Symptom burden, service use and care dissatisfaction among older adults with cancer, cardiovascular disease, respiratory disease, dementia and neurological disease during the last 3 months before death: A pooled analysis of mortality follow-back surveys.

BACKGROUND: Variation in the provision of care and outcomes in the last months of life by cancer and non-cancer conditions is poorly understood. AIMS: (1) To describe patient conditions, symptom burden, practical problems, service use and dissatisfaction with end-of-life care for older adults based on the cause of death. (2) To explore factors related to these variables focussing on the causes of death. DESIGN: Secondary analysis of pooled data using cross-sectional mortality follow-back surveys from three studies: QUALYCARE; OPTCare Elderly; and International Access, Right, and Empowerment 1. SETTING/PARTICIPANTS: Data reported by bereaved relatives of people aged ⩾75 years who died of cancer, cardiovascular disease, respiratory disease, dementia or neurological disease. RESULTS: The pooled dataset contained 885 responses. Overall, service use and circumstances surrounding death differed significantly across causes of death. Bereaved relatives reported symptom severity from moderate to overwhelming in over 30% of cases for all causes of death. Across all causes of death, 28%-38% of bereaved relatives reported some level of dissatisfaction with care. Patients with cardiovascular disease and dementia experienced lower symptom burden and dissatisfaction than those with cancer. The absence of a reliable key health professional was consistently associated with higher symptom burden (p = 0.002), practical problems (p = 0.001) and dissatisfaction with care (p = 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: We showed different trajectories towards death depending on cause. Improving symptom burden and satisfaction in patients at the end-of-life is challenging, and the presence of a reliable key health professional may be helpful.

Views of patients with progressive illness and carers about the role of digital advance care planning systems to record and share information: A qualitative study.

BACKGROUND: Digital approaches are being explored internationally to support the elicitation, documentation and sharing of advance care planning information. However, the views and experiences of patients and carers are little understood, impeding the development and impact of digital approaches to strengthen palliative and end-of-life care. AIM: To explore perspectives of patients with progressive illness and their carers on digital approaches to advance care planning, anticipated impact from their use and expectations for their future development. DESIGN: A qualitative study employing thematic framework analysis of data collected from focus groups and semi-structured interviews. SETTING/PARTICIPANTS: Purposive sample of 29 patients and 15 current or bereaved carers in London and West Yorkshire from hospice settings, non-governmental support and advocacy groups, and care home residents. RESULTS: Four generated themes included: 1. 'Why haven't you read what's wrong with me?'; uncertainty around professionals' documenting, sharing and use of information; 2. The art of decision-making relies on the art of conversation; 3. The perceived value in having 'a say in matters': control and responsibility; 4. Enabling patient and carer control of their records: 'custodianship is key'. CONCLUSIONS: Lived experiences of information sharing influenced trust and confidence in digital advance care planning systems. Despite scepticism about the extent that care can be delivered in line with their preferences, patients and carers acknowledge digital systems could facilitate care through contemporaneous and accurately documented wishes and preferences. There remains a need to determine how independent patient and public-facing advance care planning resources might be integrated with existing digital health record systems.

Integration of primary care and palliative care services to improve equality and equity at the end-of-life: Findings from realist stakeholder workshops.

BACKGROUND: Inequalities in access to palliative and end of life care are longstanding. Integration of primary and palliative care has the potential to improve equity in the community. Evidence to inform integration is scarce as research that considers integration of primary care and palliative care services is rare. AIM: To address the questions: 'how can inequalities in access to community palliative and end of life care be improved through the integration of primary and palliative care, and what are the benefits?' DESIGN: A theory-driven realist inquiry with two stakeholder workshops to explore how, when and why inequalities can be improved through integration. Realist analysis leading to explanatory context(c)-mechanism(m)-outcome(o) configurations(c) (CMOCs). FINDINGS: A total of 27 participants attended online workshops (July and September 2022): patient and public members (n = 6), commissioners (n = 2), primary care (n = 5) and specialist palliative care professionals (n = 14). Most were White British (n = 22), other ethnicities were Asian (n = 3), Black African (n = 1) and British mixed race (n = 1). Power imbalances and racism hinder people from ethnic minority backgrounds accessing current services. Shared commitment to addressing these across palliative care and primary care is required in integrated partnerships. Partnership functioning depends on trusted relationships and effective communication, enabled by co-location and record sharing. Positive patient experiences provide affirmation for the multi-disciplinary team, grow confidence and drive improvements. CONCLUSIONS: Integration to address inequalities needs recognition of current barriers. Integration grounded in trust, faith and confidence can lead to a cycle of positive patient, carer and professional experience. Prioritising inequalities as whole system concern is required for future service delivery and research.

