Search

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: The PACE Steps to Success programme is a complex educational and development intervention to improve palliative care in nursing homes. Little research has investigated processes in the cross-cultural adaptation and implementation of interventions in palliative care across countries, taking account of differences in health and social care systems, legal and regulatory policies, and cultural norms. This paper describes a framework for the cross-cultural development and support necessary to implement such an intervention, taking the PACE Steps to Success programme as an exemplar.Methods: The PACE Steps to Success programme was implemented as part of the PACE cluster randomised control trial in seven European countries. A three stage approach was used, a) preparation of resources; b) training in the intervention using a train-the-trainers model; and c) cascading support throughout the implementation. All stages were underpinned by cross-cultural adaptation, including recognising legal and cultural norms, sensitivities and languages. This paper draws upon collated evidence from minutes of international meetings, evaluations of training delivered, interviews with those delivering the intervention in nursing homes and providing and/or receiving support.Results: Seventy eight nursing homes participated in the trial, with half randomized to receive the intervention, 3638 nurses/care assistants were identified at baseline. In each country, 1-3 trainers were selected (total n = 16) to deliver the intervention. A framework was used to guide the cross-cultural adaptation and implementation. Adaptation of three English training resources for different groups of staff consisted of simplification of content, identification of validated implementation tools, a review in 2 nursing homes in each country, and translation into local languages. The same training was provided to all country trainers who cascaded it into intervention nursing homes in local languages, and facilitated it via in-house PACE coordinators. Support was cascaded from country trainers to staff implementing the intervention.Conclusions: There is little guidance on how to adapt complex interventions developed in one country and language to international contexts. This framework for cross-cultural adaptation and implementation of a complex educational and development intervention may be useful to others seeking to transfer quality improvement initiatives in other contexts. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The UK has many excellent care homes that provide high-quality care for their residents; however, across the care home sector, there is a significant need for improvement. Even though the majority of care homes receive a rating of 'good' from regulators, still significant numbers are identified as requiring 'improvement' or are 'inadequate'. Such findings resonate with the public perceptions of long-term care as a negative choice, to be avoided wherever possible--as well as impacting on the career choices of health and social care students. Projections of current demographics highlight that, within 10 years, the part of our population that will be growing the fastest will be those people older than 80 years old with the suggestion that spending on long-term care provision needs to rise from 0.6% of our Gross Domestic Product in 2002 to 0.96% by 2031. Teaching/research-based care homes have been developed in the USA, Canada, Norway, the Netherlands and Australia in response to scandals about care, and the shortage of trained geriatric healthcare staff. There is increasing evidence that such facilities help to reduce inappropriate hospital admissions, increase staff competency and bring increased enthusiasm about working in care homes and improve the quality of care. Is this something that the UK should think of developing? This commentary details the core goals of a Care Home Innovation Centre for training and research as a radical vision to change the culture and image of care homes, and help address this huge public health issue we face. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The global population is changing with an increasing percentage of the oldest old, many of whom in the UK are looked after in care homes. Care homes now provide care for a fifth of the UK population who die each year. However, most nursing care homes are privately owned and not part of the NHS, which exposes staff to a lack of skills/knowledge in relation to end-of-life care. Methods: To implement the Gold Standards Framework in Care Homes Programme and audit outcomes within nursing care homes across five Clinical Commissioning Groups over a 7-year period using a research-based model of facilitation. Results: The percentage of residents dying in nursing care homes increased from 57% to 79%, with improvement in other outcomes. Conclusions: A 'high' facilitation model, including a sustainability initiative and ongoing audit, contributed to significant improvements when implementing the Programme. Reciprocity and trustworthiness underpin the success of this initiative. