to new evidence from literature, ongoing debate and criticism of methodology, terminology and applicability. Aim: To provide evidence- and consensus-based guidance on palliative sedation for healthcare professionals involved in end-of-life care, for medical associations and health policy decision-makers. Design: Revision between June 2020 and September 2022 of the 2009 framework using a literature update and a Delphi procedure. Setting: European. Participants: International experts on palliative sedation (identified through literature search and nomination by national palliative care associations) and a European patient organisation. Results: A framework with 42 statements for which high or very high level of consensus was reached. Terminology is defined more precisely with the terms suffering used to encompass distressing physical and psychological symptoms as well as existential suffering and refractory to describe the untreatable (healthcare professionals) and intolerable (patient) nature of the suffering. The principle of proportionality is introduced in the definition of palliative sedation. No specific period of remaining life expectancy is defined, based on the principles of refractoriness of suffering, proportionality and independent decision-making for hydration. Patient autonomy is emphasised. A stepwise pharmacological approach and a guidance on hydration decision-making are provided. Conclusions: This is the first framework on palliative sedation using a strict consensus methodology. It should serve as comprehensive and soundly developed information for healthcare professionals. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Advance care planning is not well implemented in Belgian hospital practice. In order to obtain successful implementation, implementation theory states that the adopters should be involved in the implementation process. This information can serve as a basis for creating better implementation strategies.Aim: For this study, we asked hospitalized palliative patients and their families what they experienced as good advance care planning.Methods: Twenty-nine interviews were taken from patients and families, following the Tape Assisted Recall procedure of Elliot. These interviews were analyzed using content analysis based on grounded theory. To improve reliability, 3 independent external auditors audited the analysis.Results: Results show that hospitalized palliative patients and families want to have advance care planning communication about treatment and care throughout their disease and about different aspects: social, psychological, physical, practical, and medical. They prefer to have these conversations with their supervising physician. They report 4 important goals of advance care planning communication: establishing a trustful relationship with the physician, in which they feel the involvement of the physician; giving and receiving relevant information for the decision process, making a personal decision about which treatment and care are preferred; and finding consensus between the preferred decision of the physician, the patient and the family concerning the treatment and care policy.Conclusion: This study can contribute to advance care planning implementation in hospital practice because it gives in insight into which elements in advance care planning patients and families experience as necessary and when advance care planning is necessary to them. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Advance Care Planning (ACP) communication is difficult to implement in hospital. Possibly this has to do with the fact that the concept is not well tuned to the needs of hospital professionals or that they experience implementation barriers in practice. Aims: The aim of this study was to investigate what is valued in having ACP conversations by hospital professionals (physicians, nurses, psychologists and social workers) and what they experience as barriers and facilitating factors for having ACP conversations with patients. Methods: A Delphi study consisting of two rounds with respectively 21 and 19 multidisciplinary experts from seven European countries was organised. Data were analysed using content analysis and descriptive statistics. Results: Participants agreed that ACP is valued mostly because it is seen to improve transmural continuation of care, emotional processing of the loss of a patient, and serenity at the end of life. Reported barriers are patient characteristics blocking patient-centred communication and a lack of knowledge to have these conversations. An important facilitator is multidisciplinary cooperation. Conclusions: There is consensus by experts from different settings and countries suggesting that these results can theoretically be applied to hospital settings in Europe. This study reveals that hospital professionals value ACP in hospital practice, but that they encounter several barriers to its implementation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background:: Hospitalists seem to struggle with advance care planning implementation. One strategy to help them is to understand which barriers and helpful factors they may encounter.Aims:: This review aims to give an overview on what hospitalists experience as barriers and helpful factors for having advance care planning conversations.Method:: A systematic synthesis of the qualitative literature was conducted.Data Sources:: A bibliographic search of English peer-reviewed publications in PubMed, Embase, CINAHL, Central, PsycINFO, and Web of Science was undertaken.Results:: Hospitalists report lacking communication skills which lead to difficulties with exploring values and wishes of patients, dealing with emotions of patients and families and approaching the conversation about letting a patient die. Other barriers are related to different interpretations of the concept advance care planning, cultural factors, like being lost in translation, and medicolegal factors, like fearing prosecution. Furthermore, hospitalists report that decision-making is often based on irrational convictions, and it is highly personal. Physician and patient characteristics, like moral convictions, experience, and personality play a role in the decision-making process. Hospitalists report that