Co-design of the EMBED-Care Framework as an intervention to enhance shared decision-making for people affected by dementia and practitioners, comprising holistic assessment, linked with clinical decision support tools: A qualitative study.

INTRODUCTION: Shared decision-making intends to align care provision with individuals' preferences. However, the involvement of people living with dementia in decision-making about their care varies. We aimed to co-design the EMBED-Care Framework, to enhance shared decision-making between people affected by dementia and practitioners. METHODS: A theory and evidence driven co-design study was conducted, using iterative workshops, informed by a theoretical model of shared decision-making and the EMBED-Care Framework (the intervention) for person-centred holistic palliative dementia care. The intervention incorporates a holistic outcome measure for assessment and review, linked with clinical decision-support tools to support shared decision-making. We drew on the Medical Research Council (MRC) guidance for developing and evaluating complex interventions. Participants included people with dementia of any type, current or bereaved family carers and practitioners. We recruited via established dementia groups and research and clinical networks. Data were analysed using reflexive thematic analysis to explore how and when the intervention could enhance communication and shared decision-making, and the requirements for use, presented as a logic model. RESULTS: Five co-design workshops were undertaken with participants comprising people affected by dementia (n = 18) and practitioners (n = 36). Three themes were generated, comprising: (1) 'knowing the person and personalisation of care', involving the person with dementia and/or family carer identifying the needs of the person using a holistic assessment. (2) 'engaging and considering the perspectives of all involved in decision-making' required listening to the person and the family to understand their priorities, and to manage multiple preferences. (3) 'Training and support activities' to use the Framework through use of animated videos to convey information, such as to understand the outcome measure used to assess symptoms. CONCLUSIONS: The intervention developed sought to enhance shared decision-making with individuals affected by dementia and practitioners, through increased shared knowledge of individual priorities and choices for care and treatment. The workshops generated understanding to manage disagreements in determining priorities. Practitioners require face-to-face training on the intervention, and on communication to manage sensitive conversations about symptoms, care and treatment with individuals and their family. The findings informed the construction of a logic model to illustrate how the intervention is intended to work.

Exploring access to community care and emergency department use among people with dementia: A qualitative interview study with people with dementia, and current and bereaved caregivers.

OBJECTIVES: Emergency department (ED) attendance is common among people with dementia and associated with poor health outcomes. Literature suggests a link between access to community care and the ED, but we know little about the mechanisms behind this link. This study aimed to explore experiences of accessing community and emergency care among people affected by dementia. METHODS: Informed by critical realism, semi-structured online and telephone interviews were conducted with people with dementia and family caregivers, with and without experience of using the ED. Participants were recruited from across the United Kingdom using purposive sampling with maximum variation. A mostly experiential reflexive thematic analysis approach was used, applying the candidacy model of access to deepen interpretation. RESULTS: Two dyad and 33 individual interviews were conducted with 10 people with dementia, 11 current caregivers and 16 bereaved caregivers (men = 11, 70-89 years = 18, white ethnicity = 32). Three themes are reported: (1) Navigating a 'push system', (2) ED as the 'last resort', and (3) Taking dementia 'seriously'. Themes describe a discrepancy between the configuration of services and the needs of people affected by dementia, who resort to the ED in the absence of accessible alternatives. Underlying this discrepancy is a lack of systemic prioritisation of dementia and wider societal stigma. CONCLUSION: Although a last resort, ED attendance is frequently the path of least resistance for people with dementia who encounter multiple barriers for timely, responsive access to community health and social care. Greater systemic prioritisation of dementia as a life-limiting condition may help to reduce reliance on the ED through essential development of post-diagnostic care, from diagnosis to the end of life.

A population-based retrospective cohort study of end-of-life emergency department visits by people with dementia: multilevel modelling of individual- and service-level factors using linked data.

BACKGROUND: emergency department (ED) visits have inherent risks for people with dementia yet increase towards the end-of-life. Although some individual-level determinants of ED visits have been identified, little is known about service-level determinants. OBJECTIVE: to examine individual- and service-level factors associated with ED visits by people with dementia in the last year of life. METHODS: retrospective cohort study using hospital administrative and mortality data at the individual-level, linked to health and social care service data at the area-level across England. The primary outcome was number of ED visits in the last year of life. Subjects were decedents with dementia recorded on the death certificate, with at least one hospital contact in the last 3 years of life. RESULTS: of 74,486 decedents (60.5% women; mean age 87.1 years (standard deviation: 7.1)), 82.6% had at least one ED visit in their last year of life. Factors associated with more ED visits included: South Asian ethnicity (incidence rate ratio (IRR) 1.07, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.02-1.13), chronic respiratory disease as the underlying cause of death (IRR 1.17, 95% CI 1.14-1.20) and urban residence (IRR 1.06, 95% CI 1.04-1.08). Higher socioeconomic position (IRR 0.92, 95% CI 0.90-0.94) and areas with higher numbers of nursing home beds (IRR 0.85, 95% CI 0.78-0.93)-but not residential home beds-were associated with fewer ED visits at the end-of-life. CONCLUSIONS: the value of nursing home care in supporting people dying with dementia to stay in their preferred place of care must be recognised, and investment in nursing home bed capacity prioritised.

