Search

Background: General practitioners (GPs) play a crucial part in palliative care. The quality of care can be improved by investigating and addressing barriers perceived by GPs in daily practice. The aim of this study was to investigate GPs' task perception and barriers involved in palliative care. Methods: Qualitative focus group study. We gathered together a group of GPs representing a broad range of experience in palliative care. Content analysis was performed to derive a comprehensive view of tasks and barriers in daily palliative care. Results: GPs described their palliative care tasks as satisfactory and varied, but burdensome. Palliative care tasks included somatic and psychosocial care. Opinions differed with respect to whether the coordination of care belonged to the primary GP tasks. Barriers were classified according to three levels: (1) personal: barriers related to knowledge, skills, emotions; (2) relational: barriers concerning communication and collaboration; (3) organizational: barriers related to the organization of care and compartmentalization in healthcare. Conclusions: This study revealed a complex web of tasks and barriers. It may be possible to trace back a problem (lack of knowledge, for example) on the personal level to an isolated knowledge gap, but the problem may well have originated from communication or compartmentalization problems. To maintain GPs' feeling of being at ease with palliative care requires helping them acquire the appropriate balance between technical and organizational interventions and a compassionate orientation to their terminally ill patients. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract: Objective: To gain insight into the experiences of a palliative care patient and her husband who were living on borrowed time. Methods: A qualitative single case design was used. Systematic content analysis of the interview data, obtained in an in-depth semi-structured interview, from the husband and wife was conducted to extract themes relating to living on borrowed time. Results: Three themes were identified: shifts in the interpretation of physical signs and symptoms, altered view of the future and altered choices and priorities. Conclusion: The identified themes lead to a better understanding of the phenomenon of living on borrowed time. Yet, refinement of, and variation within the themes still need to be studied in order to get more grips on the themes and to be better able to help patients to integrate the ‘new reality’. Practice implications: Our findings can be used to support professionals in the practical application of care when their patients need to integrate the ‘new reality’ and seek new equilibrium, e.g. converted into a conversational guide, or used for educational purposes. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Abstract: No instrument to assess autonomy problems in palliative care is currently available. The purpose of this study was to develop a comprehensive and concise questionnaire to measure autonomy problems in palliative cancer patients and to study its validity and reliability. We systematically developed a questionnaire through: a) a literature review of the concepts and elements of autonomy; b) qualitative analysis of interviews with patients and professional carers; c) the construction of questionnaires; and d) testing validity and reliability. The basic conceptual elements were: dependency, losing control, and limitation of activities. Patients with disseminated cancer in the palliative stage of the disease (n = 64) participated in the study. A 9-item Patient Autonomy Questionnaire (PAQ) was developed (Cronbach''s alpha 0.86), followed by a concise 4-item version (PAQs) (Cronbach''s alpha 0.71). Autonomy problems were more prevalent than pain problems. The development of the PAQ may help draw attention to autonomy problems. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

This study describes a new clinical tool for needs assessment in palliative care: the Problems and Needs in Palliative Care questionnaire (PNPC). It was developed to support the provision of care tailored to the specific demands of patients, which only can be provided when their needs are clearly identified. To test validity and reliability, 64 patients with metastatic cancer living at home completed the PNPC. Of 140 initial items, 2 were deleted because of low response. No important topics were missing. Dimensions were proposed to organize the problems and needs in a logical and practical array for use in individual patients, and to enable statistical analysis of patient-groups. Reliability analysis supported the proposed dimensions, with Cronbach''s alpha coefficient >0.70 for dimensions with ≥5 items, and alpha >0.65 for the 3- and 4-item dimensions. However, the dimensions ‘physical symptoms’ and ‘social issues’ lacked coherency with some low item-total correlations. The PNPC demonstrated convergent validity with the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) and COOP-WONCA quality-of-life measures. These data are a first step in validating the PNPC, although the ‘social issues’ dimension needs reconsideration. Further studies are needed to evaluate clinical use. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

This study presents a comprehensive overview of the problems patients experience in a palliative phase of cancer. A two-step qualitative method was used: in-depth interviews with patients and relatives (N=9 patients+7 relatives), followed by interviews (N=31 patients+15 relatives) using a checklist to confirm and complete the picture. Quality of life and quality of care domains were addressed. Patients experienced problems in all of these palliative care domains, although individual patients may have experienced only a few problems. Fatigue, feelings of futility, reluctance to accept help, fear of suffering and the fear that help would not be available if needed, were common problems. Communication problems arose when a grudge against a GP had remained, or because one family member tried to spare the other a confrontation with his/her feelings of fear or grief. A comprehensive checklist of relevant problems is presented. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]