Distress among healthcare providers who provided end-of-life care during the COVID-19 pandemic: a longitudinal survey study (the CO-LIVE study).

INTRODUCTION: The COVID-19 pandemic had a significant impact on care at the end-of-life due to restrictions and other circumstances such as high workload and uncertainty about the disease. The objective of this study is to describe the degree of various signs experienced by healthcare providers throughout the first 18 months of the pandemic and to assess what provider's characteristics and care circumstances related to COVID-19 are associated with distress. METHODS: A longitudinal survey study among healthcare providers from different healthcare settings who provided end-of-life care during the pandemic's first 18 months. Data of four time periods were analyzed using descriptive statistics, logistic regression analysis and Generalized Estimating Equation. RESULTS: Of the respondents (n=302) the majority had a nursing background (71.8%) and most worked in a hospital (30.3%). Although reported distress was highest in the first period, during the first wave of COVID-19 pandemic, healthcare providers reported signs of distress in all four time periods. Being more stressed than usual and being regularly exhausted were the most common signs of distress. Healthcare providers working in nursing homes and hospitals were more likely to experience signs of distress, compared to healthcare providers working in hospice facilities, during the whole period of 1.5 years. When HCPs were restricted in providing post-death care, they were more likely to feel more stressed than usual and find their work more often emotionally demanding. CONCLUSION: A substantial amount of healthcare providers reported signs of distress during the first 1.5 years of the COVID-19 pandemic. A cause of distress appears to be that healthcare providers cannot provide the care they desire due the pandemic. Even though the pandemic is over, this remains an important and relevant finding, as high workload can sometimes force healthcare providers to make choices about how they provide care. Given that this can cause prolonged stress and this can lead to burnout (and HCPs leaving their current positions), it is now especially important to continue observing the long term developments of the well-being of our healthcare providers in palliative care and provide timely and adequate support where needed.

How end-of-life care was limited during the first 18 months of the COVID-19 pandemic: a longitudinal survey study among healthcare providers (the CO-LIVE study).

BACKGROUND: During the COVID-19 pandemic, the way in which end-of-life care was provided, underwent a lot of changes and therefor different domains of end-of-life care were impacted. The aim of this study is to describe whether health care providers considered end-of-life care (in medical, nursing, psychosocial and spiritual care) limited by the pandemic through the first 18 months of the COVID-19 pandemic, and examine associations with COVID-19 related circumstances of care (e.g. visit restrictions) and health care providers' characteristics. METHODS: A longitudinal survey study among healthcare providers from different healthcare settings who provided end-of-life care during the pandemic's first 18 months. Data of four time periods were analyzed using descriptive statistics and Generalized Estimating Equation. RESULTS: Of the respondents (n = 302) the majority had a nursing background (71.8%) and most worked in a hospital (30.3%). Especially in the first wave end-of-life care in all aspects was limited according to a substantial part of health care providers (between 29.7 and 57.7%). Psychosocial and spiritual care were more limited than medical and nursing care during all time periods. Care being limited according to health care providers was associated with visit restrictions, shortness of personal protective equipment or restrictions in caring for the deceased and decreased over time. CONCLUSION: The COVID-19 pandemic impacted different aspects of end-of-life care throughout the pandemic's first 18 months. Over the course of the pandemic health care providers seemed to have invented ways to adjust their work in order to minimize the effect of limiting measures. More involvement of health care providers in decision-making may improve the prioritization of measures to deal with crisis situations in care. These reflections highlight priorities during crises and the role healthcare providers could play in maintaining good end-of-life care. This remains relevant in new health crises, where care may differ from what is considered good quality of care.

Failed implementation of a nursing intervention to support family caregivers: An evaluation study using Normalization Process Theory.

