The cost-effectiveness of coronary calcium score-guided statin therapy initiation for Australians with family histories of premature coronary artery disease.

OBJECTIVES: To compare the cost-effectiveness of coronary artery calcium (CAC) score-guided statin therapy criteria and American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association (ACC/AHA) guidelines (10-year pooled cohort equation [PCE] risk ≥ 7.5%) with selection according to Australian guidelines (5-year absolute cardiovascular disease risk [ACVDR] ≥ 10%), for people with family histories of premature coronary artery disease. STUDY DESIGN, SETTING: Markov microsimulation state transition model based on data from the Coronary Artery calcium score: Use to Guide management of Hereditary Coronary Artery Disease (CAUGHT-CAD) trial and transition probabilities derived from published statin prescribing and adherence outcomes and clinical data. PARTICIPANTS: 1083 people with family histories of premature coronary artery disease but no symptomatic cardiovascular disease. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Relative cost-effectiveness over fifteen years, from the perspective of the Australian health care system, compared with usual care (Australian guidelines), assessed as incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs), with a notional willingness-to-pay threshold of $50 000 per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) gained. RESULTS: Applying the Australian guidelines, 77 people were eligible for statin therapy (7.1%); with ACVDR 5-year risk ≥ 2% and CAC score > 0, 496 people (46%); with ACVDR 5-year risk ≥ 2% and CAC score ≥ 100, 155 people (14%); and with the ACC/AHA guidelines, 256 people (24%). The ICERs for CAC-guided selection were $33 108 (CAC ≥ 100) and $53 028 per QALY gained (CAC > 0); the ACC/AHA guidelines approach (ICER, $909 241 per QALY gained) was not cost-effective. CAC score-guided selection (CAC ≥ 100) was cost-effective for people with 5-year ACVDR of at least 5%. CONCLUSION: Expanding the number of people at low to intermediate CVD risk eligible for statin therapy should selectively target people with subclinical atherosclerosis identified by CAC screening. This approach can be more cost-effective than simply lowering treatment eligibility thresholds.

Psychosocial care for cancer survivors: A systematic literature review on the role of general practitioners.

OBJECTIVE: To explore the general practitioners (GP's) role in providing psychosocial care for cancer survivors through a systematic literature review. METHODS: We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO, and CINAHL and included the studies that complied with the predefined inclusion and exclusion criteria. At least two independent reviewers performed the quality appraisal and data extraction. RESULTS: We included 33 (five qualitative, 19 observational, and nine intervention) studies; the majority of these studies focused on care for depression and anxiety (21/33). Cancer survivors were more likely to contact their GP for psychosocial problems compared with noncancer controls. Survivors were more likely to use antidepressants compared with controls, although 71% of survivors preferred depression treatment to be "talking therapy only." Overall, GPs and patients mostly agreed that GPs are the preferred healthcare provider to manage psychosocial problems. The major exception is a survivor's fear of recurrence-here, the oncologist was the preferred healthcare provider. Only two interventions effectively decreased depression or anxiety; these studies included patients who had a clinical indication for psychosocial care, were specifically designed for decreasing depression/anxiety, and consisted of a multidisciplinary team approach. The other interventions evaluated GP-led follow-up for cancer survivors and found that this did not impact the patients' levels of anxiety, depression, or distress neither negatively nor positively. CONCLUSIONS: Cancer survivors often prefer psychosocial care by their GP, and GPs generally consider they are well placed to provide this care. Although evidence on the effectiveness of psychosocial care by GPs is limited, an active multidisciplinary team approach seems key.

Coronary artery calcium scoring in cardiovascular risk assessment of people with family histories of early onset coronary artery disease.

