The effectiveness of out-of-hours palliative care telephone advice lines: A rapid systematic review.

BACKGROUND: People with palliative care needs and their carers often rely on out-of-hours services to remain at home. Policymakers have recommended implementing telephone advice lines to ensure 24/7 access to support. However, the impact of these services on patient and carer outcomes, as well as the health care system, remains poorly understood. AIM: To evaluate the clinical- and cost-effectiveness of out-of-hours palliative care telephone advice lines, and to identify service characteristics associated with effectiveness. DESIGN: Rapid systematic review (PROSPERO ID: CRD42023400370) with narrative synthesis. DATA SOURCES: Three databases (Medline, EMBASE and CINAHL) were searched in February 2023 for studies of any design reporting on telephone advice lines with at least partial out-of-hours availability. Study quality was assessed using the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool, and quantitative and qualitative data were synthesised narratively. RESULTS: Twenty-one studies, published 2000-2022, were included. Most studies were observational, none were experimental. While some evidence suggested that telephone advice lines offer guidance and reassurance, supporting care at home and potentially reducing avoidable emergency care use in the last months of life, variability in reporting and poor methodological quality across studies limit our understanding of patient/carer and health care system outcomes. CONCLUSION: Despite their increasing use, evidence for the clinical- and cost-effectiveness of palliative care telephone advice lines remains limited, primarily due to the lack of robust comparative studies. There is a need for more rigorous evaluations incorporating experimental or quasi-experimental methods and longer follow-up, and standardised reporting of telephone advice line models and outcomes, to guide policy and practice.

Place of Death for Adults Receiving Specialist Palliative Care in Their Last 3 Months of Life: Factors Associated With Preferred Place, Actual Place, and Place of Death Congruence.

Objectives: Congruence between the preferred and actual place of death is recognised as an important quality indicator in end-of-life care. However, there may be complexities about preferences that are ignored in summary congruence measures. This article examined factors associated with preferred place of death, actual place of death, and congruence for a sample of patients who had received specialist palliative care in the last three months of life in Ireland. Methods: This article analysed merged data from two previously published mortality follow-back surveys: Economic Evaluation of Palliative Care in Ireland (EEPCI); Irish component of International Access, Rights and Empowerment (IARE I). Logistic regression models examined factors associated with (a) preferences for home death versus institutional setting, (b) home death versus hospital death, and (c) congruent versus non-congruent death. Setting: Four regions with differing levels of specialist palliative care development in Ireland. Participants: Mean age 77, 50% female/male, 19% living alone, 64% main diagnosis cancer. Data collected 2011-2015, regression model sample sizes: n = 342-351. Results: Congruence between preferred and actual place of death in the raw merged dataset was 51%. Patients living alone were significantly less likely to prefer home versus institution death (OR 0.389, 95%CI 0.157-0.961), less likely to die at home (OR 0.383, 95%CI 0.274-0.536), but had no significant association with congruence. Conclusions: The findings highlight the value in examining place of death preferences as well as congruence, because preferences may be influenced by what is feasible rather than what patients would like. The analyses also underline the importance of well-resourced community-based supports, including homecare, facilitating hospital discharge, and management of complex (eg, non-cancer) conditions, to facilitate patients to die in their preferred place.

Optimising breathlessness triggered services for older people with advanced diseases: a multicentre economic study (OPTBreathe).

BACKGROUND: In advanced disease, breathlessness becomes severe, increasing health services use. Breathlessness triggered services demonstrate effectiveness in trials and meta-analyses but lack health economic assessment. METHODS: Our economic study included a discrete choice experiment (DCE), followed by a cost-effectiveness analysis modelling. The DCE comprised face-to-face interviews with older patients with chronic breathlessness and their carers across nine UK centres. Conditional logistic regression analysis of DCE data determined the preferences (or not, indicated by negative ß coefficients) for service attributes. Economic modelling estimated the costs and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) over 5 years. FINDINGS: The DCE recruited 190 patients and 68 carers. Offering breathlessness services in person from general practitioner (GP) surgeries was not preferred (ß=-0.30, 95% CI -0.40 to -0.21); hospital outpatient clinics (0.16, 0.06 to 0.25) or via home visits (0.15, 0.06 to 0.24) were preferred. Inperson services with comprehensive treatment review (0.15, 0.07 to 0.21) and holistic support (0.19, 0.07 to 0.31) were preferred to those without. Cost-effectiveness analysis found the most and the least preferred models of breathlessness services were cost-effective compared with usual care. The most preferred service had £5719 lower costs (95% CI -6043 to 5395), with 0.004 (95% CI -0.003 to 0.011) QALY benefits per patient. Uptake was higher when attributes were tailored to individual preferences (86% vs 40%). CONCLUSION: Breathlessness services are cost-effective compared with usual care for health and social care, giving cost savings and better quality of life. Uptake of breathlessness services is higher when service attributes are individually tailored.

