Exploring patients' advance care planning needs during the annual 75+ health assessment: survey of Australian GPs' views and current practice.

BACKGROUND: The 75+ health assessment has been identified as a suitable trigger to introduce advance care planning (ACP) to general practice patients. Australian general practitioners (GPs) were surveyed to explore their perceptions, attitudes and practices in introducing ACP during 75+ health assessments. METHODS: A cross-sectional postal survey of Australian GPs covering their personal, professional and workplace characteristics, their current practice regarding ACP within a 75+ health assessment, and their attitude towards ACP. Multivariate logistic regression was used to analyse the factors associated with routinely discussing ACP as part of the 75+ health assessment. RESULTS: A total of 185 (19.2%) out of 964 eligible GPs returned a completed survey. Most GPs reported that patients interested in ACP were supported by the GPs or the practice nurse. Two factors, (1) attitude that ACP is an essential component of the 75+ health assessment, and (2) regional or rural location of the practice, had a statistically and clinically significant association with the GP's self-reported discussion of ACP during 75+ health assessments. CONCLUSIONS: GPs showed a high level of support and involvement in discussing ACP during 75+ health assessments. ACP support during 75+ health assessments was often provided directly by the GP or via the practice nurse. Given the international evidence that ACP training programs improve skills and knowledge, and foster positive attitudes towards ACP, there is an important need to continue funding ACP training programs for GPs and practice nurses.

Effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of a digital health intervention to support patients with colorectal cancer prepare for and recover from surgery: study protocol of the RecoverEsupport randomised controlled trial.

INTRODUCTION: Surgery is the most common treatment for colorectal cancer (CRC) and can cause relative long average length of stay (LOS) and high risks of unplanned readmissions and complications. Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) pathways can reduce the LOS and postsurgical complications. Digital health interventions provide a flexible and low-cost way of supporting patients to achieve this. This protocol describes a trial aiming to evaluate the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of the RecoverEsupport digital health intervention in decreasing the hospital LOS in patients undergoing CRC surgery. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: The two-arm randomised controlled trial will assess the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of the RecoverEsupport digital health intervention compared with usual care (control) in patients with CRC. The intervention consists of a website and a series of automatic prompts and alerts to support patients to adhere to the patient-led ERAS recommendations. The primary trial outcome is the length of hospital stay. Secondary outcomes include days alive and out of hospital; emergency department presentations; quality of life; patient knowledge and behaviours related to the ERAS recommendations; health service utilisation; and intervention acceptability and use. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The trial has been approved by the Hunter New England Research Ethics Committee (2019/ETH00869) and the University of Newcastle Ethics Committee (H-2015-0364). Trial findings will be disseminated via peer-reviewed publications and conference presentations. If the intervention is effective, the research team will facilitate its adoption within the Local Health District for widespread adaptation and implementation. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ACTRN12621001533886.

Essential components of health assessment for older people in primary care: a cross-sectional survey of Australian general practitioners.

OBJECTIVE: To examine general practitioners' views about how health assessments for older people should be conducted. METHODS: General practitioners were randomly sampled from a national database of medical practitioners and invited to complete a survey. Survey items explored general practitioners' views about essential components of a 75+ Health Assessment and who should assess each component, consultation time, use of standardised templates and tools, and home visits. RESULTS: Overall, 185 (19.2%) general practitioners participated. Of 61 items presented, 24 were rated 'essential' by ≥70% of practitioners, with an average estimated consultation time of 65 minutes. Of the 24 essential items, it was perceived that 21 could be assessed by either a general practitioner or clinic nurse. Most practitioners indicated a standardised template (86%) and standardised tools for complex issues (79%) should be used, and home visits conducted (75%). CONCLUSIONS: General practitioners agreed on 24 items as essential for every health assessment, with assessments estimated to take more than one hour. Implications for public health: Increases to remuneration for prolonged assessments or mechanisms for improving efficiency and quality of assessments are needed. Acceptable mechanisms may include standardised patient-reported tools, standardised templates and the use of non-medical staff to assist with assessments.

Systematic review of barriers and enablers to the delivery of palliative care by primary care practitioners.

