Factors influencing deprescribing in primary care for those towards the end of life: A qualitative interview study with patients and healthcare practitioners.

BACKGROUND: For people with limited lifetime expectancy, the benefit of many medications may be outweighed by their potential harms. Despite the relevance of reducing unnecessary medication use, deprescribing is poorly enacted in primary care practice. AIM: This study aims to describe factors, as identified by primary care professionals and patients, that influence deprescribing in the last phase of life. DESIGN: Semi-structured interviews were conducted and analysed using a thematic approach. SETTING/PARTICIPANTS: This study was performed in primary care settings, including general practices, hospices and community care teams in The Netherlands. Purposefully identified primary care professionals (general practitioners, pharmacists, nurses) and patients with limited lifetime expectancy due to advanced chronic illness or cancer and their caretakers were interviewed. RESULTS: Three themes emerged detailing factors influencing deprescribing in the last phase of life in primary care: (1) non-maleficence, the wish to avoid additional psychological or physical distress; (2) reactive care, the lack of priority and awareness of eligible patients; and (3) discontinuity of care within primary care and between primary care and specialty care. CONCLUSIONS: Deprescribing is an incremental process, complicated by the unpredictability of life expectancy and attitudes of patients and health care professionals that associate continued medication use with clinical stability. Opportunities to facilitate the deprescribing process and its acceptance include the routinely systematic identification of patients with limited life expectancy and potentially inappropriate medications, and normalisation of deprescribing as component of regular primary care, occurring for all patients and continuing into end-of-life care.

Impact of the COVID-19 Outbreak-Delayed Referral of Colorectal and Lung Cancer in Primary Care: A National Retrospective Cohort Study.

The Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) outbreak impacted health care. We investigated its impact on the time to referral and diagnosis for symptomatic cancer patients in The Netherlands. We performed a national retrospective cohort study utilizing primary care records linked to The Netherlands Cancer Registry. For patients with symptomatic colorectal, lung, breast, or melanoma cancer, we manually explored free and coded texts to determine the durations of the primary care (IPC) and secondary care (ISC) diagnostic intervals during the first COVID-19 wave and pre-COVID-19. We found that the median IPC duration increased for colorectal cancer from 5 days (Interquartile Range (IQR) 1-29 days) pre-COVID-19 to 44 days (IQR 6-230, p < 0.01) during the first COVID-19 wave, and for lung cancer, the duration increased from 15 days (IQR) 3-47) to 41 days (IQR 7-102, p < 0.01). For breast cancer and melanoma, the change in IPC duration was negligible. The median ISC duration only increased for breast cancer, from 3 (IQR 2-7) to 6 days (IQR 3-9, p < 0.01). For colorectal cancer, lung cancer, and melanoma, the median ISC durations were 17.5 (IQR (9-52), 18 (IQR 7-40), and 9 (IQR 3-44) days, respectively, similar to pre-COVID-19 results. In conclusion, for colorectal and lung cancer, the time to primary care referral was substantially prolonged during the first COVID-19 wave. In such crises, targeted primary care support is needed to maintain effective cancer diagnosis.

The Impact of the COVID Pandemic on the Incidence of Presentations with Cancer-Related Symptoms in Primary Care.

