The relationships between the combination of person- and organization-related conditions and patients' perceptions of palliative care quality.

BACKGROUND: Little is known about the combination of person- and organization- related conditions and the relationships with patients' perspectives of care quality. Such a combination could contribute knowledge reflecting the complexity of clinical practice, and enhance individualized care. The aim was to investigate the relationships between the combination of person- and organization-related conditions and patients' perceptions of palliative care quality. METHODS: A cross-sectional study, including 191 patients in the late palliative phase (73% response rate) admitted to hospice inpatient care (n = 72), hospice day care (n = 51), palliative units in nursing homes (n = 30) and home care (n = 38), was conducted between November 2013 and December 2014, using the instrument Quality from the Patients' Perspective specific to palliative care (QPP-PC). Data were analysed, using analysis of covariance, to explore the amount of the variance in the dependent variables (QPP-PC) that could be explained by combination of the independent variables - Person- and organization-related conditions, - while controlling for differences in covariates. RESULTS: Patients scored the care received and the subjective importance as moderate to high. The combination of person- and organization - related conditions revealed that patients with a high sense of coherence, lower age (person - related conditions) and being in a ward with access to and availability of physicians (organization-related condition) might be associated with significantly higher scores for the quality of care received. Gender (women), daily contact with family and friends, and low health-related quality of life (person-related conditions) might be associated with higher scores for subjective importance of the aspects of care quality. CONCLUSION: Healthcare personnel, leaders and policy makers need to pay attention to person- and organization-related conditions in order to provide person-centered palliative care of high quality. Further studies from palliative care contexts are needed to confirm the findings and to investigate additional organizational factors that might influence patients' perceptions of care quality.

Patients' perceptions of palliative care quality in hospice inpatient care, hospice day care, palliative units in nursing homes, and home care: a cross-sectional study.

BACKGROUND: Patients' perceptions of care quality within and across settings are important for the further development of palliative care. The aim was to investigate patients' perceptions of palliative care quality within settings, including perceptions of care received and their subjective importance, and contrast palliative care quality across settings. METHOD: A cross-sectional study including 191 patients in late palliative phase (73 % response rate) admitted to hospice inpatient care, hospice day care, palliative units in nursing homes, and home care was conducted, using the Quality from the Patients' Perspective instrument-palliative care (QPP-PC). QPP-PC comprises four dimensions and 12 factors; "medical-technical competence" (MT) (2 factors), "physical-technical conditions" (PT) (one factor), "identity-orientation approach" (ID) (4 factors), "sociocultural atmosphere" (SC) (5 factors), and three single items (S); medical care, personal hygiene and atmosphere. Data were analysed using paired-samples t-test and analysis of covariance while controlling for differences in patient characteristics. RESULTS: Patients' perceptions of care received within settings showed high scores for the factors and single items "honesty" (ID) and "atmosphere" (S) in all settings and low scores for "exhaustion" (MT) in three out of four settings. Patients' perceptions of importance scored high for "medical care" (S), "honesty" (ID), "respect and empathy" (ID) and "atmosphere" (S) in all settings. No aspects of care scored low in all settings. Importance scored higher than perceptions of care received, in particular for receiving information. Patients' perceptions of care across settings differed, with highest scores in hospice inpatient care for the dimensions; ID, SC, and "medical care" (S), the SC and "atmosphere" (S) for hospice day care, and "medical care" (S) for palliative units in nursing homes. There were no differences in subjective importance across settings. CONCLUSION: Strengths of services related to identity-orientation approach and a pleasant and safe atmosphere. Key areas for improvement related to receiving information. Perceptions of subjective importance did not differ across settings, but perceptions of care received scored higher in more care areas for hospice inpatient care, than in other settings. Further studies are needed to support these findings, to investigate why perceptions of care differ across settings and to highlight what can be learned from settings receiving high scores.

Patients' perceptions of palliative care: adaptation of the Quality from the Patient's Perspective instrument for use in palliative care, and description of patients' perceptions of care received.

BACKGROUND: Instruments specific to palliative care tend to measure care quality from relative perspectives or have insufficient theoretical foundation. The instrument Quality from the Patient's Perspective (QPP) is based on a model for care quality derived from patients' perceptions of care, although it has not been psychometrically evaluated for use in palliative care. The aim of this study was to adapt the QPP for use in palliative care contexts, and to describe patients' perceptions of the care quality in terms of the subjective importance of the care aspects and the perceptions of the care received. METHOD: A cross-sectional study was conducted between November 2013 and December 2014 which included 191 patients (73% response rate) in late palliative phase at hospice inpatient units, hospice day-care units, wards in nursing homes that specialized in palliative care and homecare districts, all in Norway. An explorative factor analysis using principal component analysis, including data from 184 patients, was performed for psychometric evaluation. Internal consistency was assessed by Cronbach's alpha and paired t-tests were used to describe patients' perceptions of their care. RESULTS: The QPP instrument was adapted for palliative care in four steps: (1) selecting items from the QPP, (2) modifying items and (3) constructing new items to the palliative care setting, and (4) a pilot evaluation. QPP instrument specific to palliative care (QPP-PC) consists of 51 items and 12 factors with an eigenvalue ≥1.0, and showed a stable factor solution that explained 68.25% of the total variance. The reliability coefficients were acceptable for most factors (0.79-0.96). Patients scored most aspects of care related to both subjective importance and actual care received as high. Areas for improvement were symptom relief, participation, continuity, and planning and cooperation. CONCLUSION: The QPP-PC is based on a theoretical model of quality of care, and has its roots in patients' perspectives. The instrument was developed and psychometrically evaluated in a sample of Norwegian patients with various diagnoses receiving palliative care in different care contexts. The evaluation of the QPP-PC shows promising results, although it needs to be further validated and tested in other contexts and countries.

Patients' preferences in palliative care: A systematic mixed studies review.

BACKGROUND: It is necessary to develop palliative care to meet existing and future needs of patients and their families. It is important to include knowledge of patient preferences when developing high-quality palliative care services. Previous reviews have focused on patient preferences with regard to specific components of palliative care. There is a need to review research on patient's combined preferences for all elements that constitute palliative care. AIM: The aim of this study is to identify preferences for palliative care among patients in the palliative phase of their illness, by synthesizing existing research. DATA SOURCES: Studies were retrieved by searching databases - the Cochrane Library, Medline, CINAHL, PsycINFO, Scopus and Sociological Abstracts - from 1946 to 2014, and by hand searching references in the studies included. DESIGN: A systematic mixed studies review was conducted. Two reviewers independently selected studies for inclusion and extracted data according to the eligibility criteria. Data were synthesized using integrative thematic analysis. RESULTS: The 13 qualitative and 10 quantitative studies identified included participants with different illnesses in various settings. Four themes emerged representing patient preferences for care. The theme 'Living a meaningful life' illustrated what patients strived for. The opportunity to focus on living required the presence of 'Responsive healthcare personnel', a 'Responsive care environment' and 'Responsiveness in the organization of palliative care'. CONCLUSION: The four themes may be useful for guiding clinical practice and measurements of quality, with the overall goal of meeting future needs and improving quality in palliative care services to suit patients' preferences.