How is community based 'out-of-hours' care provided to patients with advanced illness near the end of life: A systematic review of care provision.

BACKGROUND: Deaths in the community are increasing. However, community palliative care out-of-hours is variable. We lack detailed understanding of how care is provided out-of-hours and the associated outcomes. AIM: To review systematically the components, outcomes and economic evaluation of community-based 'out-of-hours' care for patients near the end of life and their families. DESIGN: Mixed method systematic narrative review. Narrative synthesis, development and application of a typology to categorise out-of-hours provision. Qualitative data were synthesised thematically and integrated at the level of interpretation and reporting. DATA SOURCES: Systematic review searching; MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO, CINAHL from January 1990 to 1st August 2022. RESULTS: About 64 publications from 54 studies were synthesised (from 9259 retrieved). Two main themes were identified: (1) importance of being known to a service and (2) high-quality coordination of care. A typology of out-of-hours service provision was constructed using three overarching dimensions (service times, focus of team delivering the care and type of care delivered) resulting in 15 categories of care. Only nine papers were randomised control trials or controlled cohorts reporting outcomes. Evidence on effectiveness was apparent for providing 24/7 specialist palliative care with both hands-on clinical care and advisory care. Only nine publications reported economic evaluation. CONCLUSIONS: The typological framework allows models of out-of-hours care to be systematically defined and compared. We highlight the models of out-of-hours care which are linked with improvement of patient outcomes. There is a need for effectiveness and cost effectiveness studies which define and categorise out-of-hours care to allow thorough evaluation of services.

Needs-based triggers for timely referral to palliative care for older adults severely affected by noncancer conditions: a systematic review and narrative synthesis.

BACKGROUND: Older people with noncancer conditions are less likely to be referred to palliative care services due to the inherent uncertain disease trajectory and a lack of standardised referral criteria. For older adults with noncancer conditions where prognostic estimation is unpredictable, needs-based criteria are likely more suitable. Eligibility criteria for participation in clinical trials on palliative care could inform a needs-based criteria. This review aimed to identify and synthesise eligibility criteria for trials in palliative care to construct a needs-based set of triggers for timely referral to palliative care for older adults severely affected by noncancer conditions. METHODS: A systematic narrative review of published trials of palliative care service level interventions for older adults with noncancer conditions. Electronic databases Medline, Embase, CINAHL, PsycINFO, CENTRAL, and ClinicalTrials.gov. were searched from inception to June 2022. We included all types of randomised controlled trials. We selected trials that reported eligibility criteria for palliative care involvement for older adults with noncancer conditions, where > 50% of the population was aged ≥ 65 years. The methodological quality of the included studies was assessed using a revised Cochrane risk-of-bias tool for randomized trials. Descriptive analysis and narrative synthesis provided descriptions of the patterns and appraised the applicability of included trial eligibility criteria to identify patients likely to benefit from receiving palliative care. RESULTS: 27 randomised controlled trials met eligibility out of 9,584 papers. We identified six major domains of trial eligibility criteria in three categories, needs-based, time-based and medical history-based criteria. Needs-based criteria were composed of symptoms, functional status, and quality of life criteria. The major trial eligibility criteria were diagnostic criteria (n = 26, 96%), followed by medical history-based criteria (n = 15, 56%), and physical and psychological symptom criteria (n = 14, 52%). CONCLUSION: For older adults severely affected by noncancer conditions, decisions about providing palliative care should be based on the present needs related to symptoms, functional status, and quality of life. Further research is needed to examine how the needs-based triggers can be operationalized as referral criteria in clinical settings and develop international consensus on referral criteria for older adults with noncancer conditions.

Factors Associated With Depression and Anxiety for Community-Dwelling Patients With Heart Failure: A Retrospective Cohort Study.

