Search

Background: Care home residents often lack access to end-of-life care from specialist palliative care providers. Palliative Care Needs Rounds, developed and tested in Australia, is a novel approach to addressing this., Objective: To co-design and implement a scalable UK model of Needs Rounds., Design: A pragmatic implementation study using the integrated Promoting Action on Research Implementation in Health Services framework., Setting: Implementation was conducted in six case study sites (England, n = 4, and Scotland, n = 2) encompassing specialist palliative care service working with three to six care homes each., Participants: Phase 1: interviews ( n = 28 care home staff, specialist palliative care staff, relatives, primary care, acute care and allied health practitioners) and four workshops ( n = 43 care home staff, clinicians and managers from specialist palliative care teams and patient and public involvement and engagement representatives). Phase 2: interviews ( n = 58 care home and specialist palliative care staff); family questionnaire ( n = 13 relatives); staff questionnaire ( n = 171 care home staff); quality of death/dying questionnaire ( n = 81); patient and public involvement and engagement evaluation interviews ( n = 11); fidelity assessment ( n = 14 Needs Rounds recordings)., Interventions: (1) Monthly hour-long discussions of residents' physical, psychosocial and spiritual needs, alongside case-based learning, (2) clinical work and (3) relative/multidisciplinary team meetings., Main Outcome Measures: A programme theory describing what works for whom under what circumstances with UK Needs Rounds. Secondary outcomes focus on health service use and cost effectiveness, quality of death and dying, care home staff confidence and capability, and the use of patient and public involvement and engagement., Data Sources: Semistructured interviews and workshops with key stakeholders from the six sites; capability of adopting a palliative approach, quality of death and dying index, and Canadian Health Care Evaluation Project Lite questionnaires; recordings of Needs Rounds; care home data on resident demographics/health service use; assessments and interventions triggered by Needs Rounds; semistructured interviews with academic and patient and public involvement and engagement members., Results: The programme theory: while care home staff experience workforce challenges such as high turnover, variable skills and confidence, Needs Rounds can provide care home and specialist palliative care staff the opportunity to collaborate during a protected time, to plan for residents' last months of life. Needs Rounds build care home staff confidence and can strengthen relationships and trust, while harnessing services' complementary expertise. Needs Rounds strengthen understandings of dying, symptom management, advance/anticipatory care planning and communication. This can improve resident care, enabling residents to be cared for and die in their preferred place, and may benefit relatives by increasing their confidence in care quality., Limitations: COVID-19 restricted intervention and data collection. Due to an insufficient sample size, it was not possible to conduct a cost-benefit analysis of Needs Rounds or calculate the treatment effect or family perceptions of care., Conclusions: Our work suggests that Needs Rounds can improve the quality of life and death for care home residents, by enhancing staff skills and confidence, including symptom management, communications with general practitioners and relatives, and strengthen relationships between care home and specialist palliative care staff., Future Work: Conduct analysis of costs-benefits and treatment effects. Engagement with commissioners and policy-makers could examine integration of Needs Rounds into care homes and primary care across the UK to ensure equitable access to specialist care., Study Registration: This study is registered as ISRCTN15863801., Funding: This award was funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Health and Social Care Delivery Research programme (NIHR award ref: NIHR128799) and is published in full in Health and Social Care Delivery Research ; Vol. 12, No. 19. See the NIHR Funding and Awards website for further award information.