Formal and Informal Costs of Care for People With Dementia Who Experience a Transition to Hospital at the End of Life: A Secondary Data Analysis.

OBJECTIVES: To explore formal and informal care costs in the last 3 months of life for people with dementia, and to evaluate the association between transitions to hospital and usual place of care with costs. DESIGN: Cross-sectional study using pooled data from 3 mortality follow-back surveys. SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: People who died with dementia. METHODS: The Client Service Receipt Inventory survey was used to derive formal (health, social) and informal care costs in the last 3 months of life. Generalized linear models were used to explore the association between transitions to hospital and usual place of care with formal and informal care costs. RESULTS: A total of 146 people who died with dementia were included. The mean age was 88.1 years (SD 6.0), and 98 (67.1%) were female. The usual place of care was care home for 85 (58.2%). Sixty-five individuals (44.5%) died in a care home, and 85 (58.2%) experienced a transition to hospital in the last 3 months. The mean total costs of care in the last 3 months of life were £31,224.7 (SD 23,536.6). People with a transition to hospital had higher total costs (£33,239.2, 95% CI 28,301.8-39,037.8) than people without transition (£21,522.0, 95% CI 17,784.0-26,045.8), mainly explained by hospital costs. People whose usual place of care was care homes had lower total costs (£23,801.3, 95% CI 20,172.0-28,083.6) compared to home (£34,331.4, 95% CI 27,824.7-42,359.5), mainly explained by lower informal care costs. CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS: Total care costs are high among people dying with dementia, and informal care costs represent an important component of end-of-life care costs. Transitions to hospital have a large impact on total costs; preventing these transitions might reduce costs from the health care perspective, but not from patients' and families' perspectives. Access to care homes could help reduce transitions to hospital as well as reduce formal and informal care costs.

Common elements of service delivery models that optimise quality of life and health service use among older people with advanced progressive conditions: a tertiary systematic review.

INTRODUCTION: Health and social care services worldwide need to support ageing populations to live well with advanced progressive conditions while adapting to functional decline and finitude. We aimed to identify and map common elements of effective geriatric and palliative care services and consider their scalability and generalisability to high, middle and low-income countries. METHODS: Tertiary systematic review (Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, CINAHL, Embase, January 2000-October 2019) of studies in geriatric or palliative care that demonstrated improved quality of life and/or health service use outcomes among older people with advanced progressive conditions. Using frameworks for health system analysis, service elements were identified. We used a staged, iterative process to develop a 'common components' logic model and consulted experts in geriatric or palliative care from high, middle and low-income countries on its scalability. RESULTS: 78 studies (59 geriatric and 19 palliative) spanning all WHO regions were included. Data were available from 17 739 participants. Nearly half the studies recruited patients with heart failure (n=36) and one-third recruited patients with mixed diagnoses (n=26). Common service elements (≥80% of studies) included collaborative working, ongoing assessment, active patient participation, patient/family education and patient self-management. Effective services incorporated patient engagement, patient goal-driven care and the centrality of patient needs. Stakeholders (n=20) emphasised that wider implementation of such services would require access to skilled, multidisciplinary teams with sufficient resource to meet patients' needs. Identified barriers to scalability included the political and societal will to invest in and prioritise palliative and geriatric care for older people, alongside geographical and socioeconomic factors. CONCLUSION: Our logic model combines elements of effective services to achieve optimal quality of life and health service use among older people with advanced progressive conditions. The model transcends current best practice in geriatric and palliative care and applies across the care continuum, from prevention of functional decline to end-of-life care. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42020150252.

Exploring costs, cost components, and associated factors among people with dementia approaching the end of life: A systematic review.