BACKGROUND: Depression and anxiety are common comorbidities in heart failure (HF) and are associated with adverse outcomes including unplanned hospitalization. However, there is insufficient evidence on the factors associated with depression and anxiety for community patients with HF to inform optimal assessment and treatment in this population. AIM: The aim of this study was to examine the prevalence of and factors associated with depression and anxiety in community-dwelling patients with HF. METHODS: A retrospective cohort study of 302 adult patients given a diagnosis of HF referred to United Kingdom's largest specialist cardiac rehabilitation center, from June 2013 to November 2020. Main study outcomes were symptoms of depression using Patient Health Questionnaire-9 and anxiety using the General Anxiety Disorder 7-item scale. Explanatory variables included demographic and clinical characteristics and functional status from the Dartmouth COOP questionnaire: quality of life, pain, level of social activity and daily activities, and being bothered by emotional problems (feelings). Logistic regressions were performed to evaluate the association between demographic and clinical characteristics and depression and anxiety. RESULTS: Of the sample, 26.2% reported depression and 20.2% had anxiety. Higher depression and anxiety were associated with difficulty in performing daily activities (95% confidence interval, 1.11-6.46 and 1.13-8.09, respectively) and being bothered by feelings (95% confidence interval, 4.06-21.77 and 4.25-22.46, respectively). Depression was associated with limitations in social activity (95% confidence interval, 1.06-6.34) and anxiety with distressing pain (95% confidence interval, 1.38-7.23). CONCLUSION: Findings indicate the importance of psychosocial interventions for patients with HF to minimize and manage depression and anxiety. Patients with HF may benefit from interventions targeted to maintain independence, promote participation in social activities, and optimally manage pain.

Family carers' administration of injectable medications at the end of life: a service evaluation of a novel intervention.

Timely and safe administration of injectable medications for patients at home is vital in optimally managing distressing symptoms in the final days of life. This article discusses a service evaluation of family carers' (including close friends) administrating subcutaneous end-of-life medications. The procedure was not intended to become normal care, rather the exception when appropriate and needed, with 24/7 skilled support from community nursing and palliative care services. A service evaluation of the procedure was undertaken in rural and urban areas in the South East of England. The procedure ran over 6 months and used detailed processes with recruitment criteria to mitigate risk of harm. In total, 11 patients participated with their family carers, including five carers with experience in healthcare roles. Of the 11 family carers, 10 were able to administer injections safely with structured training and support in place. Patients received timely symptom relief and their family carers were able to support loved ones by administering injectable medications rapidly without waiting for a nurse to arrive. This was particularly welcomed in more rural areas where waiting times were greater due to the large geographical area covered and limited staff availability during out-of-hours periods. The findings informed a carefully monitored wider rollout and ongoing evaluation in adult community nursing services in the NHS Trust.

The most important components of out-of-hours community care for patients at the end of life: A Delphi study of healthcare professionals' and patient and family carers' perspectives.

BACKGROUND: Community services for palliative patients outside normal working hours are variable and the best evidence-based models of care have not been determined. AIM: To establish expert consensus on the most important components of out-of-hours community palliative care services. DESIGN: Delphi study. The first round listed 68 components generated from systematic literature reviewing, focus groups with healthcare professionals and input from the project's patient and public involvement advisory group. The components deemed 'essential' by over 70% of participants in the first round were refined and carried forward to a second round, asking participants to rank each on a five-point Likert scale (5 highest to 1 lowest). The consensus threshold was median of 4 to 5 and interquartile range of ⩽1. PARTICIPANTS: Community specialist palliative care health professionals, generalist community health professionals and patients and family carers with experience of receiving care out-of-hours at home. RESULTS: Fifty-four participants completed round 1, and 44 round 2. Forty-five components met the threshold as most important for providing out-of-hours care, with highest consensus for: prescription, delivery and administration of medicines; district and community nurse visits; and shared electronic patient records and advance care plans. CONCLUSIONS: The Delphi method identified the most important components to provide community palliative care for patients out-of-hours, which are often provided by non-specialist palliative care professionals. The importance placed on the integration and co-ordination with specialist palliative care through shared electronic records and advance care plans demonstrates the reassurance for patients and families of being known to out-of-hours services.

Characteristics and mortality rates among patients requiring intermediate care: a national cohort study using linked databases.