OBJECTIVES: To assess the predictive value of the Australian absolute cardiovascular disease risk (ACVDR) calculator and other assessment tools for identifying Australians with family histories of early onset coronary artery disease (CAD) who have coronary artery calcification. DESIGN, SETTING, PARTICIPANTS: People without known CAD were recruited at seven Australian hospitals, October 2016 - January 2019. Participants were aged 40-70 years, had a family history of early onset CAD, and a 5-year ACVDR of 2-15%. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: CT coronary artery calcium score greater than zero (any coronary calcification) or greater than 100 (calcification warranting lipid therapy). RESULTS: 1059 participants were recruited; 477 (45%) had non-zero coronary artery calcium scores (median 5-year ACVDR, 4.8% [IQR, 2.9-7.6%]; median coronary artery calcium score, 41.7 [IQR, 8-124]); 582 (55%) did not (median 5-year ACVDR, 3.2% [IQR, 2.0-4.6%]). Of 151 participants with calcium scores of 100 or more, 116 (77%) were deemed to be at low cardiovascular risk by Australian guidelines, while 14 of 75 participants at intermediate risk (19%) had zero calcium scores. The sensitivity of the ACVDR calculator for identifying people with non-zero calcium scores (area under receiver operator curve [AUC], 0.674) was lower than that of the pooled cohort equation (AUC, 0.711; P < 0.001). ACVDR (10-year)- and Multi-Ethnic Study of Atherosclerosis (MESA)-predicted risk categories concurred for 511 participants (48%); classifications were concordant for 925 participants (87%) when the ACVDR was supplemented by calcium scores. CONCLUSIONS: Coronary artery calcium scoring should be considered as part of the heart health check for patients at intermediate ACVDR risk and with family histories of early onset CAD. Alternative risk calculators may better select such patients for further diagnostic testing and primary prevention therapy. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry, ACTRN 12614001294640; 11 December 2014 (prospective).

General practitioners' considerations when deciding whether to initiate end-of-life conversations: a qualitative study.

BACKGROUND: End-of-life discussions often are not initiated until close to death, even in the presence of life-limiting illness or frailty. Previous research shows that doctors may not explicitly verbalize approaching end-of-life in the foreseeable future, despite shifting their focus to comfort care. This may limit patients' opportunity to receive information and plan for the future. General Practitioners (GPs) have a key role in caring for increasing numbers of patients approaching end-of-life. OBJECTIVE: To explore GPs' thought processes when deciding whether to initiate end-of-life discussions. METHODS: A qualitative approach was used. We purposively recruited 15 GPs or GP trainees from South-East Queensland, Australia, and each participated in a semi-structured interview. Transcripts were analyzed using inductive thematic analysis. RESULTS: Australian GPs believe they have a responsibility to initiate end-of-life conversations, and identify several triggers to do so. Some also describe caution in raising this sensitive topic, related to patient, family, cultural and personal factors. CONCLUSIONS: These findings enable the development of approaches to support GPs to initiate end-of-life discussions that are cognizant both of GPs' sense of responsibility for these discussions, and factors that may contribute to caution initiating them, such as anticipated patient response, cultural considerations, societal taboos, family dynamics and personal challenges to doctors.

General practitioners' practical approach to initiating end-of-life conversations: a qualitative study.

BACKGROUND: As doctors who provide care across the life-course, general practitioners (GPs) play a key role in initiating timely end-of-life discussions. Nonetheless, these discussions are often not initiated until close to death. Given the ageing of the population, GPs will be confronted with end-of-life care more often, and this needs to become a core skill for all GPs. OBJECTIVE: To describe GPs' approach to initiating end-of-life discussions. METHODS: Fifteen GPs or GP trainees from South-East Queensland, Australia, were purposively recruited to participate in a semi-structured interview. We analysed transcripts using a thematic analysis. RESULTS: GPs' approach to initiating end-of-life discussions was summarized by four themes: (1) Preparing the ground; (2) finding an entry point; (3) tailoring communication and (4) involving the family. CONCLUSIONS: Emphasis on the doctor-patient relationship; assessing patient readiness for end-of-life discussions; and sensitive information delivery is consistent with factors previously reported to be important to both GPs and patients in this context. Our findings provide a framework for GPs initiating end-of-life discussions, which must be tailored to patient and GP personality factors. Further research is required to evaluate its outcomes.

