Feasibility and effectiveness of a two-tiered intervention involving training and a new consultation model for patients with palliative care needs in primary care: A before-after study.

BACKGROUND: Evidence suggests that involving General Practitioners in the care of patients with palliative care needs may improve patient outcomes. AIM: To evaluate whether a two-tiered intervention involving training in palliative care and a new consultation model in primary care for patients with palliative care needs is feasible and could reduce patients' symptom burden. DESIGN: Before-after study including an internal pilot. SETTING/PARTICIPANTS: Nine general practitioners working in a health region in Portugal and 53 patients with palliative care needs from their patient lists were recruited. General Practitioners received training in palliative care and used a new primary palliative care consultation model, with medical consultations every 3 weeks for 12 weeks. The primary outcome was physical symptom burden, self-reported using the Integrated Palliative care Outcome Scale (IPOS) patient version (min.0-max.1000). Secondary outcomes included emotional symptoms (min.0-max.400) and communication/practical issues (min.0-max.300). RESULTS: Of the 35/53 patients completed the 12-week intervention (mean age 72.53 years, SD = 13.45; 54.7% female). All had advanced disease: one third had cancer (n = 13), one third had congestive heart failure (n = 12); others had chronic kidney disease and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. After the 12 weeks of intervention, there was a reduction in physical symptom burden [mean difference from baseline of 71.42 (95%CI 37.01-105.85) with a medium-large effect size (0.71], and in emotional symptom burden [mean difference 42.86 (95%CI 16.14-69.58), with a medium effect size (0.55)]. No difference was found for communication/practical issues. CONCLUSIONS: Our intervention can be effective in reducing patients' physical and emotional symptoms. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov ID - NCT05244590. Registration: 14th February 2022.

[Palliative Care Needs in Primary Health Care: Characteristics of Patients with Advanced Cancer and Dementia]. / Necessidades Paliativas em Cuidados de Saúde Primários: Características dos Doentes com Neoplasia e Demência Avançadas.

INTRODUCTION: The increase in life expectancy brought a higher prevalence of chronic diseases, with an emphasis on those who reached advanced stages and required palliative care. We aimed to characterize patients diagnosed with advanced neoplasms and/or dementia accompanied in primary health care and to test the sensitivity of two tools for identifying patients with palliative needs. METHODS: We recruited three voluntary family physicians who provided data relative to 623 patients with active codification for neoplasm and/or dementia on the MIM@UF platform. We defined 'patient with palliative needs' as any patient with this codification in advanced stadium and made their clinical and sociodemographic characterization. Assuming the existence of advanced-stage disease as the gold standard, we calculated and compared the sensitivities of each of the tools under study: the surprise question, the question 'do you think this patient has palliative needs?' and an instrument that corresponded to identification by at least one of the questions. RESULTS: Among the analyzed data, there were 559 (89.7%) active codifications of neoplasm and 64 (10.3%) of dementia; the prevalence of advanced neoplasm and dementia was 1.0% in the studied sample. The subgroup of patients with advanced dementia showed female sex predominance, an older age, and less access to health care. In both subgroups there was a scarcity of data related to education and income, and we observed polypharmacotherapy and multimorbidity. The sensitivity of the surprise question was 33.3% for neoplasia and 69.3% for dementia; of the new tool 50.0% for neoplasia and 92.3% for dementia; and, when used together, 55.6% for neoplasia and 92.3% for dementia. CONCLUSION: Our results help characterize two subpopulations of patients in need of palliative care and advance with a possible tool for their identification, to be confirmed in a representative sample.

Introdução: O aumento da esperança de vida trouxe maior prevalência de doenças crónicas, merecendo destaque as que atingem estádios avançados e que requerem cuidados paliativos. Pretendeu-se caracterizar os doentes com diagnóstico de neoplasia e/ou demência em estádio avançado, acompanhados em cuidados de saúde primários, e testar a sensibilidade de duas ferramentas para identificação de doentes com necessidades paliativas. Métodos: Recrutámos três médicos de família voluntários que forneceram dados relativos a 623 doentes com codificação ativa de neoplasia e/ou demência na plataforma MIM@UF. Definimos como 'doente com necessidades paliativas' todo o doente com doença em estádio avançado, e fizemos a sua caracterização clínica e sociodemográfica. Assumindo como gold standard a existência de doença em estádio avançado, calculámos e comparámos as sensibilidades de cada uma das ferramentas em estudo: a questão surpresa, a questão 'acha que este doente tem necessidades paliativas?' e um instrumento que correspondesse a identificação por pelo menos uma das questões. Resultados: De entre os dados analisados, existiram 559 (89,7%) codificações ativas de neoplasia e 64 (10,3%) de demência; a prevalência de neoplasia e demência avançadas foi de 1,0% na amostra estudada. O subgrupo de doentes com demência avançada mostrou predomínio do sexo feminino, idade superior e menor acesso a cuidados de saúde. Em ambos os subgrupos houve escassez de dados relativos à escolaridade e rendimento e observámos polifarmacoterapia e multimorbilidade. A sensibilidade da questão surpresa foi de 33,3% para neoplasia e 69,3% para demência; da nova ferramenta de 50,0% para neoplasia e 92,3% para demência; e, quando usadas em conjunto, de 55,6% para neoplasia e 92,3% para demência. Conclusão: Estes resultados ajudam a caracterizar duas subpopulações de doentes com necessidade de cuidados paliativos e avançam com uma possível ferramenta para sua identificação, a confirmar a sua utilidade numa amostra representativa.