BACKGROUND: Adults increasingly live and die with chronic progressive conditions into advanced age. Many live with multimorbidity and an uncertain illness trajectory with points of marked decline, loss of function and increased risk of end of life. Intermediate care units support mainly older adults in transition between hospital and home to regain function and anticipate and plan for end of life. This study examined the patient characteristics and the factors associated with mortality over 1 year post-admission to an intermediate care unit to inform priorities for care. METHODS: A national cohort study of adults admitted to intermediate care units in England using linked individual-level Hospital Episode Statistics and death registration data. The main outcome was mortality within 1 year from admission. The cohort was examined as two groups with significant differences in mortality between main diagnosis of a non-cancer condition and cancer. Data analysis used Kaplan-Meier curves to explore mortality differences between the groups and a time-dependant Cox proportional hazards model to determine mortality risk factors. RESULTS: The cohort comprised 76,704 adults with median age 81 years (IQR 70-88) admitted to 220 intermediate care units over 1 year in 2016. Overall, 28.0% died within 1 year post-admission. Mortality varied by the main diagnosis of cancer (total n = 3680, 70.8% died) and non-cancer condition (total n = 73,024, 25.8% died). Illness-related factors had the highest adjusted hazard ratios [aHRs]. At 0-28 days post-admission, risks were highest for non-cancer respiratory conditions (pneumonia (aHR 6.17 [95%CI 4.90-7.76]), chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (aHR 5.01 [95% CI 3.78-6.62]), dementia (aHR 5.07 [95% CI 3.80-6.77]) and liver disease (aHR 9.75 [95% CI 6.50-14.6]) compared with musculoskeletal disorders. In cancer, lung cancer showed largest risk (aHR 1.20 [95%CI 1.04-1.39]) compared with cancer 'other'. Risks increased with high multimorbidity for non-cancer (aHR 2.57 [95% CI 2.36-2.79]) and cancer (aHR 2.59 [95% CI 2.13-3.15]) (reference: lowest). CONCLUSIONS: One in four patients died within 1 year. Indicators for palliative care assessment are respiratory conditions, dementia, liver disease, cancer and rising multimorbidity. The traditional emphasis on rehabilitation and recovery in intermediate care units has changed with an ageing population and the need for greater integration of palliative care.

Patient and public involvement in palliative care research: What works, and why? A qualitative evaluation.

BACKGROUND: Public involvement is increasingly considered a prerequisite for high-quality research. However, involvement in palliative care is impeded by limited evidence on the best approaches for populations affected by life-limiting illness. AIM: To evaluate a strategy for public involvement in palliative care and rehabilitation research, to identify successful approaches and areas for improvement. DESIGN: Co-produced qualitative evaluation using focus groups and interviews. Thematic analysis undertaken by research team comprising public contributors and researchers. SETTING/PARTICIPANTS: Researchers and public members from a palliative care and rehabilitation research institute, UK. RESULTS: Seven public members and 19 researchers participated. Building and maintaining relationships, taking a flexible approach and finding the 'right' people were important for successful public involvement. Relationship building created a safe environment for discussing sensitive topics, although public members felt greater consideration of emotional support was needed. Flexibility supported involvement alongside unpredictable circumstances of chronic and life-limiting illness, and was facilitated by responsive communication, and opportunities for in-person and virtual involvement at a project- and institution-level. However, more opportunities for two-way feedback throughout projects was suggested. Finding the 'right' people was crucial given the diverse population served by palliative care, and participants suggested more care needed to be taken to identify public members with experience relevant to specific projects. CONCLUSION: Within palliative care research, it is important for involvement to focus on building and maintaining relationships, working flexibly, and identifying those with relevant experience. Taking a strategic approach and developing adequate infrastructure and networks can facilitate public involvement within this field.

Preferences and priorities to manage clinical uncertainty for older people with frailty and multimorbidity: a discrete choice experiment and stakeholder consultations.

BACKGROUND: Clinical uncertainty is inherent for people with frailty and multimorbidity. Depleted physiological reserves increase vulnerability to a decline in health and adverse outcomes from a stressor event. Evidence-based tools can improve care processes and outcomes, but little is known about priorities to deliver care for older people with frailty and multimorbidity. This study aimed to explore the preferences and priorities for patients, family carers and healthcare practitioners to enhance care processes of comprehensive assessment, communication and continuity of care in managing clinical uncertainty using evidence-based tools. METHODS: A parallel mixed method observational study in four inpatient intermediate care units (community hospitals) for patients in transition between hospital and home. We used a discrete choice experiment (DCE) to examine patient and family preferences and priorities on the attributes of enhanced services; and stakeholder consultations with practitioners to discuss and generate recommendations on using tools to augment care processes. Data analysis used logit modelling in the DCE, and framework analysis for consultation data. RESULTS: Thirty-three patients participated in the DCE (mean age 84 years, SD 7.76). Patients preferred a service where family were contacted on admission and discharge (ß 0.36, 95% CI 0.10 to 0.61), care received closer to home (ß - 0.04, 95% CI - 0.06 to - 0.02) and the GP is fully informed about care (ß 0.29, 95% CI 0.05-0.52). Four stakeholder consultations (n = 48 participants) generated 20 recommendations centred around three main themes: tailoring care processes to manage multiple care needs for an ageing population with frailty and multimorbidity; the importance of ongoing communication with patient and family; and clear and concise evidence-based tools to enhance communication between clinical teams and continuity of care on discharge. CONCLUSION: Family engagement is vital to manage clinical uncertainty. Both patients and practitioners prioritise engaging the family to support person-centred care and continuity of care within and across care settings. Patients wished to maximise family involvement by enabling their support with a preference for care close to home. Evidence-based tools used across disciplines and services can provide a shared succinct language to facilitate communication and continuity of care at points of transition in care settings.

