When a test is more than just a test: Findings from patient interviews and survey in the trial of a technology to measure antidepressant medication response (the PReDicT Trial).

BACKGROUND: A RCT of a novel intervention to detect antidepressant medication response (the PReDicT Test) took place in five European countries, accompanied by a nested study of its acceptability and implementation presented here. The RCT results indicated no effect of the intervention on depression at 8 weeks (primary outcome), although effects on anxiety at 8 weeks and functioning at 24 weeks were found. METHODS: The nested study used mixed methods. The aim was to explore patient experiences of the Test including acceptability and implementation, to inform its use within care. A bespoke survey was completed by trial participants in five countries (n = 778) at week 8. Semi-structured interviews were carried out in two countries soon after week 8 (UK n = 22, Germany n = 20). Quantitative data was analysed descriptively; for qualitative data, thematic analysis was carried out using a framework approach. Results of the two datasets were interrogated together. OUTCOMES: Survey results showed the intervention was well received, with a majority of participants indicating they would use it again, and it gave them helpful extra information; a small minority indicated the Test made them feel worse. Qualitative data showed the Test had unexpected properties, including: instigating a process of reflection, giving participants feedback on progress and new understanding about their illness, and making participants feel supported and more engaged in treatment. INTERPRETATION: The qualitative and quantitative results are generally consistent. The Test's unexpected properties may explain why the RCT showed little effect, as properties were experienced across both trial arms. Beyond the RCT, the qualitative data sheds light on measurement reactivity, i.e., how measurements of depression can impact patients.

Care practices of specialized outpatient pediatric palliative care teams in collaboration with parents: Results of participatory observations.

BACKGROUND: Collaboration between parents and professional care providers is an essential part of pediatric palliative care. As children are embedded in family systems and many of the patients are not able to communicate verbally, their parents are the primary interaction partners for palliative care providers. International standards for pediatric palliative care in Europe state that parents should be supported, acknowledged as the primary carers and involved as partners in all care and decisions. AIM: To find out through which care practices pediatric palliative care teams shape collaboration with parents in everyday care. DESIGN: Ethnographic method of participatory observations. Field notes were analyzed using thematic analysis. SETTING/PARTICIPANTS: Researchers accompanied three pediatric palliative care teams on home visits to eight different families caring for a child with life-limiting conditions. RESULTS: Care practices of palliative care teams were characterized by familiarity, a resource-oriented attitude, empowerment of parents, shared decision-making and support for parents. Palliative care teams not only provided palliative medical treatment for the children, but also developed a trusting care partnership with parents. The teams employed a sensitive and multifaceted communication style in their collaboration with parents. CONCLUSIONS: Care practices in pediatric palliative care require time, communication skills, and a high level of psychosocial competence, to develop a trusting, collaborative relationship with parents. This should be taken into consideration when establishing pediatric palliative care structures, preparing guidelines, training staff, and deciding upon appropriate remuneration.

Integrating patient- and caregiver-reported outcome measures into the daily care routines of specialised outpatient palliative care: a qualitative study (ELSAH) on feasibility, acceptability and appropriateness.

BACKGROUND: The use of patient-reported outcome measures (PROM) and caregiver-reported outcome measures can raise the patient centeredness of treatment and improve the quality of palliative care. Nevertheless, the everyday implementation of self-report in patients and caregivers is complex, and should be adapted for use in specific settings. We aimed to implement a set of outcome measures that included patient and caregiver self- and proxy-reported outcome measures in specialised outpatient palliative care (SOPC). In this study, we explore how the Integrated Palliative Outcome Scale (IPOS), IPOS Views on Care (IPOS VoC) and the Short-form Zarit Caregiver Burden Interview (ZBI-7) can be feasibly, acceptably and appropriately implemented in the daily care routines of SOPC. METHODS: Five SOPC teams were trained, and used the outcome measures in daily practice. Team members were mainly nurses and physicians. To investigate their feedback, we used a multi-method qualitative design consisting of focus groups with SOPC-team members (n = 14), field notes of meetings and conversations with the SOPC teams. In an iterative process, we analysed the findings using qualitative content analysis and refined use of the outcome measures. RESULTS: We found that integrating patient and caregiver outcome measures into daily care routines in SOPC is feasible. To improve feasibility, acceptability and appropriateness, the resulting burden on patients and relatives should be kept to a minimum, the usefulness of the measures must be understood, they should be used considerately, and administration must be manageable. We removed ZBI-7 from the set of measures as a result of feedback on its content and wording. CONCLUSIONS: SOPC-team members have reservations about the implementation of PROM in SOPC, but with appropriate adjustments, its application in daily care is feasible, accepted and perceived as appropriate. Previous to use, SOPC-team members should be trained in how to apply the measures, in the design of manageable processes that include integration into electronic documentation systems, and in ongoing evaluation and support. They should also be taught how useful the measures can be. TRIAL REGISTRATION: May 19th, 2017, German Clinical Trials Register DRKS-ID: DRKS00012421 .