Evaluation of deprescription by general practitioners in elderly people with different levels of dependence: cross-sectional study.

BACKGROUND: Polypharmacy is easily achieved in elderly patients with multimorbidity and it is associated with a higher risk of potentially inappropriate medication use and worse health outcomes. Studies have shown that deprescription is safe, however, some barriers have been identified. The aim of this study was to analyse Portuguese General Practitioners (GP) deprescription's attitudes using clinical vignettes. METHODS: Cross-sectional study using an online survey with 3 sections: demographic and professional characterization; two clinical vignettes with an elderly patient with multimorbidity and polypharmacy in which the dependency level varies; barriers and factors influencing deprescription. Frequencies, means, and standard deviations were calculated to describe the GPs. Analysis of the deprescription attitude, globally and for each drug, for each clinical vignette applying the McNeemar's test. RESULTS: A sample of 396 GP was obtained with a mean age of 38 years, most of them female. A statistically significant difference (p < 0.01) was observed in deprescribing according to the patient dependency level, with more GPs (80.4% versus 75.3%) deprescribing in the most dependent patient. A statistically significant difference was found for all drugs except for antihypertensive drugs. All medications were deprescribed more often in dependent patients except for anti-dementia drugs. More than 70% of the participants considered life expectancy and quality of life as "very important" factors for deprescription and more than 90% classified the existence of guidelines and the risks and benefits of medication as "very important" or "important". In the open question, the factors most reported by the GP were those related to the patient (52,9%). CONCLUSIONS: This is the largest study on this topic carried out in Portugal using clinical vignettes, with a representative sample of Portuguese GP. The level of dependence significatively influenced the deprescription attitude of Portuguese GPs. The majority of the GPs classified the quality of life, life expectancies, potential negative effects and the existence of guidelines as "very important" or "important" while deprescribing. It is important to develop and test deprescribing in real life studies to analyze if these attitudes are the same in daily practice.

Non-pharmacological interventions in primary care to improve the quality of life of older patients with palliative care needs: a systematic review of randomised controlled trials.

OBJECTIVES: Our systematic review aimed to summarise non-pharmacological interventions applicable in primary care that improve the quality of life of older patients with palliative care needs. DESIGN: Systematic review. PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcome was patients' quality of life. Secondary outcomes were symptoms relief and patients' well-being measures. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO, Cochrane and CINAHL up to October 2022 for randomised controlled trials (RCTs). We also handsearched abstract books of relevant congresses and scientific meetings in the last 5 years. Screening, data extraction and quality evaluation (Cochrane risk-of-bias (RoB) V.2.0 tool and Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations (GRADE)) were done independently by two reviewers, with disagreements solved by a third reviewer. Findings were narratively synthesised. RESULTS: We identified 4 RCTs, including 268 patients. One study used a broad criteria of palliative care needs ('progressive, life-threatening disease'), two studies focused on advanced cancer and one study on heart failure. The non-pharmacological interventions evaluated were advance care planning conducted by general practitioners (GPs); social worker-aided palliative care; online primary palliative care training for GPs and spiritual history taking by nurses and GPs. No intervention showed a statistically significant impact on quality of life and the evidence was low according to GRADE. CONCLUSION: The results highlight a dearth of evidence on what non-pharmacological interventions can be effectively done in primary care to improve the quality of life of older persons with palliative care needs. The results should be interpreted with caution, as the search more comprehensively covers interventions delivered by GPs. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42020154216.

Non-pharmacological interventions in primary care to improve the quality of life of older patients with palliative care needs: a systematic review protocol.