Managing clinical uncertainty in older people towards the end of life: a systematic review of person-centred tools.

BACKGROUND: Older people with multi-morbidities commonly experience an uncertain illness trajectory. Clinical uncertainty is challenging to manage, with risk of poor outcomes. Person-centred care is essential to align care and treatment with patient priorities and wishes. Use of evidence-based tools may support person-centred management of clinical uncertainty. We aimed to develop a logic model of person-centred evidence-based tools to manage clinical uncertainty in older people. METHODS: A systematic mixed-methods review with a results-based convergent synthesis design: a process-based iterative logic model was used, starting with a conceptual framework of clinical uncertainty in older people towards the end of life. This underpinned the methods. Medline, PsycINFO, CINAHL and ASSIA were searched from 2000 to December 2019, using a combination of terms: "uncertainty" AND "palliative care" AND "assessment" OR "care planning". Studies were included if they developed or evaluated a person-centred tool to manage clinical uncertainty in people aged ≥65 years approaching the end of life and quality appraised using QualSyst. Quantitative and qualitative data were narratively synthesised and thematically analysed respectively and integrated into the logic model. RESULTS: Of the 17,095 articles identified, 44 were included, involving 63 tools. There was strong evidence that tools used in clinical care could improve identification of patient priorities and needs (n = 14 studies); that tools support partnership working between patients and practitioners (n = 8) and that tools support integrated care within and across teams and with patients and families (n = 14), improving patient outcomes such as quality of death and dying and satisfaction with care. Communication of clinical uncertainty to patients and families had the least evidence and is challenging to do well. CONCLUSION: The identified logic model moves current knowledge from conceptualising clinical uncertainty to applying evidence-based tools to optimise person-centred management and improve patient outcomes. Key causal pathways are identification of individual priorities and needs, individual care and treatment and integrated care. Communication of clinical uncertainty to patients is challenging and requires training and skill and the use of tools to support practice.

Priorities and opportunities for palliative and end of life care in United Kingdom health policies: a national documentary analysis.

BACKGROUND: Access to high-quality palliative care is inadequate for most people living and dying with serious illness. Policies aimed at optimising delivery of palliative and end of life care are an important mechanism to improve quality of care for the dying. The extent to which palliative care is included in national health policies is unknown. We aimed to identify priorities and opportunities for palliative and end of life care in national health policies in the UK. METHODS: Documentary analysis consisting of 1) summative content analysis to describe the extent to which palliative and end of life care is referred to and/or prioritised in national health and social care policies, and 2) thematic analysis to explore health policy priorities that are opportunities to widen access to palliative and end of life care for people with serious illness. Relevant national policy documents were identified through web searches of key government and other organisations, and through expert consultation. Documents included were UK-wide or devolved (i.e. England, Scotland, Northern Ireland, Wales), health and social care government strategies published from 2010 onwards. RESULTS: Fifteen policy documents were included in the final analysis. Twelve referred to palliative or end of life care, but details about what should improve, or mechanisms to achieve this, were sparse. Policy priorities that are opportunities to widen palliative and end of life care access comprised three inter-related themes: (1) integrated care - conceptualised as reorganisation of services as a way to enable improvement; (2) personalised care - conceptualised as allowing people to shape and manage their own care; and (3) support for unpaid carers - conceptualised as enabling unpaid carers to live a more independent lifestyle and balance caring with their own needs. CONCLUSIONS: Although information on palliative and end of life care in UK health and social care policies was sparse, improving palliative care may provide an evidence-based approach to achieve the stated policy priorities of integrated care, personalised care, and support for unpaid carers. Aligning existing evidence of the benefits of palliative care with the three priorities identified may be an effective mechanism to both strengthen policy and improve care for people who are dying.

Empowering Better End-of-Life Dementia Care (EMBED-Care): A mixed methods protocol to achieve integrated person-centred care across settings.