BACKGROUND: There is increasing demand for primary care practitioners to play a key role in palliative care delivery. Given this, it is important to understand their perceptions of the barriers and enablers to optimal palliative care, and how commonly these are experienced. AIM: To explore the type and prevalence of barriers and enablers to palliative care provision reported by primary care practitioners. DESIGN: A systematic review of quantitative data-based articles was conducted. DATA SOURCES: Medline, Embase and PsychINFO databases were searched for articles published between January 2007 and March 2019. DATA SYNTHESIS: Abstracts were assessed against the eligibility criteria by one reviewer and a random sample of 80 articles were blind coded by a second author. Data were extracted from eligible full-texts by one author and checked by a second. Given the heterogeneity in the included studies' methods and outcomes, a narrative synthesis was undertaken. RESULTS: Twenty-one studies met the inclusion criteria. The most common barriers related to bureaucratic procedures, communication between healthcare professionals, primary care practitioners' personal commitments, and their skills or confidence. The most common enablers related to education, nurses and trained respite staff to assist with care delivery, better communication between professionals, and templates to facilitate referral to out-of-hours services. CONCLUSION: A holistic approach addressing the range of barriers reported in this review is needed to support primary care providers to deliver palliative care. This includes better training and addressing barriers related to the interface between healthcare services.

Barriers to the evaluation of evidence-based public health policy.

Public health policy has the potential to produce great benefits for individuals and communities. There is growing demand that such efforts be rigorously evaluated to ensure that the expected benefits are, in fact, realised. Commonly, public health policy is evaluated by consumer acceptability, reach, or changes in knowledge and attitudes. Non-robust research designs are often used. But these approaches to evaluation do not answer three critical questions: Has a change in the desired outcome occurred? Was it a consequence of the policy and not some extraneous factor? Was the size of the change considered significant and cost-effective? We, a team of government and academic scholars working in research and evaluation, have examined some of the more common impediments to robust evaluation: political impediments, a lack of investment in evaluation capacity within bureaucracy, and the failure of academic researchers to understand the need for the evaluation of public health policy.

System-Wide and Group-Specific Health Service Improvements: Cross-Sectional Survey of Outpatient Improvement Preferences and Associations with Demographic Characteristics.

Efficient patient-centred quality improvement requires an understanding of the system-wide areas of dissatisfaction along with evidence to identify the programs which can be strategically targeted according to specific patient characteristics and preferences. This cross-sectional study reports the proportion of chronic disease outpatients selecting 23 patient-centred improvement initiatives. Using univariate tests and multivariable logistic regressions, this multi-site study also identifies initiatives differentially selected by outpatients according to clinical and demographic characteristics. A total of 475 outpatients participated (49% response). Commonly selected initiatives included: reducing wait-times (22.3%); convenient appointment scheduling (16.0%); and receiving up-to-date treatment information (16.0%). Within univariate tests, preferences for information and service accessibility initiatives were not significantly associated with specific subgroups. However, seven initiatives were preferred according to age, gender, diagnosis status, and chronic disease type within multivariate models. For example, neurology outpatients were more likely to select assistance to manage psychological symptoms when compared to oncology outpatients (OR: 2.89). Study findings suggest that system-wide programs to enhance information provision are strategic approaches to improve experiences across patient characteristics. Furthermore, a few initiatives can be targeted to specific groups and emphasized the importance of detailed scoping analyses and tailored implementation plans when designing patient-centred quality improvement programs.

A consumer register: an acceptable and cost-effective alternative for accessing patient populations.