INTRODUCTION: Understanding costs of care for people dying with dementia is essential to guide service development, but information has not been systematically reviewed. We aimed to understand (1) which cost components have been measured in studies reporting the costs of care in people with dementia approaching the end of life, (2) what the costs are and how they change closer to death, and (3) which factors are associated with these costs. METHODS: We searched the electronic databases CINAHL, Medline, Cochrane, Web of Science, EconLit, and Embase and reference lists of included studies. We included any type of study published between 1999 and 2019, in any language, reporting primary data on costs of health care in individuals with dementia approaching the end of life. Two independent reviewers screened all full-text articles. We used the Evers' Consensus on Health Economic Criteria checklist to appraise the risk of bias of included studies. RESULTS: We identified 2843 articles after removing duplicates; 19 studies fulfilled the inclusion criteria, 16 were from the United States. Only two studies measured informal costs including out-of-pocket expenses and informal caregiving. The monthly total direct cost of care rose toward death, from $1787 to $2999 USD in the last 12 months, to $4570 to $11921 USD in the last month of life. Female sex, Black ethnicity, higher educational background, more comorbidities, and greater cognitive impairment were associated with higher costs. DISCUSSION: Costs of dementia care rise closer to death. Informal costs of care are high but infrequently included in analyses. Research exploring the costs of care for people with dementia by proximity to death, including informal care costs and from outside the United States, is urgently needed.

Community-based short-term integrated palliative and supportive care reduces symptom distress for older people with chronic noncancer conditions compared with usual care: A randomised controlled single-blind mixed method trial.

BACKGROUND: Globally, a rising number of people live into advanced age and die with multimorbidity and frailty. Palliative care is advocated as a person-centred approach to reduce health-related suffering and promote quality of life. However, no evidence-based interventions exist to deliver community-based palliative care for this population. AIM: To evaluate the impact of the short-term integrated palliative and supportive care intervention for older people living with chronic noncancer conditions and frailty on clinical and economic outcomes and perceptions of care. DESIGN: Single-blind trial with random block assignment to usual care or the intervention and usual care. The intervention comprised integrated person-centred palliative care delivered by multidisciplinary palliative care teams working with general practitioners and community nurses. Main outcome was change in five key palliative care symptoms from baseline to 12-weeks. Data analysis used intention to treat and complete cases to examine the mean difference in change scores and effect size between the trial arms. Economic evaluation used cost-effectiveness planes and qualitative interviews explored perceptions of the intervention. SETTING/PARTICIPANTS: Four National Health Service general practices in England with recruitment of patients aged ≥75 years, with moderate to severe frailty, chronic noncancer condition(s) and ≥2 symptoms or concerns, and family caregivers when available. RESULTS: 50 patients were randomly assigned to receive usual care (n = 26, mean age 86.0 years) or the intervention and usual care (n = 24, mean age 85.3 years), and 26 caregivers (control n = 16, mean age 77.0 years; intervention n = 10, mean age 77.3 years). Participants lived at home (n = 48) or care home (n = 2). Complete case analysis (n = 48) on the main outcome showed reduced symptom distress between the intervention compared with usual care (mean difference -1.20, 95% confidence interval -2.37 to -0.027) and medium effect size (omega squared = 0.071). Symptom distress reduced with decreased costs from the intervention compared with usual care, demonstrating cost-effectiveness. Patient (n = 19) and caregiver (n = 9) interviews generated themes about the intervention of 'Little things make a big difference' with optimal management of symptoms and 'Care beyond medicines' of psychosocial support to accommodate decline and maintain independence. CONCLUSIONS: This palliative and supportive care intervention is an effective and cost-effective approach to reduce symptom distress for older people severely affected by chronic noncancer conditions. It is a clinically effective way to integrate specialist palliative care with primary and community care for older people with chronic conditions. Further research is indicated to examine its implementation more widely for people at home and in care homes. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Controlled-Trials.com ISRCTN 45837097 Tweetable abstract: Specialist palliative care integrated with district nurses and GPs is cost-effective to reduce symptom distress for older people severely affected by chronic conditions.

Preparedness and Capacity of Indian Palliative Care Services to Respond to the COVID-19 Pandemic: An Online Rapid Assessment Survey.

