Patients' and Relatives' Preferences for Outpatient and Day Care Services Within End-of-Life Care in Germany - A Discrete Choice Experiment.

Purpose: In Germany, patients with incurable chronic diseases living at home increasingly have the option of using outpatient and day care hospice and specialized palliative care services. The present study examined and compared patients' and their relatives' preferences for end-of-life outpatient and day care services. Patients and Methods: The study used a questionnaire integrating a discrete choice experiment. For six scenarios, participants chose between two hypothetical end-of-life care offers, described by seven attributes. The model compared place of care, frequency and duration of care and support, specialized medical palliative care, accompanied activities, and relieving patient counselling. The model also included optional overnight care and willingness to pay. Patients and the relatives of patients suffering from incurable, chronic diseases who were not yet receiving palliative care were recruited via hospitals and self-help groups (06/2021-07/2022). Results: The results were based on data from 436 questionnaires (patients: n=263, relatives: n=173). All attributes had a statistically significant impact on choice decisions, with place of care showing the greatest importance. All respondents highly preferred care in the patient's home over out-of-home care. Patients stressed the importance of special medical (palliative) care and valued accompanied activities, often facilitated by hospice volunteers. Relatives, but not patients, considered the frequency and duration of care highly relevant. Conclusion: The results suggest a higher demand for care in the patient's home than for out-of-home care. Patients' and relatives' high preference for special medical care and the relief of family caregiver burden should be considered in the design of day care services.

Expert Perspectives on the Additional Benefit of Day Hospices and Palliative Day Care Clinics in Germany: A Qualitative Approach.

Background: In Germany, hospice and palliative care is well covered through inpatient, outpatient, and home-based care services. It is unknown if, and to what extent, there is a need for additional day care services to meet the specific needs of patients and caregivers. Methods: Two day hospices and two palliative day care clinics were selected. In the first step, two managers from each facility (n = 8) were interviewed by telephone, using a semi-structured interview guide. In the second step, four focus groups were conducted, each with three to seven representatives of hospice and palliative care from the facilities' hospice and palliative care networks. Interviews and focus groups were audio recorded, transcribed verbatim and analyzed using qualitative content analysis. Results: The interviewed experts perceived day care services as providing additional patient and caregiver benefits. Specifically, the services were perceived to meet patient needs for social interaction and bundled treatments, especially for patients who did not fit into inpatient settings (due to, e.g., their young age or a lack of desire for inpatient admission). The services were also perceived to meet caregiver needs for support, providing short-term relief for the home care situation. Conclusions: The results suggest that inpatient, outpatient, and home-based hospice and palliative care services do not meet the palliative care needs of all patients. Although the population that is most likely to benefit from day care services is assumed to be relatively small, such services may meet the needs of certain patient groups more effectively than other forms of care.

Experiences of German health care professionals with spiritual history taking in primary care: a mixed-methods process evaluation of the HoPES3 intervention.

BACKGROUND: Spiritual needs gain importance in old age but are often ignored in health care. Within the 'Holistic care program for elderly patients to integrate spiritual needs, social activity and self-care into disease management in primary care (HoPES3)' a complex intervention was evaluated in a cluster-randomized trial. The aim of this study was to explore the acceptability, feasibility, benefits, and harms of a spiritual history taken by general practitioners (GPs) as part of the complex intervention. METHODS: In this mixed-methods study telephone interviews with 11 German GPs and 12 medical assistants (MAs) of the HoPES3 intervention group were conducted and analysed using a content-analytical approach. Furthermore, GPs were asked to complete a questionnaire after each spiritual history. One hundred and forty-one questionnaires from 14 GPs were analysed descriptively. RESULTS: GPs considered the spiritual history very/quite helpful for the patient in 27% (n= 38) and very/quite stressful in 2% (n = 3) of the cases. Interviews indicated that GPs found discussing spiritual history easier than anticipated. GPs and MAs saw a difficulty in that many patients associated spirituality with religion or church and reacted with surprise or rejection. Benefits for patients were seen in the opportunity to talk about non-medical topics, and increased awareness of their own resources. Benefits for GPs mainly related to information gain and an intensified patient-physician relationship. CONCLUSIONS: A spiritual history in general practice has the potential to reveal important information about patients' lives and to improve the patient-physician relationship. Implementation barriers identified in this study have to be considered and addressed.