[Specialized outpatient palliative care for children, adolescents, and their families-the special needs of the target group. Results of the ELSAH study]. / Spezialisierte ambulante Palliativversorgung für Kinder, Jugendliche und ihre Familien ­ die besonderen Belange der Zielgruppe. Ergebnisse der ELSAH-Studie.

BACKGROUND AND AIM: Children and adolescents with life-limiting conditions and complex symptoms are eligible for specialized outpatient palliative care (SOPC). The SOPC guideline in Germany solely states: "The special needs of children and adolescents shall be considered." This study aims to identify these special needs and to develop recommendations for a revision of the SOPC guideline. METHODS: We used a sequential mixed-methods design including surveys, qualitative interviews, participant observations, and focus group discussions with relatives, patients, and team members of the SOPC in Hesse, Germany. Furthermore, we analyzed documentation data of the Hessian SOPC teams. RESULTS: Children and adolescents in SOPC suffer from complex and often rare diseases. They need elaborate palliative care delivered by a team with pediatric expertise. SOPC must include the whole family and coordinate healthcare providers that are stretched regionally. Furthermore, patients and relatives need elaborate psychosocial care. SOPC for children and adolescents is less well-known than SOPC for adults, and access for families is often difficult. There is a healthcare gap for children and adolescents with life-limiting diseases who need palliative care at home but not of the intensive kind provided by SOPC. CONCLUSIONS: SOPC for children, adolescents, and adults who have been diseased since their childhood and adolescence must be delivered within an independent structure, including a reimbursement scheme that takes the special care efforts for this patient group into consideration.

[Similarities and differences in specialized outpatient palliative care for adults, children and adolescents: results from focus group discussions with health care professionals]. / Gemeinsamkeiten und Unterschiede in der spezialisierten ambulanten Palliativversorgung von Erwachsenen sowie Kindern und Jugendlichen: Ergebnisse aus Fokusgruppendiskussionen mit Leistungserbringer*innen.

BACKGROUND: In Germany, people with life-limiting conditions and complex symptoms are eligible for specialized outpatient palliative care (SOPC). Requirements, delivery and goals of SOPC have been laid down by the Federal Joint Committee in a nationwide guideline. The guideline emphasizes the need to consider the special needs of children and adolescents with life-limiting conditions. A specification of these needs has so far been missing. The focus group discussion presented here aimed at investigating similarities and differences between the specialized outpatient palliative care of adults (SOPC for adults) on the one hand, and children and adolescents (SOPPC) on the other hand, from the perspective of health care professionals in order to further define specifics of SOPPC. METHOD: In three focus group discussions a total of 11 nursing and 8 medical professionals from SOPC for adults and SOPPC engaged in face-to-face discussions on the similarities and differences of both care forms. Discussions were designed openly and stimulated with three guiding questions only. Focus group discussions were audio-recorded, transcribed verbatim and analyzed by thematic analysis supported by the software MAXQDA. RESULTS: Within the following six themes, similarities as well as key differences between SOPC and SOPPC were identified: the participants discussed diseases, coverage area and locations, therapy goals, the psychosocial care situation, the role of relatives and end-of-life care. From the participants' perspective different underlying diseases constitute a main difference that causes further differences in the expertise required. Furthermore, SOPC for adults and SOPPC differ in the dimension of areas covered by one team, the number of patients per team and the reasons for SOPC visits. Differences in terminal care and the mourning process within the team became evident. Some similarities existed regarding goal-setting, psychosocial care and the role of relatives, but concrete patterns and the importance of these aspects differed because a particularly complex and emotional communication is required when a child is dying. CONCLUSION: From the perspective of health care professionals, SOPC for adults and SOPPC differ with regard to underlying diseases as well as care patterns such as collaboration with relatives and their need for psychosocial support. Therefore, the care for children, adolescents and young adults with life-limiting conditions and pediatric diseases all over Germany should be delivered within the frame of an independent care structure by teams whose members possess specific pediatric expertise.