BACKGROUND: COVID-19 has been causing a high burden of suffering for patients and families. There is limited evidence on the preparedness of Indian palliative care services for the pandemic. AIM: This study aimed to assess the preparedness and capacity of Indian palliative care services in response to the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: A cross-sectional online survey was developed based on prior evidence and international health regulations. It was emailed to the Indian Palliative Care Association members and investigators' professional networks in India. One participant per palliative care service was requested. Descriptive analysis was used. RESULTS: Representatives of 78 palliative care services completed the survey. Three in four services had COVID-19 case definition and adapted their protocols for infection control (75%). About half of the services (55%) reported concerns about achieving appropriate hand hygiene in the community. More than half of the services (59%) had capacity to train nonspecialists for symptom control and psychological support. About half of the services reported that they had plans to redeploy staff (56%) and resources (53%) in the case of outbreaks. Two-fifths of the services used paper records to store an updated contact list of staff (40%) and did not have designated focal contacts for information update (40%). Staff anxiety related to personal infection risk and family care was relatively high (median score = 7 on a 1-10 scale). CONCLUSION: We recommend the following resource allocation to enable palliative care services to support the Indian health system in delivering essential care in this and future pandemics: (1) infection control, especially in the community; (2) training using existing clinical protocols to strengthen palliative care across the health system; and (3) redeployment plans.

Identification of palliative care needs among people with dementia and its association with acute hospital care and community service use at the end-of-life: A retrospective cohort study using linked primary, community and secondary care data.

BACKGROUND: Hospital admissions among people dying with dementia are common. It is not known whether identification of palliative care needs could help prevent unnecessary admissions. AIM: To examine the proportion of people with dementia identified as having palliative care needs in their last year of life, and the association between identification of needs and primary, community and hospital services in the last 90 days. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study using Discover, an administrative and clinical dataset from 365 primary care practices in London with deterministic individual-level data linkage to community and hospital records. SETTING/PARTICIPANTS: People diagnosed with dementia and registered with a general practitioner in North West London (UK) who died between 2016 and 2019. The primary outcome was multiple non-elective hospital admissions in the last 90 days of life. Secondary outcomes included contacts with primary and community care providers. We examined the association between identification of palliative care needs with outcomes. RESULTS: Among 5804 decedents with dementia, 1953 (33.6%) were identified as having palliative care needs, including 1141 (19.7%) identified before the last 90 days of life. Identification of palliative care needs before the last 90 days was associated with a lower risk of multiple hospital admissions (Relative Risk 0.70, 95% CI 0.58-0.85) and more contacts with the primary care practice, community nurses and palliative care teams in the last 90 days. CONCLUSIONS: Further investigation of the mechanisms underlying the association between identification of palliative care needs and reduced hospital admissions could help reduce reliance on acute care for this population.

Associations between informal care costs, care quality, carer rewards, burden and subsequent grief: the international, access, rights and empowerment mortality follow-back study of the last 3 months of life (IARE I study).

BACKGROUND: At the end of life, formal care costs are high. Informal care (IC) costs, and their effects on outcomes, are not known. This study aimed to determine the IC costs for older adults in the last 3 months of life, and their relationships with outcomes, adjusting for care quality. METHODS: Mortality follow-back postal survey. SETTING: Palliative care services in England (London), Ireland (Dublin) and the USA (New York, San Francisco). PARTICIPANTS: Informal carers (ICrs) of decedents who had received palliative care. DATA: ICrs reported hours and activities, care quality, positive aspects and burdens of caregiving, and completed the Texas Revised Inventory of Grief (TRIG). ANALYSIS: All costs (formal, informal) were calculated by multiplying reported hours of activities by country-specific costs for that activity. IC costs used country-specific shadow prices, e.g. average hourly wages and unit costs for nursing care. Multivariable logistic regression analysis explored the association of potential explanatory variables, including IC costs and care quality, on three outcomes: positive aspects and burdens of caregiving, and subsequent grief. RESULTS: We received 767 completed surveys, 245 from London, 282 Dublin, 131 New York and 109 San Francisco. Most respondents were women (70%); average age was 60 years. On average, patients received 66-76 h per week from ICrs for 'being on call', 52-55 h for ICrs being with them, 19-21 h for personal care, 17-21 h for household tasks, 15-18 h for medical procedures and 7-10 h for appointments. Mean (SD) IC costs were as follows: USA $32,468 (28,578), England $36,170 (31,104) and Ireland $43,760 (36,930). IC costs accounted for 58% of total (formal plus informal) costs. Higher IC costs were associated with less grief and more positive perspectives of caregiving. Poor home care was associated with greater caregiver burden. CONCLUSIONS: Costs to informal carers are larger than those to formal care services for people in the last three months of life. If well supported ICrs can play a role in providing care, and this can be done without detriment to them, providing that they are helped. Improving community palliative care and informal carer support should be a focus for future investment.