Introduction: Palliative and end-of-life care in care homes is often inadequate, despite high morbidity and mortality. Residents can experience uncontrolled symptoms, poor quality deaths and avoidable hospitalisations. Care home staff can feel unsupported to look after residents at the end of life. Approaches for improving end-of-life care are often education-focused, do not triage residents and rarely integrate clinical care. This study will adapt an evidence-based approach from Australia for the UK context called 'Palliative Care Needs Rounds' (Needs Rounds). Needs Rounds combine triaging, anticipatory person-centred planning, case-based education and case-conferencing; the Australian studies found that Needs Rounds reduce length of stay in hospital, and improve dying in preferred place of care, and symptoms at the end of life., Methods and Analysis: This implementation science study will codesign and implement a scalable UK model of Needs Rounds. The Integrated Promoting Action on Research Implementation in Health Services (i-PARIHS) framework will be used to identify contextual barriers and use facilitation to enable successful implementation. Six palliative care teams, working with 4-6 care homes each, will engage in two phases. In phase 1 (February 2021), stakeholder interviews (n=40) will be used to develop a programme theory to meet the primary outcome of identifying what works, for whom in what circumstances for UK Needs Rounds. Subsequently a workshop to codesign UK Needs Rounds will be run. Phase 2 (July 2021) will implement the UK model for a year. Prospective data collection will focus on secondary outcomes regarding hospitalisations, residents' quality of death and care home staff capability of adopting a palliative approach., Ethics and Dissemination: Frenchay Research Ethics Committee (287447) approved the study. Findings will be disseminated to policy-makers, care home/palliative care practitioners, residents/relatives and academic audiences. An implementation package will be developed for practitioners to provide the tools and resources required to adopt UK Needs Rounds., Registration Details: Registration details: ISRCTN15863801., Competing Interests: Competing interests: Not required., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2021. Re-use permitted under CC BY. Published by BMJ.)

Importance: High-quality evidence on how to improve palliative care in nursing homes is lacking., Objective: To investigate the effect of the Palliative Care for Older People (PACE) Steps to Success Program on resident and staff outcomes., Design, Setting, and Participants: A cluster-randomized clinical trial (2015-2017) in 78 nursing homes in 7 countries comparing PACE Steps to Success Program (intervention) with usual care (control). Randomization was stratified by country and median number of beds in each country in a 1:1 ratio., Interventions: The PACE Steps to Success Program is a multicomponent intervention to integrate basic nonspecialist palliative care in nursing homes. Using a train-the-trainer approach, an external trainer supports staff in nursing homes to introduce a palliative care approach over the course of 1 year following a 6-steps program. The steps are (1) advance care planning with residents and family, (2) assessment, care planning, and review of needs and problems, (3) coordination of care via monthly multidisciplinary review meetings, (4) delivery of high-quality care focusing on pain and depression, (5) care in the last days of life, and (6) care after death., Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary resident outcome was comfort in the last week of life measured after death by staff using the End-of-Life in Dementia Scale Comfort Assessment While Dying (EOLD-CAD; range, 14-42). The primary staff outcome was knowledge of palliative care reported by staff using the Palliative Care Survey (PCS; range, 0-1)., Results: Concerning deceased residents, we collected 551 of 610 questionnaires from staff at baseline and 984 of 1178 postintervention in 37 intervention and 36 control homes. Mean (SD) age at time of death ranged between 85.22 (9.13) and 85.91 (8.57) years, and between 60.6% (160/264) and 70.6% (190/269) of residents were women across the different groups. Residents' comfort in the last week of life did not differ between intervention and control groups (baseline-adjusted mean difference, -0.55; 95% CI, -1.71 to 0.61; P = .35). Concerning staff, we collected 2680 of 3638 questionnaires at baseline and 2437 of 3510 postintervention in 37 intervention and 38 control homes. Mean (SD) age of staff ranged between 42.3 (12.1) and 44.1 (11.7) years, and between 87.2% (1092/1253) and 89% (1224/1375) of staff were women across the different groups. Staff in the intervention group had statistically significantly better knowledge of palliative care than staff in the control group, but the clinical difference was minimal (baseline-adjusted mean difference, 0.04; 95% CI, 0.02-0.05; P < .001). Data analyses began on April 20, 2018., Conclusions and Relevance: Residents' comfort in the last week of life did not improve after introducing the PACE Steps to Success Program. Improvements in staff knowledge of palliative care were clinically not important., Trial Registration: ISRCTN Identifier: ISRCTN14741671.