OBJECTIVES: Globally, the number of people with dementia who have palliative care needs will increase fourfold over the next 40 years. The Empowering Better End-of-Life Dementia Care (EMBED-Care) Programme aims to deliver a step change in care through a large sequential study, spanning multiple work streams. METHODS: We will use mixed methods across settings where people with dementia live and die: their own homes, care homes, and hospitals. Beginning with policy syntheses and reviews of interventions, we will develop a conceptual framework and underpinning theory of change. We will use linked data sets to explore current service use, care transitions, and inequalities and predict future need for end-of-life dementia care. Longitudinal cohort studies of people with dementia (including young onset and prion dementias) and their carers will describe care transitions, quality of life, symptoms, formal and informal care provision, and costs. Data will be synthesised, underpinned by the Knowledge-to-Action Implementation Framework, to design a novel complex intervention to support assessment, decision making, and communication between patients, carers, and inter-professional teams. This will be feasibility and pilot tested in UK settings. Patient and public involvement and engagement, innovative work with artists, policymakers, and third sector organisations are embedded to drive impact. We will build research capacity and develop an international network for excellence in dementia palliative care. CONCLUSIONS: EMBED-Care will help us understand current and future need, develop novel cost-effective care innovations, build research capacity, and promote international collaborations in research and practice to ensure people live and die well with dementia.

Feasibility and acceptability of a culturally adapted advance care planning intervention for people living with advanced cancer and their families: A mixed methods study.

BACKGROUND: Increasing evidence shows that advance care planning is effective in improving outcomes. However, its applicability and acceptability outside Western cultures remain unknown. Examination of relevant cultural adaptations is required prior to wider adoption. AIM: To examine the feasibility and acceptability of a culturally adapted advance care planning intervention in a Taiwanese inpatient hospital for advanced cancer patients, family members and healthcare professionals. METHODS: A single-group, non-controlled, mixed methods feasibility study guided by a previously developed logic model. The culturally adapted advance care planning intervention represented a one-time intervention, comprising pre-advance care planning preparation and follow-up consultation. Qualitative interviews explored participants' view on their involvement in the study. Patients' medical records were examined to assess intervention fidelity. Findings from both data sets were integrated following analysis. RESULTS: N = 29 participants (n = 10 patients; n = 10 family members and n = 9 healthcare professionals) participated in the intervention, of who 28 completed follow-up interviews. Of the 10 advance care planning interventions delivered, most components (n = 10/13) were met. Key contextual moderators influencing the intervention feasibility included: (1) resource constraints resulting in increased workload; (2) care decisions informed by relatives' experiences of care; (3) the requirement for financial and policy support; and (4) a presumption for end-of-life care provision and surrogate decision-making. Six areas of intervention refinement were identified for future research. CONCLUSION: Implementing a culturally adapted advance care planning intervention in an inpatient hospital setting in Taiwan is possible. The participants reported the intervention to be acceptable. However, careful attention to the conceptual underpinning using local primary data is imperative for its success.

Understanding usual care in randomised controlled trials of complex interventions: A multi-method approach.

BACKGROUND: Evaluations of complex interventions compared to usual care provided in palliative care are increasing. Not describing usual care may affect the interpretation of an intervention's effectiveness, yet how it can be described remains unclear. AIM: To demonstrate the feasibility of using multi-methods to describe usual care provided in randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of complex interventions, shown within a feasibility cluster RCT. DESIGN: Multi-method approach comprising usual care questionnaires, baseline case note review and focus groups with ward staff completed at study end. Thematic analysis of qualitative data, descriptive statistics of quantitative data, followed by methodological triangulation to appraise approach in relation to study aim. SETTING/PARTICIPANTS: Four general medical wards chosen from UK hospitals. Purposive sampling of healthcare professionals for usual care questionnaires, and focus groups. Review of 20 patients' notes from each ward who died during admission or within 100 days of discharge. RESULTS: Twenty-three usual care questionnaires at baseline, two focus groups comprising 20 healthcare professionals and 80 case note reviews. Triangulation of findings resulted in understanding the usual care provided to the targeted population in terms of context, structures, processes and outcomes for patients, families and healthcare professionals. Usual care was described, highlighting (1) similarities and embedded practices, (2) heterogeneity and (3) subtle changes in care during the trial within and across sites. CONCLUSIONS: We provide a feasible approach to defining usual care that can be practically adopted in different settings. Understanding usual care enhances the reliability of tested complex interventions, and informs research and policy priorities.

The effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of hospital-based specialist palliative care for adults with advanced illness and their caregivers.