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: In the UK, implementation of the Gold Standards Framework in Care Homes (GSFCH) programme is being promoted to develop the quality of end-of-life care for frail older people living and dying in care homes. Advance care planning (ACP) discussions are an integral part of this. This study explored experiences of initiating and completing these discussions in homes undertaking the GSFCH. Methods: A qualitative descriptive study was carried out in three nursing care homes implementing the GSFCH programme. Following an ACP discussion, 28 semi-structured interviews were conducted with the resident, a family member, and the staff member who undertook the ACP. Content analysis was then conducted. Findings: Three main categories of findings emerged: understanding ACP, undertaking ACP discussions, and impact of and reactions to ACP discussions. Staff understanding of ACP varied, affecting the depth of their discussions. Documentation was either a useful prompt or limited the discussion, blocking opportunistic cues and encouraging a 'tick-box' exercise. Residents were open to ACP, although the way it was introduced could affect the results. Families were comforted that the resident's future care had been considered. Education was identified as being important, and role modelling ACP enabled a member of staff to develop their skills and confidence in it. Conclusions: Care home staff need to develop the knowledge, skills, and confidence to engage in discussions around end-of-life care. The assistance of a trained facilitator who role-models this process should be explored. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aim:This paper explores the barriers that needed to be overcome during the process of implementing an integrated care pathway for the last days of life as a way of developing quality end-of-life care in nursing homes. Methods: An action research methodology underpinned the study. Qualitative and quantitative data were collected in eight nursing homes before, during and after the implementation of the care pathway. Findings: Six main barriers were identified: a lack of knowledge of palliative care drugs and control of symptoms at the end of life; lack of preparation for approaching death; not knowing when someone is dying or understanding the dying process; lack of multidisciplinary team working in nursing homes; lack of confidence in communicating about dying; some nursing homes are not ready or able to change. These findings highlight a functional `rehabilitative' culture that may not be so appropriate in the current context of nursing home care, and one that makes implementing an integrated care pathway for the last days of life less straightforward than in other settings. Conclusion: It cannot be presumed that the implementation of a care pathway for the last days of life in nursing homes is straightforward. This study suggests that an action research framework was extremely useful in highlighting and overcoming some obstacles when developing evidence-based practice. Action at both local and public policy level is required to fully address barriers that prevent quality end-of-life care in nursing homes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Several studies have highlighted the need for improvement in palliative care delivered to older people long-term care facilities. However, the available evidence on how to improve palliative care in these settings is weak, especially in Europe. We describe the protocol of the PACE trial aimed to 1) evaluate the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of the ‘PACE Steps to Success’ palliative care intervention for older people in long-term care facilities, and 2) assess the implementation process and identify facilitators and barriers for implementation in different countries. Methods: We will conduct a multi-facility cluster randomised controlled trial in Belgium, Finland, Italy, the Netherlands, Poland, Switzerland and England. In total, 72 facilities will be randomized to receive the ‘Pace Steps to Success intervention’ or to ‘care as usual’. Primary outcome at resident level: quality of dying (CAD-EOLD); and at staff level: staff knowledge of palliative care (Palliative Care Survey). Secondary outcomes: resident’s quality of end-of-life care, staff self-efficacy, self-perceived educational needs, and opinions on palliative care. Economic outcomes: direct costs and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs). Measurements are performed at baseline and after the intervention. For the resident-level outcomes, facilities report all deaths of residents in and outside the facilities over a previous four-month period and structured questionnaires are sent to (1) the administrator, (2) staff member most involved in care (3) treating general practitioner, and (4) a relative. For the staff-level outcomes, all staff who are working in the facilities are asked to complete a structured questionnaire. A process evaluation will run alongside the effectiveness evaluation in the intervention group using the RE-AIM framework. Discussion: The lack of high quality trials in palliative care has been recognized throughout the field of palliative care research. This cross-national cluster RCT designed to evaluate the impact of the palliative care intervention for long-term care facilities ‘PACE Steps to Success’ in seven countries, will provide important evidence concerning the effectiveness as well as the preconditions for optimal implementation of palliative care in nursing homes, and this within different health care systems. Trial registration: The study is registered at www.isrctn.com – ISRCTN14741671 (FP7-HEALTH-2013-INNOVATION-1 603111) Registration date: July 30, 2015. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]