Background: The PACE 'Steps to Success' programme is a complex educational and development intervention for staff to improve palliative care in long-term care facilities (LTCFs). In a cluster randomized controlled trial, this programme has been implemented in 37 LTCFs in 7 European countries. Alongside an effectiveness study, a process evaluation study was conducted. This paper reports on the results of this process evaluation, of which the aim was to provide a more detailed understanding of the implementation of the PACE Programme across and within countries., Methods: The process evaluation followed the Reach, Effectiveness, Adoption, Implementation, Maintenance (RE-AIM) framework and involved various measures and tools, including diaries for country trainers, evaluation questionnaires for care staff, attendance lists and interviews (online and face-to-face, individual and in groups) with country trainers, managers, PACE coordinators and other staff members. Based on key elements of the PACE Programme, a priori criteria for a high, medium and low level of the RE-AIM components Reach, Adoption, Implementation and intention to Maintenance were defined. Qualitative data on factors affecting each RE-AIM component gathered in the online discussion groups and interviews were analysed according to the principles of thematic analysis., Results: The performance of the PACE Programme on the RE-AIM components was highly variable within and across countries, with a high or medium score for in total 28 (out of 37) LTCFs on Reach, for 26 LTCFs on Adoption, for 35 LTCFs on Implementation and for 34 LTCFs on intention to Maintenance. The factors affecting performance on the different RE-AIM components could be classified into three major categories: (1) the PACE Programme itself and its way of delivery, (2) people working with the PACE Programme and (3) contextual factors. Several country-specific challenges in implementing the PACE Programme were identified., Conclusions: The implementation of the PACE Programme was feasible but leaves room for improvement. Our analysis helps to better understand the optimal levels of training and facilitation and provides recommendations to improve implementation in the LTC setting. The results of the process evaluation will be used to further adapt and improve the PACE Programme prior to its further dissemination., Trial Registration: The PACE study was registered at www.isrctn.com-ISRCTN14741671 (FP7-HEALTH-2013-INNOVATION-1 603111) July 30, 2015.

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.

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.

Background: Increasing numbers of older people with advanced dementia are cared for in care homes. No cure is available, so research focused on improving quality of life and quality of care for people with dementia is needed to support them to live and die well. The Namaste Care programme is a multi-dimensional care program with sensory, psycho-social and spiritual components intended to enhance quality of life and quality of care for people with advanced dementia. The aim of the study was to establish whether the Namaste Care program can be implemented in UK care homes; and what effect Namaste Care has on the quality of life of residents with advanced dementia, their families and staff. This article explores the qualitative findings of the study, reporting the effect of the programme on the families of people with advanced dementia and care home staff, and presenting their perceptions of change in care., Methods: An organisational action research methodology was used. Focus groups and interviews were undertaken pre/post implementation of the Namaste Care program. The researcher kept a reflective diary recording data on the process of change. A comments book was available to staff and relatives in each care home. Data was analysed thematically within each care home and then across all care homes., Results: Six care homes were recruited in south London: one withdrew before the study was underway. Of the five remaining care homes, four achieved a full Namaste Care program. One care home did not achieve the full program during the study, and another discontinued Namaste Care when the study ended. Every home experienced management disruption during the study. Namaste Care challenged normal routinised care for older people with advanced dementia. The characteristics of care uncovered before Namaste was implemented were: chaos and confusion, rushing around, lack of trust, and rewarding care. After the programme was implemented these perceptions were transformed, and themes of calmness, reaching out to each other, seeing the person, and, enhanced well-being, emerged., Conclusions: Namaste Care can enrich the quality of life of older people with advanced dementia in care homes. The program was welcomed by care home staff and families, and was achieved with only modest expenditure and no change in staffing levels. The positive impact on residents quality of life influenced the well-being of family carers. Care staff found the changes in care enjoyable and rewarding. Namaste Care was valued for the benefits seen in residents; the improvement in relationships; and the shift towards a person-centred, relationship-based culture of care brought about by introducing the program. Namaste Care deserves further exploration and investigation including a randomised controlled trial.

Background: Action research is beginning to be utilized within palliative care research to address questions concerned with practice and organizational change. An understanding of appropriate evaluation practices is required in order to ensure that high-quality action research is conducted., Aim: The aim of this paper is to present an account of participatory action research and illustrate the way in which evaluation approaches are integrated within this methodology., Design: Participatory action research will be described identifying its origins, principles and its relationship with evaluation frameworks. The key features of the evaluation process in regard to participatory research are outlined., Setting: Two studies are presented which illustrate the integration of evaluation within a participatory action research framework. The first approach uses a before-after summative evaluation approach in a study undertaken to develop palliative care practice within a UK nursing home context. The evaluation focused upon the impact of the intervention. The second study utilized similar methods and addressed the process of the action research using the Äldreväst Sjuhärad (ÄVS) model to evaluate participation in a peer education programme for advance care planning amongst older adults., Results: These examples of evaluation within action research illustrate how diverse methods can be used. The use of a specific participatory evaluation model ensures the process reflects the underlying participatory principle of action research., Conclusions: Evaluation processes are integral to action research approaches. The specific evaluative methods adopted will reflect the nature and focus of the evaluation being undertaken.