AIM: To evaluate the failed implementation of the Carer Support Needs Assessment Tool Intervention for family caregivers in end-of-life care, within a trial context using Normalization Process Theory (NPT). DESIGN: An evaluation study was conducted to learn lessons from our trial, which was not successful due to the low number of participants. The evaluation study utilized various data sources, including published data from interviews and questionnaires, and unpublished data derived from emails and conversation notes. METHODS: Data were retrospectively collected. Thematic analysis was conducted guided by the NPT framework. This framework emphasizes that successful implementation of an intervention relies on its 'normalization', consisting of four constructs: coherence, cognitive participation, collective action and reflexive monitoring. RESULTS: Coherence (sense making): Nurses felt the intervention could contribute to their competence in assessing family caregivers' needs, but some were unsure how it differed from usual practice. Cognitive participation (relational work): Nurse champions played a crucial role in building a community of practice. However, sustaining this community was challenging due to staff turnover and shortages. Collective action (work done to enable the intervention): Nurses felt the Carer Support Needs Assessment Tool training enabled them to improve their support of family caregivers. However, contextual factors complicated implementation, such as being used to a patient rather than a family-focused approach and a high workload. Reflexive monitoring (appraisal of the intervention): Positive experiences of the nurses with the intervention motivated them to implement it. However, the research context made nurses hesitant to recruit family caregivers because of the potential burden of participation. CONCLUSION: Although the intervention demonstrated potential to assist nurses in providing tailored support to family caregivers, its integration into daily practice was not optimal. Contextual factors, such as a patient-focused approach to care and the research context, hampered normalization of the intervention. IMPLICATIONS FOR THE PROFESSION AND/OR PATIENT CARE: Assessing and considering contextual factors that may influence implementation of a complex care intervention is needed. The NPT provided a valuable framework for evaluating the implementation process in our study. IMPACT: What problem did the study address? This evaluation study analysed the factors that promoted or hindered the implementation of a nursing intervention to support family caregivers in end-of-life care. What were the main findings? Both the intervention and the intervention training have potential and value for nurses in providing tailored support to family caregivers. However, the implementation faced challenges due to organizational factors and the research context, including recruitment. Where and on whom will the research have an impact? This insight is valuable for all stakeholders involved in implementing complex nursing interventions, including researchers, nurses and funders. REPORTING METHOD: This study has adhered to the relevant EQUATOR guidelines: Standards for Reporting Qualitative Research (SRQR). PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: There was no patient or public involved. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The trial was prospectively registered on the Dutch Trial Register (NL7702).

Supportive interventions for family caregivers of patients with advanced cancer: A systematic review.

OBJECTIVE: Family caregivers are often intensively involved in palliative and end-of-life cancer care. A variety of interventions to support family caregivers have been developed, differing in target population, modality, and components. We aimed to systematically examine characteristics and the effectiveness of interventions to support family caregivers of patients with advanced cancer. METHODS: A systematic review was conducted using Embase, Medline Ovid, Web of Science, Cochrane, Google Scholar, and Cinahl. This review included quantitative studies published from January 2004 until January 2020 reporting on interventions to support family caregivers of patients with advanced cancer in all care settings. RESULTS: Out of 7957 titles, 32 studies were included. Twenty-two studies were randomized controlled trials. Interventions were delivered to four target populations: individual family caregivers (n = 15), family caregiver-patient dyads (n = 11), families (n = 2) and peer groups (n = 4). Most interventions (n = 26) were delivered face-to-face or by phone, two were delivered online. Most interventions included multiple components and were primarily aimed at supporting family caregivers' self-care. Twenty-nine interventions were shown to have beneficial effects on family caregiver outcomes, mostly in the psycho-emotional (n = 24), daily functioning (n = 13) and social dimension (n = 6). Individual interventions were mainly effective in the psycho-emotional dimension, dyad and family interventions in the psycho-emotional and social domain, and group interventions mainly had an effect on daily functioning. CONCLUSIONS: Interventions to support family caregivers in advanced cancer care vary widely. Most intervention studies reported beneficial effects for the wellbeing of family caregivers. There is evidence that the target group is associated with beneficial effects on different outcome dimensions.

Relatives' grief at three moments after death of a loved one during COVID-19 pandemic (the CO-LIVE study).

COVID-19 has complicated grieving experiences. Rich qualitative description of these experiences is lacking. We interviewed 10 bereaved relatives (mainly daughters) 2-3 times each: shortly after their relative died in the first wave of COVID-19 pandemic, and after 12 and 18 months (29 interviews in total). Analyses took place according to inductive content analysis. Losses were threefold: the loss of the loved one; of the (desired) way to say farewell, and of social support. We identified five ways in which the three COVID-19 related loss experiences interacted: overshadowed grief, cumulative grief, triggered grief, derailed grief, and conciliatory grief. This study demonstrated that pre-COVID-19 diagnoses and understandings of grief are not sufficient to picture grief during and after the COVID-19 pandemic. These grief experiences are more complex and deserve further exploration.

Dignity reflections based on experiences of end-of-life care during the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic: A qualitative inquiry among bereaved relatives in the Netherlands (the CO-LIVE study).

