Population-level, patient-reported outcomes: a case study regarding a public health intervention that involves patients with life-limiting illnesses.

Introduction: Dying and death are public health concerns, but little is known about public health interventions that target populations living with life-limiting illnesses. This gap makes it difficult to identify best-practice public health interventions for this population and to achieve public health objectives. The study aimed to describe a public health intervention that intends to improve population-level outcomes using point-of-care and patient-reported outcomes. Methods: A case study approach, informed by the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development's (OECD) Best-Practice Public Health Framework, was used to describe coverage, effectiveness, and equity using mixed methods. Data from 2012 to 2022 were analyzed. Results: Over the 10-year period, the number of deaths recorded in the programme (n = 16,358 to 32,421, +98.2%) as well as the percentage of the population that might benefit from palliative care increased (14.8% to 25.1%). The median age of those admitted for care (74 to 77 years) and the proportion of services participating in the programme located in outer regional and remote areas of Australia increased (2012: 59; 2022: 94; +5.4%). The access by patients that experience the greatest socioeconomic disadvantage decreased (2012: 18.2% n = 4,918; 2022: 15.9% n = 9,525). Improvements in relation to moderate distress related to pain were identified (2012: 63% n = 8,751, 2022: 69% n = 13,700), and one in five instances of severe distress related to pain did not improve (2012: 20% n = 781; 2022: 19% n = 635). Conclusion: Population-level, patient-reported outcome data are useful and necessary in addressing public health objectives in populations with life-limiting illnesses. Our application of the OECD's Best-Practice Public Health Framework has helped to identify and describe a national intervention that may be transferred to other settings to address health promotion objectives. This may help improve the targeting of treatments to improve pain and issues related to equity.

Preferred Place of Death-A Study of 2 Specialist Community Palliative Care Services in Australia.

Choice and preference are fundamental to person-centered care and supporting personal choice at the end of life should be a priority. This study analyzed the relationship between a person's preferred place of death and other individual variables that might influence their actual place of death by examining the activity of 2 specialist community palliative care services in Australia. This was a cross-sectional study of 2353 people who died between 01 August 2016-31 August 2018; 81% died in their preferred place. Sex, type of life-limiting illness, and length of time in care were the only variables significantly related to dying in one's preferred place. Women were more likely to die in their preferred place than men (84% v 78%) and people with a non-cancer diagnosis were 7% more likely to die in their preferred place than those with cancer, particularly when that place was their private residence (74% v 60%) or Residential Aged Care Facility (98% v 89%). Someone in care for 0-7 days had 4.2 times greater odds of dying in their preferred place (OR = 4.18, 2.20-7.94), and after 21 days in care, people had 4.6 greater odds of having a preference to die in a hospital (OR = 4.63, 3.58-5.99). Both community palliative care services have capacity and a model of care that is responsive to choice. These findings align with known referral patterns and disease trajectories and demonstrate that it is possible to support the majority of people in the care of community palliative care services to die in their preferred place.