The objective of this study was to evaluate the key components of services for people with advanced heart failure from multiple perspectives and recommend how care might be delivered in line with UK policies on long-term conditions, palliative and end-of-life care. Serial interviews were conducted over 2 years with patients, case-linked family carers and professionals (n =162); followed by four focus groups involving patients, carers and key professionals (n =32). There were 36 patients with advanced heart failure, 30 family carers and 62 professionals included in the study from a UK health region with various heart failure care models. Participants confirmed the value of a key health professional coordinating care, holistic assessment and regular monitoring. A lack of time and resources due to competing priorities in primary care, failure to respond to the fluctuations of a heart failure illness trajectory, concerns about the balance between direct care from specialist nurses or a more advisory role and difficulty in judging when to move towards palliative care hindered consistent access to proactive care. A heart failure care framework, with key stages and service responses, was developed. We conclude that patients with long-term conditions needing palliative care should be identified and managed using pragmatic criteria that include a proactive shift in care goals.

Action research in health care is a relatively new research approach, which is adopted when one aim of the research is to bring about change in practice and to research the process of that change. This paper describes the way action research, as a research methodology, can be used to develop palliative care knowledge in generalist care settings. An overview of action research is presented and its relationship to more conventional research paradigms. Two action research projects, undertaken to develop knowledge about end-of-life care for older people in care homes, are used to illustrate the key principles of action research, methods of data collection and data analysis. Finally, the challenges of such, utilising an action research approach and its strengths, are discussed.

Background: New out-of-hours healthcare services in the UK are intended to offer simple, convenient access and effective triage. They may be unsatisfactory for patients with complex needs, where continuity of care is important., Aim: To explore the experiences and perceptions of out-of-hours care of patients with advanced cancer, and with their informal and professional carers., Design of Study: Qualitative, community-based study using in-depth interviews, focus groups and telephone interviews., Setting: Urban, semi-urban and rural communities in three areas of Scotland., Method: Interviews with 36 patients with advanced cancer who had recently used out-of-hours services, and/or their carers, with eight focus groups with patients and carers and 50 telephone interviews with the patient's GP and other key professionals., Results: Patients and carers had difficulty deciding whether to call out-of-hours services, due to anxiety about the legitimacy of need, reluctance to bother the doctor, and perceptions of triage as blocking access to care and out-of-hours care as impersonal. Positive experiences related to effective planning, particularly transfer of information, and empathic responses from staff. Professionals expressed concern about delivering good palliative care within the constraints of a generic acute service, and problems accessing other health and social care services., Conclusions: Service configuration and access to care is based predominantly on acute illness situations and biomedical criteria. These do not take account of the complex needs associated with palliative and end-of-life care. Specific arrangements are needed to ensure that appropriately resourced and integrated out-of-hours care is made accessible to such patient groups.

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 proportion of people dying in long-term care institutions is predicted to increase in future years. Establishing the costs associated with the provision of such care is important as it represents a potentially increasing burden. Aim This study describes the end of life healthcare costs for nursing home residents. The study also explores the effects of resident characteristics on costs, through regression modelling. Setting This study took place in south-east England. Participants Thirty-eight nursing care homes took part in the study, comprising 2444 individual residents. Methods Using a retrospective cohort design, end of life service use was recorded from residents’ nursing care home notes. In this study, end of life was defined as the last six months of life, or from time of residency if this was less than six months. Costs were calculated assuming a healthcare payer perspective. Results The total mean healthcare cost per resident was £3906. Hospital stays accounted for two-thirds (67%) of these costs. Fifty-six percent of these hospital stays occurred in the final month of life. Death in hospital vs. in the nursing care home was associated with an average increase in costs of £4223. Conclusions Death in hospital is costly, and is seldom identified as a preferred place of death. Therefore, interventions are needed which help nursing care home staff to identify when an individual is dying, and have the skill and confidence to make difficult decisions regarding care provision at the end of life. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]