BACKGROUND: Population-based registries are increasingly used to recruit patient samples for research, however, they have several limitations including low consent and participation rates, and potential selection bias. To improve access to samples for research, the utility of a new model of recruitment termed the 'Consumer Register', that allows for direct patient recruitment from hospitals, was examined. This paper reports: (i) consent rates onto the register; (ii) preferred methods and frequency of contact; and (iii) the feasibility of establishing the register, including: (a) cost per person recruited to the register; (b) the differential cost and consent rates of volunteer versus paid data collectors; and (c) participant completion rates. METHODS: A cross-sectional survey was conducted in five outpatient clinics in Australia. Patients were approached by volunteers or paid data collectors and asked to complete a touch-screen electronic survey. Consenting individuals were asked to indicate their willingness and preferences for enrolment onto a research register. Descriptive statistics were used to examine patient preferences and linear regression used to model the success of volunteer versus paid data collectors. The opportunity and financial costs of establishing the register were calculated. RESULTS: A total of 1947 patients (80.6 %) consented to complete the survey, of which, 1486 (76.3 %) completed the questionnaire. Of the completers, the majority (69.4 %, or 1032 participants) were willing to be listed on the register and preferred to be contacted by email (50.3 %). Almost 39 % of completers were willing to be contacted three or more times in a 12 month period. The annual opportunity cost of resources consumed by the register was valued at $37,187, giving an opportunity cost per person recruited to the register of $36. After amortising fixed costs, the annual financial outlay was $23,004 or $22 per person recruited to the register. Use of volunteer data collectors contributed to an annual saving of $14,183, however paid data collectors achieved significantly higher consent rates. Successful enrolment onto the register was completed for 42 % of the sample. CONCLUSIONS: A Consumer Register is a promising and feasible alternative to population-based registries, with the majority of participants willing to be contacted multiple times via low-resource methods such as email. There is an effectiveness/cost trade off in the use of paid versus volunteer data collectors.

Measuring the quality of patient-centered care: why patient-reported measures are critical to reliable assessment.

PURPOSE: The Institute of Medicine (IOM) identified patient-centeredness as crucial to quality health care. The IOM endorsed six patient-centeredness dimensions that stipulated that care must be: respectful to patients' values, preferences, and expressed needs; coordinated and integrated; provide information, communication, and education; ensure physical comfort; provide emotional support; and involve family and friends. Patient-reported measures examine the patient's perspective and are essential to the accurate assessment of patient-centered care. This article's objectives are to: 1) use the six IOM-endorsed patient-centeredness dimensions as a framework to outline why patient-reported measures are crucial to the reliable measurement of patient-centered care; and 2) to identify existing patient-reported measures that assess each patient-centered care dimension. METHODS: For each IOM-endorsed patient-centeredness dimension, the published literature was searched to highlight the essential role of patients in assessing patient-centered care and informing quality improvement efforts. Existing literature was also searched to identify examples of patient-reported measures that assess each patient-centeredness dimension. CONCLUSION: Patient-reported measures are arguably the best way to measure patient-centeredness. For instance, patients are best positioned to determine whether care aligns with patient values, preferences, and needs and the Measure of Patient Preferences is an example of a patient-reported measure that does so. Furthermore, only the patient knows whether they received the level of information desired, and if information was understood and can be recalled. Patient-reported measures that examine information provision include the Lung Information Needs Questionnaire and the EORTC QLQ-INFO25. In relation to physical comfort, only patients can report the severity of physical symptoms and whether medications provide adequate relief. Patient-reported measures that investigate physical comfort include the Pain Care Quality Survey and the Brief Pain Inventory. Using patient-reported measures to regularly measure patient-centered care is critical to identifying areas of health care where improvements are needed.

Prevalence and correlates of cancer survivors' supportive care needs 6 months after diagnosis: a population-based cross-sectional study.

BACKGROUND: An understanding of the nature and magnitude of the impact of cancer is critical to planning how best to deliver supportive care to the growing population of cancer survivors whose need for care may span many years. This study aimed to describe the prevalence of and factors associated with moderate to high level unmet supportive care needs among adult cancer survivors six months after diagnosis. METHODS: A population-based sample of adult cancer survivors diagnosed with one of the eight most incident cancers in Australia was recruited from two state-based cancer registries. Data for 1323 survivors were obtained by self-report questionnaire and linkage with cancer registry data. Unmet needs were assessed by the 34-item Supportive Care Needs Survey (SCNS-SF34). The data were examined using chi-square and multiple logistic regression analyses. RESULTS: A total of 444 (37%) survivors reported at least one 'moderate to high' level unmet need and 496 (42%) reported 'no need' for help. Moderate to high level unmet needs were most commonly reported in the psychological (25%) and physical aspects of daily living (20%) domains. The five most frequently endorsed items of moderate to high unmet need were concerns about the worries of those close to them (15%), fears about the cancer spreading (14%), not being able to do the things they used to do (13%), uncertainty about the future (13%) and lack of energy/tiredness (12%). Survivors' psychological characteristics were the strongest indicators of unmet need, particularly caseness for anxious preoccupation coping which was associated (OR = 2.2-5.9) with unmet need for help across all domains. CONCLUSIONS: Unmet supportive care needs are prevalent among a subgroup of survivors transitioning from active treatment to survivorship, although lower than previously reported. In addition to coping support, valuable insight about how to prevent or address survivors' unmet needs could be gained by examining the substantial proportion of survivors who report no unmet needs.