Preparedness of African Palliative Care Services to Respond to the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Rapid Assessment.

CONTEXT: Palliative care is an essential component of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic response but is overlooked in national and international preparedness plans. The preparedness and capacity of African palliative care services to respond to COVID-19 is unknown. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the preparedness and capacity of African palliative care services to respond to the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: We developed, piloted, and conducted a cross-sectional online survey guided by the 2005 International Health Regulations. It was electronically mailed to the 166 African Palliative Care Association's members and partners. Descriptive analyses were conducted. RESULTS: About 83 participants from 21 countries completed the survey. Most services had at least one procedure for the case management of COVID-19 or another infectious disease (63%). Respondents reported concerns over accessing running water, soap, and disinfectant products (43%, 42%, and 59%, respectively) and security concerns for themselves or their staff (52%). Two in five services (41%) did not have any or make available additional personal protective equipment. Most services (80%) reported having the capacity to use technology instead of face-to-face appointment, and half (52%) reported having palliative care protocols for symptom management and psychological support that could be shared with nonspecialist staff in other health care settings. CONCLUSION: Our survey suggests that African palliative care services could support the wider health system's response to the COVID-19 pandemic with greater resources such as basic infection control materials. It identified specific and systemic weaknesses impeding their preparedness to respond to outbreaks. The findings call for urgent measures to ensure staff and patient safety.

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.

Primary care service use by end-of-life cancer patients: a nationwide population-based cohort study in the United Kingdom.

BACKGROUND: End of life (EoL) care becomes more complex and increasingly takes place in the community, but there is little data on the use of general practice (GP) services to guide care improvement. This study aims to determine the trends and factors associated with GP consultation, prescribing and referral to other care services amongst cancer patients in the last year of life. METHODS: A retrospective cohort study of cancer patients who died in 2000-2014, based on routinely collected primary care data (the Clinical Practice Research DataLink, CPRD) covering a representative sample of the population in the United Kingdom. Outcome variables were number of GP consultations (primary), number of prescriptions and referral to other care services (yes vs no) in the last year of life. Explanatory variables included socio-demographics, clinical characteristics and the status of palliative care needs recognised or not. The association between outcome and explanatory variables were evaluated using multiple-adjusted risk ratio (aRR). RESULTS: Of 68,523 terminal cancer patients, 70% were aged 70+, 75% had comorbidities and 45.5% had palliative care needs recognised. In the last year of life, a typical cancer patient had 43 GP consultations (Standard deviation (SD): 31.7; total = 3,031,734), 71.5 prescriptions (SD: 68.0; total = 5,074,178), and 21(SD: 13.0) different drugs; 58.0% of patients had at least one referral covering all main clinical specialities. More comorbid conditions, prostate cancer and having palliative care needs recognised were associated with more primary care consultations, more prescriptions and a higher chance of referral (aRRs 1.07-2.03). Increasing age was related to fewer consultations (aRRs 0.77-0.96), less prescriptions (aRR 1.09-1.44), and a higher chance of referral (aRRs 1.08-1.16) but less likely to have palliative care needs recognised (aRRs 0.53-0.89). CONCLUSIONS: GPs are very involved in end of life care of cancer patients, most of whom having complex care needs, i.e. older age, comorbidity and polypharmacy. This highlights the importance of enhancing primary palliative care skills among GPs and the imperative of greater integration of primary care with other healthcare professionals including oncologists, palliative care specialists, geriatricians and pharmacists. Research into the potential of deprescribing is warranted. Older patients have poorer access to both primary care and palliative care need to be addressed in future practices.

Regional variations in geographic access to inpatient hospices and Place of death: A Population-based study in England, UK.