BACKGROUND: Serious illness is often characterised by physical/psychological problems, family support needs, and high healthcare resource use. Hospital-based specialist palliative care (HSPC) has developed to assist in better meeting the needs of patients and their families and potentially reducing hospital care expenditure. There is a need for clarity on the effectiveness and optimal models of HSPC, given that most people still die in hospital and also to allocate scarce resources judiciously. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of HSPC compared to usual care for adults with advanced illness (hereafter patients) and their unpaid caregivers/families. SEARCH METHODS: We searched CENTRAL, CDSR, DARE and HTA database via the Cochrane Library; MEDLINE; Embase; CINAHL; PsycINFO; CareSearch; National Health Service Economic Evaluation Database (NHS EED) and two trial registers to August 2019, together with checking of reference lists and relevant systematic reviews, citation searching and contact with experts to identify additional studies. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating the impact of HSPC on outcomes for patients or their unpaid caregivers/families, or both. HSPC was defined as specialist palliative care delivered by a palliative care team that is based in a hospital providing holistic care, co-ordination by a multidisciplinary team, and collaboration between HSPC providers and generalists. HSPC was provided to patients while they were admitted as inpatients to acute care hospitals, outpatients or patients receiving care from hospital outreach teams at home. The comparator was usual care, defined as inpatient or outpatient hospital care without specialist palliative care input at the point of entry into the study, community care or hospice care provided outside of the hospital setting. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We used standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane. We assessed risk of bias and extracted data. To account for use of different scales across studies, we calculated standardised mean differences (SMDs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for continuous data. We used an inverse variance random-effects model. For binary data, we calculated odds ratio (ORs) with 95% CIs. We assessed the evidence using GRADE and created a 'Summary of findings' table. Our primary outcomes were patient health-related quality of life (HRQoL) and symptom burden (a collection of two or more symptoms). Key secondary outcomes were pain, depression, satisfaction with care, achieving preferred place of death, mortality/survival, unpaid caregiver burden, and cost-effectiveness. Qualitative data was analysed where available. MAIN RESULTS: We identified 42 RCTs involving 7779 participants (6678 patients and 1101 caregivers/family members). Twenty-one studies were with cancer populations, 14 were with non-cancer populations (of which six were with heart failure patients), and seven with mixed cancer and non-cancer populations (mixed diagnoses). HSPC was offered in different ways and included the following models: ward-based, inpatient consult, outpatient, hospital-at-home or hospital outreach, and service provision across multiple settings which included hospital. For our main analyses, we pooled data from studies reporting adjusted endpoint values. Forty studies had a high risk of bias in at least one domain. Compared with usual care, HSPC improved patient HRQoL with a small effect size of 0.26 SMD over usual care (95% CI 0.15 to 0.37; I2 = 3%, 10 studies, 1344 participants, low-quality evidence, higher scores indicate better patient HRQoL). HSPC also improved other person-centred outcomes. It reduced patient symptom burden with a small effect size of -0.26 SMD over usual care (95% CI -0.41 to -0.12; I2 = 0%, 6 studies, 761 participants, very low-quality evidence, lower scores indicate lower symptom burden). HSPC improved patient satisfaction with care with a small effect size of 0.36 SMD over usual care (95% CI 0.41 to 0.57; I2 = 0%, 2 studies, 337 participants, low-quality evidence, higher scores indicate better patient satisfaction with care). Using home death as a proxy measure for achieving patient's preferred place of death, patients were more likely to die at home with HSPC compared to usual care (OR 1.63, 95% CI 1.23 to 2.16; I2 = 0%, 7 studies, 861 participants, low-quality evidence). Data on pain (4 studies, 525 participants) showed no evidence of a difference between HSPC and usual care (SMD -0.16, 95% CI -0.33 to 0.01; I2 = 0%, very low-quality evidence). Eight studies (N = 1252 participants) reported on adverse events and very low-quality evidence did not demonstrate an effect of HSPC on serious harms. Two studies (170 participants) presented data on caregiver burden and both found no evidence of effect of HSPC (very low-quality evidence). We included 13 economic studies (2103 participants). Overall, the evidence on cost-effectiveness of HSPC compared to usual care was inconsistent among the four full economic studies. Other studies that used only partial economic analysis and those that presented more limited resource use and cost information also had inconsistent results (very low-quality evidence). Quality of the evidence The quality of the evidence assessed using GRADE was very low to low, downgraded due to a high risk of bias, inconsistency and imprecision. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Very low- to low-quality evidence suggests that when compared to usual care, HSPC may offer small benefits for several person-centred outcomes including patient HRQoL, symptom burden and patient satisfaction with care, while also increasing the chances of patients dying in their preferred place (measured by home death). While we found no evidence that HSPC causes serious harms, the evidence was insufficient to draw strong conclusions. Although these are only small effect sizes, they may be clinically relevant at an advanced stage of disease with limited prognosis, and are person-centred outcomes important to many patients and families. More well conducted studies are needed to study populations with non-malignant diseases and mixed diagnoses, ward-based models of HSPC, 24 hours access (out-of-hours care) as part of HSPC, pain, achieving patient preferred place of care, patient satisfaction with care, caregiver outcomes (satisfaction with care, burden, depression, anxiety, grief, quality of life), and cost-effectiveness of HSPC. In addition, research is needed to provide validated person-centred outcomes to be used across studies and populations.