Unrepresented, unheard and discriminated against: A qualitative exploration of relatives' and professionals' views of palliative care experiences of people of African and Caribbean descent during the COVID-19 pandemic.

BACKGROUND: People of African and Caribbean descent experienced disproportionately high mortality from COVID-19 and have poor access to palliative care. AIM: To explore palliative care experiences of people of African and Caribbean descent during and immediately prior to the pandemic. DESIGN: Qualitative interview study with thematic analysis. Refinement of themes/recommendations in consultation with an expert patient and public advisory group. SETTING/PARTICIPANTS: Twenty-six bereaved relatives and 13 health/social care professionals (cared for people of African and Caribbean descent) from throughout England, recruited using social media, community networks and direct advertising to over 150 organisations. RESULTS: Three themes were identified: Representation: Participants did not see themselves reflected in the palliative care services and did not expect their needs to be understood. Mistrust of the healthcare system and perceptions of racism were common and led to anticipation of inequitable care. Personalisation: Relatives and professionals reported a lack of cultural and religious sensitivity in healthcare. Assumptions were made based on ethnicity, and services not offered to all. Awareness and education: Professionals felt they lacked the knowledge to provide care to diverse communities, but were reluctant to ask, due to fear of making mistakes. Inequitable access to services was exacerbated by, but not unique to, the pandemic. Participants recommended raising awareness of palliative services, building professional competence in culturally-sensitive care, and greater ethnic diversity within services. CONCLUSIONS: Person-centred, culturally-competent palliative care is not the norm for people of African and Caribbean descent. Expectations of inequitable care are widespread. Sustained action on multiple fronts is needed.

What enables good end of life care for people with dementia? A multi-method qualitative study with key stakeholders.

BACKGROUND: People with advanced dementia often experience suboptimal end of life care (EoLC) with inadequate pain control, increased hospitalisation, and fewer palliative care interventions compared to those with cancer. Existing policy, guidance and recommendations are based largely on expert opinion because of a shortage of high quality, empirical research. Previous studies have tended to consider the views and experience of particular groups. Whilst providing important evidence, they do not take into account the diversity of perspectives of different stakeholders. The Supporting Excellence in End of life care in Dementia (SEED) programme involved multiple stakeholder groups and an integrative analysis to identify key components of good EoLC for people with dementia and to inform a new intervention. METHODS: The views of national experts, service managers, frontline staff, people with dementia and family carers were explored using a range of qualitative methods (semi-structured interviews, focus groups, discussions and observations of routine care). The large dataset comprises 116 interviews, 12 focus groups and 256 h of observation. Each dataset was initially analysed thematically prior to an integrative analysis, which drew out key themes across stakeholder groups. RESULTS: Through the integrative analysis seven key factors required for the delivery of good EoLC for people with dementia were identified: timely planning discussions; recognition of end of life and provision of supportive care; co-ordination of care; effective working relationships with primary care; managing hospitalisation; continuing care after death; and valuing staff and ongoing learning. These factors span the entire illness trajectory from planning at a relatively early stage in the illness to continuing care after death. CONCLUSIONS: This unique study has confirmed the relevance of much of the content of existing end of life frameworks to dementia. It has highlighted seven key areas that are particularly important in dementia care. The data are being used to develop an evidence-based intervention to support professionals to deliver better EoLC in dementia.

End-of-life care: A qualitative study comparing the views of people with dementia and family carers.

BACKGROUND: In recent years, UK policy has increasingly recognised the importance of end-of-life care in dementia. While professional consensus on optimal palliative care in dementia has been reported, little is known about the perspectives of people with dementia and family carers. AIM: To compare the views of people with dementia and family carers of people with dementia (current and recently bereaved) on optimal end-of-life care. DESIGN: Qualitative interviews (32) and a focus group were conducted. Data were thematically analysed. SETTING/PARTICIPANTS: Participants comprised people with early stage dementia, living at home in the north-east of England ( n = 11); and current and bereaved carers ( n = 25) from six services providing end-of-life care in England. FINDINGS: Seven areas were identified as important to end-of-life care for people with dementia and/or family carers. People with dementia and carers expressed the need for receiving care in place, ensuring comfort and a skilled care team. However, they disagreed about the importance of planning for the future and the role of families in organising care and future decision-making. CONCLUSION: Further comparison of our findings with expert consensus views highlighted key areas of divergence and agreement. Discordant views concerning perceptions of dementia as a palliative condition, responsibility for future decision-making and the practical co-ordination of end-of-life care may undermine the provision of optimal palliative care. Professionals must explore and recognise the individual perspectives of people with dementia and family carers.

End of life care for people with dementia: The views of health professionals, social care service managers and frontline staff on key requirements for good practice.

BACKGROUND: Evidence consistently shows that people with advanced dementia experience suboptimal end of life care compared to those with cancer; with increased hospitalisation, inadequate pain control and fewer palliative care interventions. Understanding the views of those service managers and frontline staff who organise and provide care is crucial in order to develop better end of life care for people with dementia. METHODS AND FINDINGS: Qualitative interviews and focus groups were conducted from 2013 to 2015 with 33 service managers and 54 staff involved in frontline care, including doctors, nurses, nursing and care home managers, service development leads, senior managers/directors, care assistants and senior care assistants/team leads. All were audio recorded and transcribed verbatim. Participants represented a diverse range of service types and occupation. Transcripts were subject to coding and thematic analysis in data meetings. Analysis of the data led to the development of seven key themes: Recognising end of life (EOL) and tools to support end of life care (EOLC), Communicating with families about EOL, Collaborative working, Continuity of care, Ensuring comfort at EOL, Supporting families, Developing and supporting staff. Each is discussed in detail and comprise individual and collective views on approaches to good end of life care for people with dementia. CONCLUSIONS: The significant challenges of providing good end of life care for people with dementia requires that different forms of expertise should be recognised and used; including the skills and knowledge of care assistants. Successfully engaging with people with dementia and family members and helping them to recognise the dying trajectory requires a supportive integration of emotional and technical expertise. The study strengthens the existing evidence base in this area and will be used with a related set of studies (on the views of other stakeholders and observations and interviews conducted in four services) to develop an evidence-based intervention.