Introduction: In the Netherlands, the onset of the coronavirus pandemic saw shifts in primary health service provision away from physical consultations, cancer-screening programs were temporarily halted, and government messaging focused on remaining at home. In March and April 2020, weekly cancer diagnoses decreased to 73% of their pre-COVID levels, and 39% for skin cancer. This study aims to explore the effect of the COVID pandemic on patient presentations for cancer-related symptoms in primary care in The Netherlands. Methods: Retrospective cohort study using routine clinical primary care data. Monthly incidences of patient presentations for cancer-related symptoms in five clinical databases in The Netherlands were analysed from March 2018 to February 2021. Results: Data demonstrated reductions in the incidence of cancer-related symptom presentations to primary care during the first COVID wave (March-June 2020) of -34% (95% CI: -43 to -23%) for all symptoms combined. In the second wave (October 2020-February 2021) there was no change in incidence observed (-8%, 95% CI -20% to 6%). Alarm-symptoms demonstrated decreases in incidence in the first wave with subsequent incidences that continued to rise in the second wave, such as: first wave: breast lump -17% (95% CI: -27 to -6%) and haematuria -15% (95% CI -24% to -6%); and second wave: rectal bleeding +14% (95% CI: 0 to 30%) and breast lump +14% (95% CI: 2 to 27%). Presentations of common non-alarm symptom such as tiredness and naevus demonstrated decreased in-cidences in the first wave of 45% (95% CI: -55% to -33%) and 37% (95% CI -47% to -25%). In the second wave, tiredness incidence was reduced by 20% (95% CI: -33% to -3%). Subgroup analy-sis did not demonstrate difference in incidence according to sex, age groups, comorbidity status, or previous history of cancer. Conclusions: These data describe large-scale primary care avoidance that did not increase until the end of the first COVID year for many cancer-related symptoms, suggestive that substantial numbers of patients delayed presenting to primary care. For those patients who had underlying cancer, this may have had impacted the cancer stage at diagnosis, treatment, and mortality.

Understanding Complexity in Care: Opportunities for Ethnographic Research in Palliative Care.

Background: Ethnography has been used to address a broad range of research questions in health care. With ethnographic research methods it is possible to gain access to the complex realities of health care practice as it occurs, through interpreting the nuances of individual and team behaviours, the roles and dynamics of care provision, and the social impacts and influences of illness. The provision of clinical palliative care is complex, involving multidisciplinary collaboration across different health systems, and is subject to a multitude of personal, cultural and environmental influences. This complexity demands creative methodological approaches to research in palliative care, of which ethnography plays an important, if infrequently utilised, role. Aim: This article aims to explore potential opportunities of ethnographic methods for palliative care research. Findings: Ethnographic methods focuses on behaviour in the 'natural' setting of participants, to create theoretical descriptions of events, cultures, interactions and experiences. In palliative care these methods may provide nuanced understandings of illness, relationships and teams, communication, medical education, complex care provision, and novel or changing health practices. Of particular importance is the potential of these methods to understand complex practices and processes, and engage with under-represented population groups who may be excluded from interview research. Conclusion: Ethnography offers important opportunities for future research in palliative care and should be considered as part of the 'research toolbox' to improve understanding of the complex nature of care provision and the experiences of illness and loss.

Communal responsibility: a history of health collectives in Australia.

Healthcare encompasses multiple discourses to which health professionals, researchers, patients, carers and lay individuals contribute. Networks of patients and non-professionals often act collectively to build capacity, enhance access to resources, develop understanding and improve provision of care. This article explores the concept of health collectives and three notable examples that have had an enduring and profound impact in the Australian context.

Systematic review of general practice end-of-life symptom control.

BACKGROUND: End of life care (EoLC) is a fundamental role of general practice, which will become more important as the population ages. It is essential that general practice's role and performance of at the end of life is understood in order to maximise the skills of the entire workforce. OBJECTIVE: To provide a comprehensive description of the role and performance of general practitioners (GPs) and general practice nurses (GPNs) in EoLC symptom control. METHOD: Systematic literature review of papers from 2000 to 2017 were sought from Medline, PsycINFO, Embase, Joanna Briggs Institute and Cochrane databases. RESULTS: From 6209 journal articles, 46 papers reported GP performance in symptom management. There was no reference to the performance of GPNs in any paper identified. Most GPs expressed confidence in identifying EoLC symptoms. However, they reported lack of confidence in providing EoLC at the beginning of their careers, and improvements with time in practice. They perceived emotional support as being the most important aspect of EoLC that they provide, but there were barriers to its provision. GPs felt most comfortable treating pain, and least confident with dyspnoea and depression. Observed pain management was sometimes not optimal. More formal training, particularly in the use of opioids was considered important to improve management of both pain and dyspnoea. CONCLUSIONS: It is essential that GPs receive regular education and training, and exposure to EoLC from an early stage in their careers to ensure skill and confidence. Research into the role of GPNs in symptom control needs to occur.