BACKGROUND: There is much variation in hospice use with respect to geographic factors such as area-based deprivation, location of patient's residence and proximity to services location. However, little is known about how the association between geographic access to inpatient hospice and hospice deaths varies by patients' region of settlement. STUDY AIM: To examine regional differences in the association between geographic access to inpatient hospice and hospice deaths. METHODS: A regional population-based observational study in England, UK. Records of patients aged ≥ 25 years (n = 123088) who died from non-accidental causes in 2014, were extracted from the Office for National Statistics (ONS) death registry. Our cohort comprised of patients who died at home and in inpatient hospice. Decedents were allocated to each of the nine government office regions of England (London, East Midlands, West Midlands, East, Yorkshire and The Humber, South West, South East, North West and North East) through record linkage with their postcode of usual residence. We defined geographic access as a measure of drive times from patients' residential location to the nearest inpatient hospice. A modified Poisson regression estimated the association between geographic access to hospice, comparing hospice deaths (1) versus home deaths (0). We developed nine regional specific models and adjusted for regional differences in patient's clinical & socio-demographic characteristics. The strength of the association was estimated with adjusted Proportional Ratios (aPRs). FINDINGS: The percentage of deaths varied across regions (home: 86.7% in the North East to 73.0% in the South East; hospice: 13.3% in the North East to 27.0% in the South East). We found wide differences in geographic access to inpatient hospices across regions. Median drive times to hospice varied from 4.6 minutes in London to 25.9 minutes in the North East. We found a dose-response association in the East: (aPRs: 0.22-0.78); East Midlands: (aPRs: 0.33-0.63); North East (aPRs: 0.19-0.87); North West (aPRs: 0.69-0.88); South West (aPRs: 0.56-0.89) and West Midlands (aPRs: 0.28-0.92) indicating that decedents who lived further away from hospices locations (≥ 10 minutes) were less likely to die in a hospice. CONCLUSION: The clear dose-response associations in six regions underscore the importance of regional specific initiatives to improve and optimise access to hospices. Commissioners and policymakers need to do more to ensure that home death is not due to limited geographic access to inpatient hospice care.

Drivers of care costs and quality in the last 3 months of life among older people receiving palliative care: A multinational mortality follow-back survey across England, Ireland and the United States.

BACKGROUND: Care costs rise towards the end of life. International comparison of service use, costs and care experiences can inform quality and improve access. AIM: The aim of this study was to compare health and social care costs, quality and their drivers in the last 3 months of life for older adults across countries. Null hypothesis: no difference between countries. DESIGN: Mortality follow-back survey. Costs were calculated from carers' reported service use and unit costs. SETTING: Palliative care services in England (London), Ireland (Dublin) and the United States (New York, San Francisco). PARTICIPANTS: Informal carers of decedents who had received palliative care participated in the study. RESULTS: A total of 767 questionnaires were returned: 245 in England, 282 in Ireland and 240 in the United States. Mean care costs per person with cancer/non-cancer were US$37,250/US$37,376 (the United States), US$29,065/US$29,411 (Ireland), US$15,347/US$16,631 (England) and differed significantly (F = 25.79/14.27, p < 0.000). Cost distributions differed and were most homogeneous in England. In all countries, hospital care accounted for > 80% of total care costs; community care 6%-16%, palliative care 1%-15%; 10% of decedents used ~30% of total care costs. Being a high-cost user was associated with older age (>80 years), facing financial difficulties and poor experiences of home care, but not with having cancer or multimorbidity. Palliative care services consistently had the highest satisfaction. CONCLUSION: Poverty and poor home care drove high costs, suggesting that improving community palliative care may improve care value, especially as palliative care expenditure was low. Major diagnostic variables were not cost drivers. Care costs in the United States were high and highly variable, suggesting that high-cost low-value care may be prevalent.

The escalating global burden of serious health-related suffering: projections to 2060 by world regions, age groups, and health conditions.

BACKGROUND: Serious life-threatening and life-limiting illnesses place an enormous burden on society and health systems. Understanding how this burden will evolve in the future is essential to inform policies that alleviate suffering and prevent health system weakening. We aimed to project the global burden of serious health-related suffering requiring palliative care until 2060 by world regions, age groups, and health conditions. METHODS: We projected the future burden of serious health-related suffering as defined by the Lancet Commission on Palliative Care and Pain Relief, by combining WHO mortality projections (2016-60) with estimates of physical and psychological symptom prevalence in 20 conditions most often associated with symptoms requiring palliative care. Projections were described in terms of absolute numbers and proportional change compared with the 2016 baseline data. Results were stratified by World Bank income regions and WHO geographical regions. FINDINGS: By 2060, an estimated 48 million people (47% of all deaths globally) will die with serious health-related suffering, which represents an 87% increase from 26 million people in 2016. 83% of these deaths will occur in low-income and middle-income countries. Serious health-related suffering will increase in all regions, with the largest proportional rise in low-income countries (155% increase between 2016 and 2060). Globally, serious health-related suffering will increase most rapidly among people aged 70 years or older (183% increase between 2016 and 2060). In absolute terms, it will be driven by rises in cancer deaths (16 million people, 109% increase between 2016 and 2060). The condition with the highest proportional increase in serious-related suffering will be dementia (6 million people, 264% increase between 2016 and 2060). INTERPRETATION: The burden of serious health-related suffering will almost double by 2060, with the fastest increases occurring in low-income countries, among older people, and people with dementia. Immediate global action to integrate palliative care into health systems is an ethical and economic imperative. FUNDING: Research Challenge Fund, Florence Nightingale Faculty of Nursing, Midwifery and Palliative Care, King's College London.