INTRODUCTION: In the last decades, the number of older people living with chronic diseases has rapidly increased. The prevalence of palliative care needs in this population can reach 17%, making the general practitioner a cornerstone in the identification and first medical intervention delivery. Therefore, knowing the primary care interventions that effectively improve the quality of life of these patients can play an important role in the delivery of healthcare. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: We will systematically review randomised controlled trials evaluating the effect of non-pharmacologic primary care interventions on the quality of life of older patients (≥65 years) with palliative care needs. PsycINFO, EMBASE, MEDLINE, Cochrane and CINAHL will be searched until December 2021. Screening, data extraction and quality evaluation (using the Cochrane RoB 2.0 tool) will be done by independently by two reviewers, with disagreements solved by a third reviewer. We will conduct meta-analysis if appropriate. In case of high heterogeneity, findings will be analysed by subgroup according to intervention type, main disease/symptoms and care context. Evidence will be graded using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation approach. We will perform a sensitivity analysis based on study quality. Publication bias will be assessed using funnel plots. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Formal ethical approval is not required as primary data will not be collected. The results will be disseminated through a peer-reviewed publication, conference presentation and the press. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42020154216.

European Portuguese Language and Cultural Validation of the Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease Assessment Test.

INTRODUCTION: The chronic obstructive pulmonary disease assessment test (CAT) is a self-administered questionnaire that measures health-related quality of life. GOLD proposes using this questionnaire, since it provides thorough coverage of the impact of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) on well-being. This questionnaire has been widely used in daily clinical practice in Portugal, but it lacks validation for European Portuguese. The aim of this study was to carry out the cultural adaptation and validation of the CAT questionnaire so that the most appropriate version can be made available to Portuguese researchers and clinicians. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A cross-sectional descriptive study was performed involving 65 patients with COPD aged 40 years or older. CAT and the previously validated Portuguese-language version of the Clinical Questionnaire for COPD were applied between January 2019 and June 2019. The agreement between the two questionnaires was determined with Kappa agreement with a 95% confidence interval. Spearman correlation was used to find the correlation between two scores. RESULTS: The 65 patients included in the study were observed in a hospital-based pulmonology clinic [aged 68 ± 7 years; forced expiratory volume in 1 sec (FEV1) 49.86% ± 16.5% predicted]. CAT correlated significantly with all the domains and the overall score of the CCQ (0.47 < r < 0.75; p < 0.001). The bilingual patient interclass correlation coefficient was 0.922; Pearson's r = 0.928; p < 0.001. The Cronbach's alpha coefficient was 0.96 (p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: The European Portuguese version of the COPD Assessment Test is a valid instrument for measurement of health-related quality of life in COPD patients. The use of validated questionnaires is of great importance since it generates reliable and reproducible evidence for use either in research or clinical practice.

Introdução: O teste de avaliação da doença pulmonar obstrutiva crónica (CAT) é um questionário autoaplicável que mede a qualidade de vida relacionada com a saúde. As normas internacionais GOLD propõem o uso deste questionário, uma vez que traduz o impacto da doença pulmonar obstrutiva crónica (DPOC) no bem-estar. Este questionário tem sido amplamente utilizado na prática clínica diária em Portugal, mas carece de validação para o português europeu. Assim, o objetivo deste estudo foi realizar a adaptação cultural e validação do questionário CAT para que a sua versão mais adequada possa ser disponibilizada a investigadores e clínicos portugueses. Material e Métodos: Foi realizado um estudo transversal descritivo com 65 doentes com DPOC com 40 anos ou mais. O CAT e a versão em português previamente validada do questionário clínico para DPOC foram aplicados entre janeiro de 2019 e junho de 2019. A concordância entre os dois questionários foi determinada com o teste de concordância de Kappa com intervalo de confiança de 95%. A correlação de Spearman foi usada para avaliar a presença de uma correlação entre os dois scores. Resultados: Os 65 doentes incluídos no estudo foram observados em consulta de pneumologia hospitalar [idade 68 ± 7 anos; volume expiratório máximo no 1º segundo (FEV1) 49,86% ± 16,5% do previsto]. O CAT correlacionou-se significativamente com todos os domínios e com a pontuação geral do CCQ (0,47 < r < 0,75; p < 0,001). O coeficiente de correlação interclasse de doentes bilíngues foi de 0,922; R de Pearson = 0,928; p < 0,001. O coeficiente alfa de Cronbach foi de 0,96 (p < 0,001). Conclusão: A versão em português europeu do CAT é um instrumento válido para medir a qualidade de vida relacionada com a saúde em doentes com DPOC. A aplicação de questionários validados é fundamental, visto que gera evidência confiável e reprodutível para uso em ensaios clínicos ou na prática clínica.