Evaluating a dignity care intervention for palliative care in the community setting: community nurses' perspectives.

AIMS AND OBJECTIVES: To evaluate a dignity care intervention provided by community nurses seeking to address dignity concerns for people with advanced and life-limiting conditions. BACKGROUND: Evidence would suggest that dying people fear a loss of dignity and a central focus of palliative care is to assist people to die with dignity. Whilst community nurses have a key role to play in the delivery of palliative care, specific interventions for dignity are lacking. DESIGN: A mixed methods study using online survey and focus group interviews and thematic analysis to examine data. METHODS: Twenty four community nurses implemented the dignity care intervention for people with advanced and life-limiting conditions were recruited from four pilot sites across Ireland. Four focus group interviews and on line survey were conducted between March-June 2015. RESULTS: The community nurses found the dignity care intervention useful. It helped the nurses to provide holistic end-of-life care and assisted in the overall assessment of palliative care patients, identifying areas that might not otherwise have been noted. Whilst it was a useful tool for communication, they noted that it stimulated some emotionally sensitive conversations for which they felt unprepared. CONCLUSIONS: Implementing the dignity care intervention in practice was challenging. However, the dignity care intervention facilitated holistic assessment and identified patient dignity-related concerns that may not have been otherwise identified. Further support is required to overcome barriers and enable dignity-conserving care. RELEVANCE TO CLINICAL PRACTICE: Ensuring dignity is a key aspect of palliative and end-of-life care; however, community nurses may not feel equipped to address this aspect of care. Implementing a dignity care intervention can assist in identifying patient dignity-related concerns and provision of holistic care. Community nurses need more training to assist in difficult conversations relating to dignity and end-of-life care.

Clinical effectiveness and patient perspectives of different treatment strategies for tics in children and adolescents with Tourette syndrome: a systematic review and qualitative analysis.

BACKGROUND: Tourette syndrome (TS) is a neurodevelopmental condition characterised by chronic motor and vocal tics affecting up to 1% of school-age children and young people and is associated with significant distress and psychosocial impairment. OBJECTIVE: To conduct a systematic review of the benefits and risks of pharmacological, behavioural and physical interventions for tics in children and young people with TS (part 1) and to explore the experience of treatment and services from the perspective of young people with TS and their parents (part 2). DATA SOURCES: For the systematic reviews (parts 1 and 2), mainstream bibliographic databases, The Cochrane Library, education, social care and grey literature databases were searched using subject headings and text words for tic* and Tourette* from database inception to January 2013. REVIEW/RESEARCH METHODS: For part 1, randomised controlled trials and controlled before-and-after studies of pharmacological, behavioural or physical interventions in children or young people (aged < 18 years) with TS or chronic tic disorder were included. Mixed studies and studies in adults were considered as supporting evidence. Risk of bias associated with each study was evaluated using the Cochrane tool. When there was sufficient data, random-effects meta-analysis was used to synthesize the evidence and the quality of evidence for each outcome was assessed using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation approach. For part 2, qualitative studies and survey literature conducted in populations of children/young people with TS or their carers or in health professionals with experience of treating TS were included in the qualitative review. Results were synthesized narratively. In addition, a national parent/carer survey was conducted via the Tourettes Action website. Participants included parents of children and young people with TS aged under 18 years. Participants (young people with TS aged 10-17 years) for the in-depth interviews were recruited via a national survey and specialist Tourettes clinics in the UK. RESULTS: For part 1, 70 studies were included in the quantitative systematic review. The evidence suggested that for treating tics in children and young people with TS, antipsychotic drugs [standardised mean difference (SMD) -0.74, 95% confidence interval (CI) -1.08 to -0.41; n = 75] and noradrenergic agents [clonidine (Dixarit(®), Boehringer Ingelheim) and guanfacine: SMD -0.72, 95% CI -1.03 to -0.40; n = 164] are effective in the short term. There was little difference among antipsychotics in terms of benefits, but adverse effect profiles do differ. Habit reversal training (HRT)/comprehensive behavioural intervention for tics (CBIT) was also shown to be effective (SMD -0.64, 95% CI -0.99 to -0.29; n = 133). For part 2, 295 parents/carers of children and young people with TS contributed useable survey data. Forty young people with TS participated in in-depth interviews. Four studies were in the qualitative review. Key themes were difficulties in accessing specialist care and behavioural interventions, delay in diagnosis, importance of anxiety and emotional symptoms, lack of provision of information to schools and inadequate information regarding medication and adverse effects. LIMITATIONS: The number and quality of clinical trials is low and this downgrades the strength of the evidence and conclusions. CONCLUSIONS: Antipsychotics, noradrenergic agents and HRT/CBIT are effective in reducing tics in children and young people with TS. The balance of benefits and harms favours the most commonly used medications: risperidone (Risperdal(®), Janssen), clonidine and aripiprazole (Abilify(®), Otsuka). Larger and better-conducted trials addressing important clinical uncertainties are required. Further research is needed into widening access to behavioural interventions through use of technology including mobile applications ('apps') and video consultation. STUDY REGISTRATION: This study is registered as PROSPERO CRD42012002059. FUNDING: The National Institute for Health Research Health Technology Assessment programme.

Palliative care research on the island of Ireland over the last decade: a systematic review and thematic analysis of peer reviewed publications.

BACKGROUND: As palliative care research continues to expand across Europe, and the world, questions exist about the nature and type of research undertaken in addition to the research priorities for the future. This systematic review, which is the first stage of a larger scale study to identify the research priorities for palliative care on the island of Ireland, examined palliative care research conducted on the island over the last decade. METHODS: A comprehensive search strategy was implemented and strict eligibility criteria were applied in order to identify relevant peer-reviewed journal articles. Inclusion criteria were all of the palliative care studies undertaken on the island of Ireland and published between January 2002 and May 2012. These were assessed in relation to year, setting, sample size, research methodology, and relevant findings. RESULTS: 412 publications were identified for screening and their abstracts obtained. After eliminating articles that did not meet the inclusion criteria, 151 remained for further analysis. A thematic analysis of 128 studies published between 2006 and 2012 revealed eight core themes: (1) specific groups/populations; (2) services and settings; (3) management of symptoms (physical, psychological, social); (4) bereavement; (5) communication and education; (6) death and dying; (7) spirituality; and (8) complementary and alternative medicine/intervention (CAM). There was an upward trend in the number of publications in palliative care research over the last ten years with over 72% of studies being published within the previous four years. A slightly higher number of studies were quantitative in nature (surveys, questionnaires, standardised assessments) followed by qualitative (individual and focus group interviews, case studies, documentary analysis and retrospective case note reviews), mixed methods, and systematic reviews. CONCLUSIONS: Whilst there has been a welcome growth in palliative care research across Ireland, this has largely been needs-based and small scale studies. In contrast, international researchers and decision makers recommend the need for more outcomes focused multidisciplinary research. An examination of palliative care research is an essential first step in seeking to develop future priority areas for further research, highlighting opportunities for future collaboration both nationally and internationally.