Using intuition or a formal palliative care needs assessment screening process in general practice to predict death within 12 months: A randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Population ageing will lead to more deaths with an uncertain trajectory. Identifying patients at risk of dying could facilitate more effective care planning. AIM: To determine whether screening for likely death within 12 months is more effective using screening tools or intuition. DESIGN: Randomised controlled trial of screening tools (Surprise Question plus the Supportive and Palliative Care Indicators Tool for Surprise Question positive patients) to predict those at risk of death at 12 months compared with unguided intuition (clinical trials registry: ACTRN12613000266763). SETTING/PARTICIPANTS: Australian general practice. A total of 30 general practitioners (screening tool = 12, intuition = 18) screened all patients ( n = 4365) aged ≥70 years seen at least once in the last 2 years. RESULTS: There were 142 deaths (screening tool = 3.1%, intuition = 3.3%; p = 0.79). General practitioners identified more at risk of dying using Surprise Question (11.8%) than intuition (5.4%; p = 0.01), but no difference with Surprise Question positive then Supportive and Palliative Care Indicators Tool (5.1%; p = 0.87). Surprise Question positive predicted more deaths (53.2%, intuition = 33.7%; p = 0.001), but Surprise Question positive/Supportive and Palliative Care Indicators Tool predictions were similar (5.1%; p = 0.87 vs intuition). There was no difference in proportions correctly predicted to die (Surprise Question = 1.6%, intuition = 1.1%; p = 0.156 and Surprise Question positive/Supportive and Palliative Care Indicators Tool = 1.1%; p = 0.86 vs intuition). Screening tool had higher sensitivity and lower specificity than intuition, but no difference in positive or negative predictive value. CONCLUSION: Screening tool was better at predicting actual death than intuition, but with a higher false positive rate. Both were similarly effective at screening the whole cohort for death. Screening for possible death is not the best option for initiating end-of-life planning: recognising increased burden of illness might be a better trigger.

Testing pilocarpine drops for dry mouth in advanced cancer using n-of-1 trials: A feasibility study.

BACKGROUND: Dry mouth is a common and troublesome symptom in palliative care. Pilocarpine is a cholinergic agent that promotes salivation. AIM: This study aimed to test the feasibility of using n-of-1 trials to test pilocarpine drops compared to placebo, for patients of palliative care units with advanced cancer, who experienced dry mouth. DESIGN: This was an N-of-1 study, in which each participant was offered three cycles of pilocarpine drops 4% (6 mg tds) (3 days) and placebo drops (3 days) in random order. SETTING/PARTICIPANTS: Participants were patients of specialist palliative care services with advanced cancer assessed as having a dry mouth, defined as having a score of ⩾ 3 on an 11-point self-rated xerostomia numerical rating scale, from any cause. Patients self-completed a diary using validated symptom and quality-of-life scores. The randomisation order was unmasked at the end of each person's trial by a clinician independent of the trial to allow a treatment decisions for individual patients to be made. RESULTS: Nine patients completed at least 1 cycle; 33 cycles of data were completed in total, comprising 438 doses of pilocarpine. Four patients completed the trial: two responded and two did not. Most withdrawals related to deteriorating condition, unacceptable toxicity, non-compliance with study procedures or withdrawal of consent. Many issues contributed to slow recruitment and high withdrawal rate. CONCLUSION: The formulation of pilocarpine drops proved unacceptable to most participants. More work is required to determine an appropriate formulation, dose and method of delivery and then a retest of pilocarpine drops for this symptom.

'The onus is on me': primary care patient views of Medicare-funded team care in chronic disease management in Australia.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: This study investigated the views of primary care patients in receipt of Medicare-funded team care for chronic disease management (CDM) in Australia. DESIGN: A qualitative study using a repeat in-depth interview design. PARTICIPANTS AND SETTING: Twenty-three patients (17 female), aged 32-89, were recruited over a six-month period from two purposively selected general practices: one urban and one regional practice in Queensland, Australia. DATA COLLECTION PROCEDURE: Semi-structured interviews were conducted with participants 6 months apart. An interview guide was used to ensure consistency of topics explored. Interviews were recorded and transcribed, and a thematic analysis was conducted. RESULTS: Patients in this study viewed the combined contributions of a GP and other health professionals in team care as thorough and reassuring. In this case of Medicare-funded team care, patients also saw obligations within the structured care routine which cultivated a personal ethics of CDM. This was further influenced by how patients viewed their role in the health-care relationship. Aside from personal obligations, Medicare funding got patients engaged in team care by providing financial incentives. Indeed, this was a defining factor in seeing allied health professionals. However, team care was also preferential due to patients' valuations of costs and benefits. CONCLUSION: Patients are likely to engage with a structured team care approach to CDM if there is a sense of personal obligation and sufficient financial incentive. The level of engagement in team care is likely to be optimized if patient expectations and preferences are considered in decisions.

Benefits and resource implications of family meetings for hospitalized palliative care patients: research protocol.