Socioeconomic position and use of healthcare in the last year of life: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Low socioeconomic position (SEP) is recognized as a risk factor for worse health outcomes. How socioeconomic factors influence end-of-life care, and the magnitude of their effect, is not understood. This review aimed to synthesise and quantify the associations between measures of SEP and use of healthcare in the last year of life. METHODS AND FINDINGS: MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO, CINAHL, and ASSIA databases were searched without language restrictions from inception to 1 February 2019. We included empirical observational studies from high-income countries reporting an association between SEP (e.g., income, education, occupation, private medical insurance status, housing tenure, housing quality, or area-based deprivation) and place of death, plus use of acute care, specialist and nonspecialist end-of-life care, advance care planning, and quality of care in the last year of life. Methodological quality was evaluated using the Newcastle-Ottawa Quality Assessment Scale (NOS). The overall strength and direction of associations was summarised, and where sufficient comparable data were available, adjusted odds ratios (ORs) were pooled and dose-response meta-regression performed. A total of 209 studies were included (mean NOS quality score of 4.8); 112 high- to medium-quality observational studies were used in the meta-synthesis and meta-analysis (53.5% from North America, 31.0% from Europe, 8.5% from Australia, and 7.0% from Asia). Compared to people living in the least deprived neighbourhoods, people living in the most deprived neighbourhoods were more likely to die in hospital versus home (OR 1.30, 95% CI 1.23-1.38, p < 0.001), to receive acute hospital-based care in the last 3 months of life (OR 1.16, 95% CI 1.08-1.25, p < 0.001), and to not receive specialist palliative care (OR 1.13, 95% CI 1.07-1.19, p < 0.001). For every quintile increase in area deprivation, hospital versus home death was more likely (OR 1.07, 95% CI 1.05-1.08, p < 0.001), and not receiving specialist palliative care was more likely (OR 1.03, 95% CI 1.02-1.05, p < 0.001). Compared to the most educated (qualifications or years of education completed), the least educated people were more likely to not receive specialist palliative care (OR 1.26, 95% CI 1.07-1.49, p = 0.005). The observational nature of the studies included and the focus on high-income countries limit the conclusions of this review. CONCLUSIONS: In high-income countries, low SEP is a risk factor for hospital death as well as other indicators of potentially poor-quality end-of-life care, with evidence of a dose response indicating that inequality persists across the social stratum. These findings should stimulate widespread efforts to reduce socioeconomic inequality towards the end of life.

Service Delivery Models to Maximize Quality of Life for Older People at the End of Life: A Rapid Review.

