General practitioners' perceptions on the feasibility and acceptability of implementing a risk prediction checklist to support their end-of-life discussions in routine care: a qualitative study.
Fam Pract
; 37(5): 703-710, 2020 10 19.
Article
em En
| MEDLINE
| ID: mdl-32297645
BACKGROUND: General practitioners' (GPs) play a central role in facilitating end-of-life discussions with older patients nearing the end-of-life. However, prognostic uncertainty of time to death is one important barrier to initiation of these discussions. OBJECTIVE: To explore GPs' perceptions of the feasibility and acceptability of a risk prediction checklist to identify older patients in their last 12 months of life and describe perceived barriers and facilitators for implementing end-of-life planning. METHODS: Qualitative, semi-structured interviews were conducted with 15 GPs practising in metropolitan locations in New South Wales and Queensland between May and June 2019. Data were analysed thematically. RESULTS: Eight themes emerged: accessibility and implementation of the checklist, uncertainty around checklist's accuracy and usefulness, time of the checklist, checklist as a potential prompt for end-of-life conversations, end-of-life conversations not an easy topic, end-of-life conversation requires time and effort, uncertainty in identifying end-of-life patients and limited community literacy on end-of-life. Most participants welcomed a risk prediction checklist in routine practice if assured of its accuracy in identifying which patients were nearing end-of-life. CONCLUSIONS: Most participating GPs saw the value in risk assessment and end-of-life planning. Many emphasized the need for appropriate support, tools and funding for prognostic screening and end-of-life planning for this to become routine in general practice. Well validated risk prediction tools are needed to increase clinician confidence in identifying risk of death to support end-of-life care planning.
Palavras-chave
Texto completo:
1
Base de dados:
MEDLINE
Assunto principal:
Clínicos Gerais
Tipo de estudo:
Etiology_studies
/
Prognostic_studies
/
Qualitative_research
/
Risk_factors_studies
Limite:
Humans
Idioma:
En
Ano de publicação:
2020
Tipo de documento:
Article