BACKGROUND: Palliative care focuses on supporting patients diagnosed with advanced, incurable disease; it is 'family centered', with the patient and their family (the unit of care) being core to all its endeavours. However, approximately 30-50% of carers experience psychological distress which is typically under recognised and consequently not addressed. Family meetings (FM) are recommended as a means whereby health professionals, together with family carers and patients discuss psychosocial issues and plan care; however there is minimal empirical research to determine the net effect of these meetings and the resources required to implement them systematically. The aims of this study were to evaluate: (1) if family carers of hospitalised patients with advanced disease (referred to a specialist palliative care in-patient setting or palliative care consultancy service) who receive a FM report significantly lower psychological distress (primary outcome), fewer unmet needs, increased quality of life and feel more prepared for the caregiving role; (2) if patients who receive the FM experience appropriate quality of end-of-life care, as demonstrated by fewer hospital admissions, fewer emergency department presentations, fewer intensive care unit hours, less chemotherapy treatment (in last 30 days of life), and higher likelihood of death in the place of their choice and access to supportive care services; (3) the optimal time point to deliver FM and; (4) to determine the cost-benefit and resource implications of implementing FM meetings into routine practice. METHODS: Cluster type trial design with two way randomization for aims 1-3 and health economic modeling and qualitative interviews with health for professionals for aim 4. DISCUSSION: The research will determine whether FMs have positive practical and psychological impacts on the family, impacts on health service usage, and financial benefits to the health care sector. This study will also provide clear guidance on appropriate timing in the disease/care trajectory to provide a family meeting. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry ACTRN12615000200583.

Systematic review of integrated models of health care delivered at the primary-secondary interface: how effective is it and what determines effectiveness?

Integrated multidisciplinary care is difficult to achieve between specialist clinical services and primary care practitioners, but should improve outcomes for patients with chronic and/or complex chronic physical diseases. This systematic review identifies outcomes of different models that integrate specialist and primary care practitioners, and characteristics of models that delivered favourable clinical outcomes. For quality appraisal, the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool was used. Data are presented as a narrative synthesis due to marked heterogeneity in study outcomes. Ten studies were included. Publication bias cannot be ruled out. Despite few improvements in clinical outcomes, significant improvements were reported in process outcomes regarding disease control and service delivery. No study reported negative effects compared with usual care. Economic outcomes showed modest increases in costs of integrated primary-secondary care. Six elements were identified that were common to these models of integrated primary-secondary care: (1) interdisciplinary teamwork; (2) communication/information exchange; (3) shared care guidelines or pathways; (4) training and education; (5) access and acceptability for patients; and (6) a viable funding model. Compared with usual care, integrated primary-secondary care can improve elements of disease control and service delivery at a modestly increased cost, although the impact on clinical outcomes is limited. Future trials of integrated care should incorporate design elements likely to maximise effectiveness.

Prevalence and characteristics of patients with advanced chronic conditions in need of palliative care in the general population: a cross-sectional study.

BACKGROUND: Of deaths in high-income countries, 75% are caused by progressive advanced chronic conditions. Palliative care needs to be extended from terminal cancer to these patients. However, direct measurement of the prevalence of people in need of palliative care in the population has not been attempted. AIM: Determine, by direct measurement, the prevalence of people in need of palliative care among advanced chronically ill patients in a whole geographic population. DESIGN: Cross-sectional, population-based study. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: prevalence of advanced chronically ill patients in need of palliative care according to the NECPAL CCOMS-ICO(©) tool. NECPAL+ patients were considered as in need of palliative care. SETTING/PARTICIPANTS: County of Osona, Catalonia, Spain (156,807 inhabitants, 21.4% > 65 years). Three randomly selected primary care centres (51,595 inhabitants, 32.9% of County's population) and one district general hospital, one social-health centre and four nursing homes serving the patients. Subjects were all patients attending participating settings between November 2010 and October 2011. RESULTS: A total of 785 patients (1.5% of study population) were NECPAL+: mean age = 81.4 years; 61.4% female. Main disease/condition: 31.3% advanced frailty, 23.4% dementia, 12.9% cancer (ratio of cancer/non-cancer = 1/7), 66.8% living at home and 19.7% in nursing home; only 15.5% previously identified as requiring palliative care; general clinical indicators of severity and progression present in 94% of cases. CONCLUSIONS: Direct measurement of prevalence of palliative care needs on a population basis is feasible. Early identification and prevalence determination of these patients is likely to be the cornerstone of palliative care public health policies.

End-of-life care for patients with cancer.