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic affects care practices for critically ill patients, with or without a COVID-19 infection, and may have affected the experience of dying for patients and their relatives in the physical, psychological, social and spiritual domains. AIM: To give insight into aspects of end-of-life care practices that might have jeopardised or supported the dignity of the patients and their family members during the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic in the Netherlands. METHODOLOGY: A qualitative study involving 25 in-depth interviews with purposively sampled bereaved relatives of patients who died during the COVID-19 pandemic between March and July 2020 in the Netherlands. We created a dignity-inspired framework for analysis, and used the models of Chochinov et al. and Van Gennip et al. as sensitising concepts. These focus on illness-related aspects and the individual, relational and societal/organisational level of dignity. RESULTS: Four themes concerning aspects of end-of-life care practices were identified as possibly jeopardising the dignity of patients or relatives: 'Dealing with an unknown illness', 'Being isolated', 'Restricted farewells' and 'Lack of attentiveness and communication'. The analysis showed that 'Meaningful end-of-life moments' and 'Compassionate professional support' contributed to the dignity of patients and their relatives. CONCLUSION: This study illuminates possible aspects of end-of-life care practices that jeopardised or supported dignity. Experienced dignity of bereaved relatives was associated with the unfamiliarity of the virus and issues associated with preventive measures. However, most aspects that had an impact on the dignity experiences of relatives were based in human action and relationships. Relatives experienced that preventive measures could be mitigated by health care professionals to make them less devastating.

How nurses support family caregivers in the complex context of end-of-life home care: a qualitative study.

BACKGROUND: Family caregivers are crucial in providing end-of-life care at home. Without their care, it would be difficult for many patients to die at home. In addition to providing care, family caregivers also need support for themselves. Nurses could play an important role in supporting family caregivers, but little is known about if and how they do so. The aim of this study is to explore how nurses currently approach and support family caregivers in end-of-life home care and which factors influence their support of family caregivers. METHODS: Data were collected using semi-structured interviews with 14 nurses from nine home care organisations in the Netherlands, in 2018. Interviews were audio-taped, transcribed verbatim and analysed using a thematic analysis approach. RESULTS: We identified two underlying nursing perspectives on supporting family caregivers: an instrumental perspective (seeing family caregivers mostly as collaborative partners in care) and a relational perspective (seeing family caregivers as both providing and needing support). All the interviewed nurses stated that they pay attention to family caregivers' needs. The activities mentioned most often were: identification of support needs, practical education, support in decision-making about the patient's treatment, emotional support, and organising respite care, such as night care, to relieve the family caregiver. The provision of support is usually based on intuition and experience, rather than on a systematic approach. Besides, nurses reported different factors at the individual, organisational and societal levels that influenced their support of family caregivers, such as their knowledge and experience, the way in which care is organised, and laws and regulations. CONCLUSIONS: Nurses tend to address family caregivers' needs, but such care was affected by various factors at different levels. There is a risk that nursing support does not meet family caregivers' needs. A more reflective approach is needed and evidence-based needs assessment tools may help nurses to systematically assess family caregivers' needs and to provide appropriate support.

The effectiveness of a nurse-led intervention to support family caregivers in end-of-life care: Study protocol for a cluster randomized controlled trial.

AIM: To evaluate the feasibility of a structured nurse-led supportive intervention and its effects on family caregivers in end-of-life care at home. BACKGROUND: Family caregivers are crucial in end-of-life care. They may experience burden due to the responsibilities associated with caregiving. Some family caregivers feel insufficiently prepared for their caregiver role. Nurses have a unique position to provide supportive interventions at home to reduce caregivers' burden and improve preparedness. However, few nurse-led interventions are available to support family caregivers in end-of-life care at home. DESIGN: We will perform a cluster randomized controlled trial. The clusters consist of twelve home care services, randomly assigned to the intervention group or the control group. METHODS: The study population consists of family caregivers of patients in the last phase of life. In the intervention group, nurses will systematically assess the supportive needs of family caregivers, using an assessment tool and the method of clinical reasoning. Family members of the control group receive care as usual. Primary outcome is burden measured by the Self-Rated Burden Scale. Secondary outcomes are preparedness for caregiving, caregiving reactions and acute (hospital) admissions of the patient. In addition, the feasibility of the intervention will be evaluated. The study was funded in October 2016 and was ethically approved in April 2019. IMPACT: Findings from this study will contribute to the scientific and practical knowledge of nursing interventions to support family caregivers in end-of-life care. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The Netherlands Trial Register (NL7702).

Impact of COVID-19 on care at the end of life during the first months of the pandemic from the perspective of healthcare professionals from different settings: a qualitative interview study (the CO-LIVE study).

