Australian residential aged care home staff experiences of implementing an intervention to improve palliative and end-of-life care for residents: A qualitative study.

Access to high-quality and safe evidence-based palliative care (PC) is important to ensure good end-of-life care for older people in residential aged care homes (RACHs). However, many barriers to providing PC in RACHs are frequently cited. The Quality End-of-Life Care (QEoLC) Project was a multicomponent intervention that included training, evidence-based tools and tele-mentoring, aiming to equip healthcare professionals and careworkers in RACHs with knowledge, skills and confidence in providing PC to residents. This study aims to understand: (1) the experiences of healthcare professionals, careworkers, care managers, planners/implementers who participated in the implementation of the QEoLC Project; and (2) the barriers and facilitators to the implementation. Staff from two RACHs in New South Wales, Australia were recruited between September to November 2021. Semi-structured interviews and thematic data analysis were used. Fifteen participants (seven health professionals [includes one nurse, two clinical educators, three workplace trainers, one clinical manager/nurse], three careworkers and five managers) were interviewed. Most RACH participants agreed that the QEoLC Project increased their awareness of PC and provided them with the skills/confidence to openly discuss death and dying. Participants perceived that the components of the QEoLC Project had the following benefits for residents: more appropriate use of medications, initiation of timely pain management and discussions with families regarding end-of-life care preferences. Key facilitators for implementation were the role of champions, the role of the steering committee, regular clinical meetings to discuss at-risk residents and mentoring. Implementation barriers included: high staff turnover, COVID-19 pandemic, time constraints, perceived absence of executive sponsorship, lack of practical support and systems-related barriers. The findings underline the need for strong leadership, supportive organisational culture and commitment to the implementation of processes for improving the quality of end-of-life care. Furthermore, the results highlight the need for codesigning the intervention with RACHs, provision of dedicated staff/resources to support implementation, and integration of project tools with existing systems for achieving effective implementation outcomes.

Australian general practice experiences of implementing a structured approach to initiating advance care planning and palliative care: a qualitative study.

OBJECTIVES: Initiation of advance care planning (ACP) and palliative care (PC) assessments in general practice is key to quality end-of-life care. The Advance Project promotes a team-based approach to initiating ACP and PC needs assessment in general practices through training, resources and practical support for implementation from local primary health networks (PHNs). This paper aims to understand: (1) general practice participants' experiences of undertaking Advance Project training and implementing the Advance Project resources in their practices; (2) barriers and facilitators to implementation of Advance Project resources; and (3) PHN staff experiences of supporting general practices through training and practical support for implementation of the Advance Project resources. DESIGN: Qualitative study using semistructured interviews and thematic analysis. SETTING: Twenty-one general practices and four PHNs from three Australian states were recruited between June 2019 and May 2020. PARTICIPANTS: General practitioners (GPs), general practice nurses, practice managers (PMs) and PHN staff. RESULTS: 45 participants comprising 13 GPs, 13 general practice nurses, 9 PMs, 3 allied health staff and 7 PHN staff were interviewed. The general practice participants generally agreed that the Advance Project training/resources led to changes in their own behaviour and increased their awareness of the importance of ACP/PC discussion with their patients. Participants reported the following benefits for patients: increased awareness of ACP; engagement with families/carers and peace of mind. Key facilitators for successful implementation were a team-based approach, the role of the PHN, the role of practice champions, training facilitators' ability to influence peers and facilitate change, and mentoring support. Barriers to implementation included issues related to workplace culture, cost, time/workload, patients and health system. CONCLUSION: Findings suggest that the Advance Project approach facilitated successful implementation of ACP and PC needs assessment into usual care in general practices that encouraged teamwork among GPs and general practice nurses. The ability of the practice to make the best use of practical support and guidance available to them through their local PHN both before and during implementation was a key factor in integration of Advance Project resources into routine practice.