Policy Points We identified two overarching classifications of integrated geriatric and palliative care to maximize older people's quality of life at the end of life. Both are oriented to person-centered care, but with differing emphasis on either function or symptoms and concerns. Policymakers should both improve access to palliative care beyond just the last months of life and increase geriatric care provision to maintain and optimize function. This would ensure that continuity and coordination for potentially complex care needs across the continuum of late life would be maintained, where the demarcation of boundaries between healthy aging and healthy dying become increasingly blurred. Our findings highlight the urgent need for health system change to improve end-of-life care as part of universal health coverage. The use of health services should be informed by the likelihood of benefits and intended outcomes rather than on prognosis. CONTEXT: In an era of unprecedented global aging, a key priority is to align health and social services for older populations in order to support the dual priorities of living well while adapting to a gradual decline in function. We aimed to provide a comprehensive synthesis of evidence regarding service delivery models that optimize the quality of life (QoL) for older people at the end of life across health, social, and welfare services worldwide. METHODS: We conducted a rapid scoping review of systematic reviews. We searched MEDLINE, CINAHL, EMBASE, and CDSR databases from 2000 to 2017 for reviews reporting the effectiveness of service models aimed at optimizing QoL for older people, more than 50% of whom were older than 60 and in the last one or two years of life. We assessed the quality of these included reviews using AMSTAR and synthesized the findings narratively. RESULTS: Of the 2,238 reviews identified, we included 72, with 20 reporting meta-analysis. Although all the World Health Organization (WHO) regions were represented, most of the reviews reported data from the Americas (52 of 72), Europe (46 of 72), and/or the Western Pacific (28 of 72). We identified two overarching classifications of service models but with different target outcomes: Integrated Geriatric Care, emphasizing physical function, and Integrated Palliative Care, focusing mainly on symptoms and concerns. Areas of synergy across the overarching classifications included person-centered care, education, and a multiprofessional workforce. The reviews assessed 117 separate outcomes. A meta-analysis demonstrated effectiveness for both classifications on QoL, including symptoms such as pain, depression, and psychological well-being. Economic analysis and its implications were poorly considered. CONCLUSIONS: Despite their different target outcomes, those service models classified as Integrated Geriatric Care or Integrated Palliative Care were effective in improving QoL for older people nearing the end of life. Both approaches highlight the imperative for integrating services across the care continuum, with service involvement triggered by the patient's needs and likelihood of benefits. To inform the sustainability of health system change we encourage economic analyses that span health and social care and examine all sources of finance to understand contextual inequalities.

The views and experiences of older people with conservatively managed renal failure: a qualitative study of communication, information and decision-making.

BACKGROUND: Older people with advanced kidney disease require information and support from clinicians when deciding whether to have dialysis or conservative (non-dialysis) care. There is evidence that communication practices, information provision and treatment rates vary widely across renal units. However, experiences of communicating with clinicians among patients receiving conservative care are poorly understood. This evidence is essential to ensure support is patient-centred and equitable. Our aim was to explore views and experiences of communication, information provision and treatment decision-making among older patients receiving conservative care. METHODS: In-depth qualitative interviews were conducted with patients with stage 5 chronic kidney disease from three UK renal units. Purposive sampling captured variation in age, co-morbidity and functional status. Interviews were analysed thematically. RESULTS: 20 patients were interviewed (11 were men; median age 82 (range 69-95)). Participants described positive experiences of communicating with clinicians and receiving information, but also negative experiences involving insensitivity, rushing or ambiguity. Participants reported clinicians omitting/avoiding conversations regarding diagnosis and prognosis, and described what helped and hindered good communication and support. They wanted information about their treatment options and illness, but expressed ambivalence about knowing details of disease progression. Clinicians' views and recommendations regarding treatment influenced patients' decision-making. CONCLUSIONS: Older patients report variable quality in communication with clinicians and gaps in the information received. Uncertainty about the disease trajectory and patients' ambivalence regarding information makes communication particularly challenging for clinicians. Tailoring information to patient preferences and conveying it clearly and sensitively is critical. Renal clinicians require support and training to ensure decision-making support for older patients is patient-centred. Future research should examine how clinicians' communication practices influence treatment decision-making.

Recommendations for services for people living with chronic breathlessness in advanced disease: Results of a transparent expert consultation.

Chronic breathlessness is highly distressing for people with advanced disease and their informal carers, yet health services for this group remain highly heterogeneous. We aimed to generate evidence-based stakeholder-endorsed recommendations for practice, policy and research concerning services for people with advanced disease and chronic breathlessness. We used transparent expert consultation, comprising modified nominal group technique during a stakeholder workshop, and an online consensus survey. Stakeholders, representing multiple specialities and professions, and patient/carers were invited to participate. Thirty-seven participants attended the stakeholder workshop and generated 34 separate recommendations, rated by 74 online survey respondents. Seven recommendations had strong agreement and high levels of consensus. Stakeholders agreed services should be person-centred and flexible, should cut across multiple disciplines and providers and should prioritize breathlessness management in its own right. They advocated for wide geographical coverage and access to expert care, supported through skills-sharing among professionals. They also recommended recognition of informal carers and their role by clinicians and policymakers. Overall, stakeholders' recommendations reflect the need for improved access to person-centred, multi-professional care and support for carers to provide or access breathlessness management interventions. Future research should test the optimal models of care and educational strategies to meet these recommendations.