BACKGROUND: End-of-life care is a core role of general practice. Patients with disseminated cancer have rapidly escalating needs at the end of life that are usually predictable and, therefore, planning for future needs is possible. Care planning and working with specialist palliative care colleagues improves patient outcomes. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this article is to provide an overview of end-of-life care for patients with cancer, including evidence supporting the involvement of general practitioners (GPs). DISCUSSION: Care planning is predicated on understanding the patient's wishes about how care should be conducted and ensuring the plan conforms to these wishes. Not all GPs are willing to undertake palliative care, often because of a sense of inadequate knowledge, confidence and support. The more palliative care is undertaken, however, the more confident practitioners feel. Therefore, starting to treat end-of-life patients early in a GP's career is important, and making use of the considerable resources available will assist in building knowledge and confidence. Systematically caring for carers might be a way of introducing GPs to the care of patients with cancer at the end of life.

Difficult but necessary conversations--the case for advance care planning.

Many patients at the end of life receive care that is inappropriate or futile and, if given the opportunity to discuss their care preferences well ahead of death, may well have chosen to forgo such care. Advance care planning (ACP) is a process of making decisions about future health care for patients in consultation with clinicians, family members and important others, and to safeguard such decisions if patients were to lose decisional capacity. Although ACP has existed as an idea for decades, acceptance and operationalisation of ACP within routine practice has been slow, despite evidence of its benefits. The chief barriers have been social and personal taboos about discussing the dying process, avoidance by medical professionals of responsibility for initiating, coordinating and documenting discussions about ACP, absence of robust and standardised procedures for recording and retrieving ACP documents across multiple care settings, and legal and ethical concerns about the validity of such documents. For ACP to become part of mainstream patient-centred care, accountable clinicians working in primary care, hospitals and nursing homes must effectively educate colleagues and patients about the purpose and mechanics of ACP, mandate ACP for all eligible patients, document ACP in accessible formats that enable patient wishes to accurately guide clinical management, devise methods for reviewing ACP decisions when clinically appropriate, and evaluate congruence between expressed patient wishes and actual care received. Public awareness campaigns coupled with implementation of ACP programs sponsored by collaborations between hospital and health services, Medicare locals and residential care facilities will be needed in making system-wide ACP a reality.

Central nervous system stimulants for secondary attention deficit-hyperactivity disorder after paediatric traumatic brain injury: a rationale and protocol for single patient (n-of-1) multiple cross-over trials.

BACKGROUND: It is estimated that 22,800 children were living with an Acquired Brain Injury (ABI) (0.6% of children aged under 15 years) in Australia during 2003. Many children after a traumatic brain injury will experience difficulties with attention and concentration; a condition termed secondary Attention Deficit-Hyperactivity Disorder. There is conflicting evidence on whether treatment with stimulant therapy with medications such as methylphenidate or dexamphetamine will improve the attention and behavior of children with this condition. METHODS/DESIGN: Single patient trials (n-of-1s or SPTs) evaluate the effect of titrated doses of psychostimulants methylphenidate or dexamphetamine compared to placebo on attention and behavior, in children with TBI and secondary ADHD. The aggregation of multiple SPTs will produce a population estimate of the benefit. Forty-two children will be registered into the trial through rehabilitation services at three large children's hospitals in Australia. Patients will complete up to 3 cycles of treatment. Each cycle is 2 weeks long comprising seven days each of treatment and placebo, with the first two days of each cycle considered a washout period and the data not analysed. The order of treatment and placebo is randomly allocated for each cycle. The Conners' Parent Rating Scales long forms will be employed to measure change in attention-deficit/hyperactivity and related problems of the child, and the primary outcome measure is the Conners' Global Index Parent Version. Secondary outcomes include the teacher and child (if aged > 12 years) Conners' Rating Scales, the Behaviour Rating Inventory of Executive Function among other measures. This study will provide high-level evidence using a novel methodological approach to inform clinicians about the most appropriate treatment for individual children. Through aggregation of individual trials, a population estimate of treatment effect will be provided to guide clinical practice in the treatment of children with secondary ADHD after a traumatic brain injury. DISCUSSION: This study employs an innovative methodological approach on the effectiveness of CNS stimulants for secondary ADHD from a brain injury. The findings will both guide clinicians on treatment recommendations, and inform the concept and acceptance of SPTs in paediatric research. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry. ACTRN12609000873224.

Do pilocarpine drops help dry mouth in palliative care patients: a protocol for an aggregated series of n-of-1 trials.