Socio-demographic and medical correlates of the use of biologically based complementary and alternative medicines amongst recent Australian cancer survivors.

OBJECTIVE: Describe the socio-demographic/medical correlates of the use of biologically based complementary and alternative medicines (BBCAM) amongst a heterogeneous sample of recent cancer survivors. METHOD: Cross-sectional analysis was undertaken on the baseline data of a population-based longitudinal study conducted in New South Wales and Victoria, Australia (2006-2008) of cancer survivors 6 months post diagnosis. Participants (n=1323) completed a self-report survey assessing socio-demographic/medical characteristics and use of BBCAM (dietary supplements or vitamins, herbal treatments, and special diets). RESULTS: Twenty-seven percent of respondents (n=349) reported using at least one BBCAM to help manage their cancer and related symptoms. Nutritional supplements and vitamins were the most commonly reported BBCAM (23%). Correlates of BBCAM use included cancer type (bowel [OR=3.3; CI:1.8-5.9], breast [OR=2.4; CI:1.4-4.1], head and neck [OR=3.8; CI: 2.0-7.2], haematological [OR=2.0; CI: 1.1-3.7], prostate [OR=1.8; CI: 1.0-3.9] versus melanoma), education level (university degree [OR=1.6; CI:1.1-2.3] versus secondary school) and treatment types (chemotherapy [OR=2.0; CI:1.4-2.7] versus not, bone marrow/stem cell transplant/immunotherapy [OR=2.3; CI:1.2-4.4] versus not). CONCLUSION: Providers should openly discuss the use of complementary and alternative therapies with all cancer patients, and given potential safety concerns, be proactive in exploring BBCAM use among the subgroups of survivors identified in this study.

Travelling all over the countryside: travel-related burden and financial difficulties reported by cancer patients in New South Wales and Victoria.

OBJECTIVE: To describe travel burden and travel-related financial burden experienced by cancer patients over the first year after diagnosis. DESIGN, SETTING, PARTICIPANTS: Population-based longitudinal cohort of recent adult cancer patients diagnosed with the eight most incident cancers recruited from New South Wales and Victorian Cancer Registries. Self-report survey data were collected at 6 and 12 months after diagnosis from 1410 participants (city: n = 890; regional/remote: n = 520). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Travel time to cancer treatment, living away from home for treatment, travel-related treatment decisions, extent of financial issues, unmet need for financial help. RESULTS: During the first 12 months after diagnosis, outer regional/remote residents had the greatest travel burden; 61% (n = 79) travelled at least 2 hours one way to receive treatment, and 49% (n = 66) lived away from home to receive treatment. Strongest associates of travel burden were living in regional/remote areas (odds ratio (OR) = 18.9-135.7), having received surgery (OR = 6.7) or radiotherapy (OR = 3.6). Between 6 and 12 months after diagnosis, 2% (n = 24) of patients declined cancer treatment because of the time it would take to get to treatment. Patients who travelled more than 2 hours or lived away for treatment reported significantly greater financial difficulties (38%; 40%) than those who did not (12%; 14%), even after adjusting for covariates. CONCLUSIONS: Travel burden is greatest for rural patients, and is associated with greater financial burden. Appropriate and adequate provision of travel and accommodation assistance schemes remains paramount to achieving equitable delivery of cancer services.