experience and learning from more experienced colleagues is helpful. Furthermore, efficient multidisciplinary co-operation is helping.Conclusion:: This systematic review shows that barriers are often related to communication issues and the convictions of the involved hospitalist. However, they seem to be preventable by creating a culture where experienced professionals can be consulted, where convictions can be questioned, and where co-operation within and between organizations is encouraged. This knowledge can serve as a basis for implementation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Integrated palliative care aims at improving coordination of palliative care services around patients' anticipated needs. However, international comparisons of how integrated palliative care is implemented across four key domains of integrated care (content of care, patient flow, information logistics and availability of (human) resources and material) are lacking. Aim: To examine how integrated palliative care takes shape in practice across abovementioned key domains within several integrated palliative care initiatives in Europe. Design: Qualitative group interview design. Setting/participants: A total of 19 group interviews were conducted (2 in Belgium, 4 in the Netherlands, 4 in the United Kingdom, 4 in Germany and 5 in Hungary) with 142 healthcare professionals from several integrated palliative care initiatives in five European countries. The majority were nurses (n = 66; 46%) and physicians (n = 50; 35%). Results: The dominant strategy for fostering integrated palliative care is building core teams of palliative care specialists and extended professional networks based on personal relationships, shared norms, values and mutual trust, rather than developing standardised information exchange and referral pathways. Providing integrated palliative care with healthcare professionals in the wider professional community appears difficult, as a shared proactive multidisciplinary palliative care approach is lacking, and healthcare professionals often do not know palliative care professionals or services. Conclusion: Achieving better palliative care integration into regular healthcare and convincing the wider professional community is a difficult task that will take time and effort. Enhancing standardisation of palliative care into education, referral pathways and guidelines and standardised information exchange may be necessary. External authority (policy makers, insurance companies and professional bodies) may be needed to support integrated palliative care practices across settings. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In Belgium, Advance Care Planning (ACP) is not well implemented in hospital practice. One of the premises for successful implementation is involving the adopters in the implementation process. In hospital, important adopters of ACP are physicians, nurses, social workers, and psychologists. First, this study wants to understand what the characteristics are of ACP in hospital, according to professionals. Second, this study aims to give an insight in the experienced value of ACP. Third, the experienced barriers to have ACP conversations are explored. Twenty-four interviews were taken and analyzed with Content Analysis based on Grounded Theory. Three independent external auditors surveilled the analysis. ACP in hospital exists by the grace of the initiative of the actors involved in the case. Professionals perceive fields of tension between one another; barriers to ACP communication. ACP is mainly considered valuable because it is a process that creates time for exploration and reflection. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Patients with advanced diseases often experience deficient continuity of care. Although integrated palliative care promotes continuity of care, it is not clear how it can be optimized to improve continuity of care experiences. Aim: To examine how relational, informational and management continuity of care are experienced by patients with advanced diseases and their family caregivers receiving care from several integrated palliative care initiatives in five European countries. Design: We adopted a longitudinal qualitative study design including two interviews (interval 3 months) with patients and family caregivers focusing on how health care professionals responded to their needs. Interviews were audio-recorded and transcribed verbatim. Analysis involved a two-step qualitative content approach. Setting/participants: A total of 22 integrated palliative care initiatives (established local palliative care collaborations) were selected in Belgium, Germany, Hungary, the Netherlands and the United Kingdom. We recruited 152 patients (63% cancer, 24% chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, 13% heart failure; life expectancy <1 year; mean age 68 years, 56% female) and 92 family caregivers (mean age 61 years, 66% female). Results: Trusted relationships with a small number of key health care professionals to receive tailored care and easily access help were essential. Relational continuity was often deficient, especially with general practitioners. Although informational and management continuity was often lacking in care provision, collaborative integrated palliative care initiatives were related to consistent and coherent care. Conclusion: Patients and family caregivers most likely experience continuity of care by having a small number of trusted health care professionals who are available, provide multidisciplinary care and regularly transfer information to all health care professionals involved. Optimizing continuity of care requires further integration of integrated palliative care initiatives with other health care professionals involved in the patients’ care networks. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article discusses research which examined the diagnostic and concurrent validity, internal consistency and user-friendliness of the Delirium Observation Screening Scale administered by bedside nurses in palliative care unit patients. Findings revealed the presence of delirium in 22.9% of patients, very good diagnostic validity of the Scale and the need for verbally active patients to perform observations correctly.