BACKGROUND: It is estimated that 39,000 Australians die from malignant disease yearly. Of these, 60% to 88% of advanced cancer patients suffer xerostomia, the subjective feeling of mouth dryness. Xerostomia has significant physical, social and psychological consequences which compromise function and quality of life. Pilocarpine is one treatment for xerostomia. Most studies have shown some variation in individual response to pilocarpine, in terms of dose used, and timing and extent of response.We will determine a population estimate of the efficacy of pilocarpine drops (6 mg) three times daily compared to placebo in relieving dry mouth in palliative care (PC) patients. A secondary aim is to assess individual patients' response to pilocarpine and provide reports detailing individual response to patients and their treating clinician. METHODS/DESIGN: Aggregated n-of-1 trials (3 cycle, double blind, placebo-controlled crossover trials using standardized measures of effect). Individual trials will identify which patients respond to the medication. To produce a population estimate of a treatment effect, the results of all cycles will be aggregated. DISCUSSION: Managing dry mouth with treatment supported by the best possible evidence will improve functional status of patients, and improve quality of life for patients and carers. Using n-of-1 trials will accelerate the rate of accumulation of high-grade evidence to support clinical therapies used in PC. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Australia and New Zealand Clinical Trial Registry Number: 12610000840088.

Using aggregated single patient (N-of-1) trials to determine the effectiveness of psychostimulants to reduce fatigue in advanced cancer patients: a rationale and protocol.

BACKGROUND: It is estimated that 29% of deaths in Australia are caused by malignant disease each year and can be expected to increase with population ageing. In advanced cancer, the prevalence of fatigue is high at 70-90%, and can be related to the disease and/or the treatment. The negative impact of fatigue on function (physical, mental, social and spiritual) and quality of life is substantial for many palliative patients as well as their families/carers. METHOD/DESIGN: This paper describes the design of single patient trials (n-of-1 s or SPTs) of a psychostimulant, methylphenidate hydrochloride (MPH) (5 mg bd), compared to placebo as a treatment for fatigue, with a population estimate of the benefit by the aggregation of multiple SPTs. Forty patients who have advanced cancer will be enrolled through specialist palliative care services in Australia. Patients will complete up to 3 cycles of treatment. Each cycle is 6 days long and has 3 days treatment and 3 days placebo. The order of treatment and placebo is randomly allocated for each cycle. The primary outcome is a reduction in fatigue severity as measured by the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-fatigue subscale (FACIT-F). Secondary outcomes include adverse events, quality of life, additional fatigue assessments, depression and Australian Karnovsky Performance Scale. DISCUSSION: This study will provide high-level evidence using a novel methodological approach about the effectiveness of psychostimulants for cancer-related fatigue. If effective, the findings will guide clinical practice in reducing this prevalent condition to improve function and quality of life. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry ACTRN12609000794202.

Team decision making: design, implementation and evaluation of an interprofessional education activity for undergraduate health science students.

An undergraduate health science student curriculum activity in interprofessional education (IPE) focused on team decision making was piloted. The IPE activity included a lecture, small group learning activity and an onsite observation of an interprofessional health care team (IPHCT) meeting. Measures included the Readiness for Interprofessional Learning scale, Interdisciplinary Education Perception scale and the Role Perception Questionnaires. The students completed a workbook to assess decision making capacity in IPHCTs. The results indicated that students (n = 61) were willing to share their knowledge and skills as a way of understanding clinical problems in the workplace and had professionally oriented perceptions and related affective domains. They also showed a positive role perception of their own role and that of other professions. Analysis of the workbooks revealed that students were able to identify positive and negative impacts on effective team decision making and its effects on a patient centred approach to health care.

Barriers and facilitators to nurse-led advance care planning and palliative care practice change in primary healthcare: a qualitative study.

Primary care settings are ideal for initiating advance care planning (ACP) conversations and assessing palliative and supportive care needs. However, time constraints and a lack of confidence to sensitively and efficiently initiate such discussions are noted barriers. The Advance Project implemented a national multicomponent training package to support Australian general practice nurses (GPNs) to work with GPs to initiate ACP and palliative care conversations in their practice. This paper reports on semistructured interviews conducted with 20 GPNs to explore barriers and facilitators to implementing the Advance Project model. Participants identified a range of factors that affected implementation, including lack of time, limited support from colleagues, lack of knowledge about systems and funding processes in general practice and a need for better alignment of the Advance Project resources and practices with general practice information management platforms. Barriers related to professional roles, particularly the lack of clarity and/or limitations in the scope of practice of GPNs, highlighted the importance of defining and supporting the roles that different primary health practice staff could play to support implementation of the model. The findings underline the need for complementary training in the Advance Project model for GPs and practice managers to enable a team-based approach to implementation.