Specialised outpatient paediatric palliative care team-parent collaboration: narrative interviews with parents.

OBJECTIVE: In Germany, children with life-limiting conditions and complex symptoms are eligible for specialised outpatient palliative care (SOPC). In the federal state of Hesse, SOPC for children (SOPPC) is delivered by teams with paediatric expertise. While burdened by the life-limiting condition of their child, parents must also fulfill their roles as main care providers and decision makers. Collaboration between parents and SOPPC teams is important, as the intermittent care and uncertainty it entails often lasts for several months or years. We explored parents' experiences and their demands of collaboration with SOPPC teams. METHODS: We conducted nine narrative interviews with 13 parents of children and adolescents with life-limiting conditions and used a grounded theory approach to analyse interview data. RESULTS: Parents stressed the importance of paediatric expertise, honesty, psychosocial support, an individualised approach, experience of self-efficacy and the need to be recognised as experts for their children. The narrative interviews showed that collaboration between parents and SOPPC teams was characterised by parents' need for specialised professional assistance and their simultaneous empowerment by SOPPC teams. CONCLUSIONS: Parents' perceptions of what good collaboration with SOPPC teams entails are manifold. To meet these complex needs, SOPPC requires time and specialised expertise.

[Patient perspectives on patient safety: Results of a population-based survey in Germany]. / Subjektive Informiertheit von Patient*innen zum Thema Patientensicherheit: Ergebnisse einer Bevölkerungsbefragung in Deutschland.

INTRODUCTION: The growing number of people with multimorbidity and polypharmacy in Germany has led to increasing complexity in health care and risks to patient safety. A high priority should therefore be placed on identifying and preventing avoidable adverse events. The patient perspective plays an important role in improving patient safety. In this study, we conducted a representative, population-based survey of knowledge, perceptions and experiences of patient safety, especially of subjectively experienced errors in health care. Our aim was, in particular, to assess patient safety from the patients' point of view, and to analyze differences in assessments of risk and preventability between persons that felt well or poorly informed about patient safety topics. METHODS: In 2019, computer-assisted telephone interviews were conducted nationwide as part of the "TK-Monitor Patient Safety" project. Recruitment was carried out by using multistage selection and forming a stratified random sample. Adults (18 years and older) with sufficient knowledge of German were included. The survey was conducted using a structured guideline containing 21 questions concerning perceptions and experiences of patient safety, and 12 questions on sociodemographic factors. The results were analyzed both descriptively and using inferential statistical methods. RESULTS: Of a total of 1,000 respondents (51% female), approx. half (52%) were gainfully employed, and 57% rated their state of health as "very good" or "good". The patients regarded data protection, medication errors, hospital infections and diagnostic (un)certainty as of major relevance to patient safety. Overall, 55% of the respondents rated their knowledge of patient safety as "very good" or "good". The results showed that subjective knowledge was negatively associated with important outcome parameters such as having experience of medication errors or suspecting errors had been made in a medical examination or treatment. Patients that considered themselves well-informed also reckoned they could contribute towards increasing safety in health care. DISCUSSION: The respondents considered diagnostic uncertainty to be one of the greatest risks to their person. This shows that they recognized a need for further information and felt this need was inadequately satisfied in the German research landscape. With regard to the correlation between subjective knowledge and outcome parameters, it is also necessary to analyze whether the respondents' subjective knowledge reflects their actual knowledge, as this would be necessary for preventive measures to be effective. This question will be the subject of further studies. CONCLUSION: The patient perspective is an important addition to the study of the safety of medical care in Germany. Factors influencing subjective knowledge should be investigated. Furthermore, regular surveys would be desirable in order to gain greater insight into the topic.