OBJECTIVES: The objective of this study is to better understand how the COVID-19 outbreak impacted the different domains of the palliative care approach to end-of-life care from the perspective of healthcare professionals (HCPs) from different professions, working in different settings during the first months of the COVID-19 outbreak in the Netherlands. METHODS: An in-depth qualitative interview study among 16 HCPs of patients who died between March and July 2020 in different healthcare settings in the Netherlands. The HCPs were recruited through an online survey about end-of-life care. Maximum variation sampling was used. Data were analysed following the principles of thematic analysis. RESULTS: Several aspects impacted the quality of the palliative care approach to care at the end of life. First, COVID-19 was a new disease and this led to challenges in the physical domain of end-of-life care, for example, a lack of knowledge on how to manage symptoms and an unreliable clinical view. Second, the high workload HCPs experienced impacted the quality of end-of-life care, especially in the emotional, social and spiritual domains, since they only had time for urgent, physical care. Third, COVID-19 is a contagious disease and measures taken to prevent the spread of the virus hampered care for both patients and relatives. For example, because of the visiting restrictions, HCPs were not able to provide emotional support to relatives. Finally, the COVID-19 outbreak also had a potentially positive impact in the longer term, for example, more awareness of advance care planning and the importance of end-of-life care that includes all the domains. CONCLUSION: The palliative care approach, which is key to good end-of-life care, was often negatively influenced by the COVID-19 pandemic, predominantly in the emotional, social and spiritual domains. This was related to a focus on essential physical care and prevention of the spread of COVID-19.

Nursing interventions to support family caregivers in end-of-life care at home: A systematic narrative review.

BACKGROUND: Family caregivers are crucial in end-of-life care. However, family caregiving may involve a significant burden with various negative health consequences. Although nurses are in a unique position to support family caregivers at home, little is known about which nursing interventions are effective in this context. Therefore, this study aims to provide insight into nursing interventions currently available to support family caregivers in end-of-life care at home and to describe their effects. METHODS: A systematic search was conducted in Embase, Medline Ovid, Web of Science, Cochrane Central, CINAHL and Google Scholar. This review included quantitative studies published from January 2003 until December 2018 reporting on nursing interventions to support adult family caregivers in end-of-life care at home. Data were extracted on intervention modalities, intervention components, and family caregivers' outcomes. Methodological quality of the studies was assessed with the Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool. RESULTS: Out of 1531 titles, nine publications were included that reported on eight studies/eight interventions. Of the eight studies, three were randomised controlled trials, one a pilot randomised trial, one a non-randomised trial, and three were single-group prospective studies. Four intervention components were identified: psychoeducation, needs assessment, practical support with caregiving, and peer support. Psychoeducation was the most commonly occurring component. Nursing interventions had a positive effect on the preparedness, competence, rewards, and burden of family caregivers. Multicomponent interventions were the most effective with, potentially, the components 'needs assessment' and 'psychoeducation' being the most effective. CONCLUSIONS: Although only eight studies are available on nursing interventions to support family caregivers in end-of-life care at home, they show that interventions can have a positive effect on family caregivers' outcomes. Multicomponent interventions proved to be the most successful, implying that nurses should combine different components when supporting family caregivers.

Teaching self-management support in Dutch Bachelor of Nursing education: A mixed methods study of the curriculum.

BACKGROUND: Nurses are expected to support people to self-manage. Student nurses therefore need to master competencies that include the assessment of peoples' needs and preferences, and shared decision-making, whilst respecting and enhancing peoples' autonomy. Adapting nurse education programmes to meet this goal requires insight into the practice of teaching self-management support. In order to reveal this practice, one can distinguish between the intended, the taught, and the received curriculum. OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to explore how Dutch Bachelor of Nursing students are educated to support peoples' self-management in clinical practice. DESIGN: Mixed methods. METHODS AND PARTICIPANTS: Focus group meetings with 30 lecturers, and qualitative semi-structured interviews with four coordinators and four (associate) professors of four Dutch schools for Bachelor of Nursing. Syllabuses were screened for learning objectives related to self-management. A survey measuring self-efficacy and behaviour regarding self-management support was distributed among 444 final-year students of these schools, resulting in 238 valid responses (response rate 53.6%). RESULTS: Much attention is paid in the curriculum to assessment of people's preferences and healthcare education but less attention is given to teaching the arrangement of follow-up care. The study further reveals that students have problems transferring theory into practice, and that they experience conflicting values between their nurse education and internships. CONCLUSIONS: Currently, students are taught to provide people with self-management support by learning about theoretical models, developing communication skills, and reflecting on their internships. This approach seems inadequate to prepare students for this task in daily practice. A shared view on self-management support based on authentic situations, having role models at university and on internships and empowering students may enable them to better support people to self-manage.