The Impact of Palliative Care Team Consultation on Quality of Life of Patients with Advanced Cancer in Dutch Hospitals: An Observational Study

Generalist, specialist, or expert in palliative care? A cross-sectional open survey on healthcare professionals' self-description

BACKGROUND

In the Netherlands, palliative care is provided by generalist healthcare professionals (HCPs) if possible and by palliative care specialists if necessary. However, it still needs to be clarified what specialist expertise entails, what specialized care consists of, and which training or work experience is needed to become a palliative care specialist. In addition to generalists and specialists, 'experts' in palliative care are recognized within the nursing and medical professions, but it is unclear how these three roles relate. This study aims to explore how HCPs working in palliative care describe themselves in terms of generalist, specialist, and expert and how this self-description is related to their work experience and education.

METHODS

A cross-sectional open online survey with both pre-structured and open-ended questions among HCPs who provide palliative care. Analyses were done using descriptive statistics and by deductive thematic coding of open-ended questions.

RESULTS

Eight hundred fifty-four HCPs filled out the survey; 74% received additional training, and 79% had more than five years of working experience in palliative care. Based on working experience, 17% describe themselves as a generalist, 34% as a specialist, and 44% as an expert. Almost three out of four HCPs attributed their level of expertise on both their education and their working experience. Self-described specialists/experts had more working experience in palliative care, often had additional training, attended to more patients with palliative care needs, and were more often physicians as compared to generalists. A deductive analysis of the open questions revealed the similarities and distinctions between the roles of a specialist and an expert. Seventy-six percent of the respondents mentioned the importance of having both specialists and experts and wished more clarity about what defines a specialist or an expert, how to become one, and when you need them. In practice, both roles were used interchangeably. Competencies for the specialist/expert role consist of consulting, leadership, and understanding the importance of collaboration.

CONCLUSIONS

Although the grounds on which HCPs describe themselves as generalist, specialist, or experts differ, HCPs who describe themselves as specialists or experts mostly do so based on both their post-graduate education and their work experience. HCPs find it important to have specialists and experts in palliative care in addition to generalists and indicate more clarity about (the requirements for) these three roles is needed.

Impact of Community Palliative Care on Quality of Life among Cancer Patients in Bangladesh

Cancer, a leading cause of mortality worldwide, is often diagnosed at late stages in low- and middle-income countries, resulting in preventable suffering. When added to standard oncological care, palliative care may improve the quality of life (QOL) of these patients. A longitudinal observational study was conducted from January 2020 to December 2021. Thirty-nine cancer patients were enrolled in the Compassionate Narayanganj community palliative care group (NPC), where they received comprehensive palliative care in addition to oncological care. Thirty-one patients from the Dept. of Oncology (DO) at BSMMU received standard oncological care. In contrast to the DO group, the NPC group had a higher percentage of female patients, was older, and had slightly higher levels of education. At 10 to 14 weeks follow-up, a significant improvement in overall QOL was observed in the NPC group (p = 0.007), as well as in the psychological (p = 0.003), social (p = 0.002), and environmental domains (p = 0.15). Among the secondary outcomes, the palliative care group had reduced disability and neuropathic pain scores. Additionally, there were statistically significant reductions in pain, drowsiness, and shortness of breath, as well as an improvement in general wellbeing, based on the results of the Edmonton Symptom Assessment Scale-Revised. At the community level in Bangladesh, increased access to palliative care may improve cancer patient outcomes such as QOL and symptom burden.

Impact of interprofessional collaborative practice in palliative care on outcomes for advanced cancer inpatients in a resource-limited setting

BACKGROUND

Palliative care for patients with advanced cancer improves suffering symptoms, and quality of life (QoL). However, routine implementation of palliative care by specialty palliative care consultation is still an unmet need among in-patients with advanced cancer. Our study aim is to evaluate the effectiveness of a team-based approach on QoLs and readmission rate when compared to routine practice by among medical oncologists.

METHODS

This study was a prospective, Quasi-Experimental design. In-patients with advanced cancer were non-randomly assigned to receive palliative care service by team-based approach or medical oncologists only. The primary endpoint was QoL. The secondary endpoint was the readmission rate at 7 and 30 days of hospital discharge.

RESULTS

One hundred twenty-two in-patients were enrolled. In-patients who were assessed by a team-based approach had significantly improved change scores of subjective well-being (SWB) when compared to another group (∆ SWB: -1 [-19 - 11] vs 0 [-9 - 15], p-value = 0.043). Furthermore, patients who were assessed under a team-based approach had significantly decreased in terms of readmission rate at 7 days of hospital discharge (4.92% in the team-based approach group vs. 19.67% in the medical oncologist group, p-value = 0.013).

CONCLUSIONS

Interdisciplinary collaboration is the key to success in establishing goals of care, which are supporting the best possible QoL and relieving suffering symptoms for those in-patients with advanced cancer. Furthermore, the readmission rate at 7 days of hospital discharge was significantly reduced by a team-based approach. Therefore, comprehensive palliative care assessment by interprofessional collaborative practice is required.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Thai Clinical Trials Registry (TCTR): number 20200312001. Date of first registration on 09/03/2020.

Learnings From Longitudinal Patient-Reported and Clinical Outcomes in Palliative Head and Neck Cancer Care

OBJECTIVE

Patients with palliative head and neck cancer experience many symptoms in a short period of time. Longitudinal data on patient-reported outcomes in this phase are lacking. The aim of this study is to use structurally obtained patient-reported outcome data combined with clinical patient data and obtain insight in patient-reported outcomes, survival, circumstances of death, and interventions and treatment during the palliative phase in order to improve the quality of end-of-life care and patient-centered counseling.

STUDY DESIGN

Longitudinal observational cohort study.

SETTING

Tertiary cancer center.

METHOD

Quality of life was prospectively collected using the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer QLQ-C15-PAL. Tumor- and patient-specific data were retrospectively collected. Descriptive statistics, linear mixed models, and regression analyses were performed.

RESULTS

A significant deterioration was found in global health status, physical functioning, fatigue, dyspnea, appetite loss, and constipation over time. However, emotional functioning improved. Median survival was 5.1 months, and only a low percentage of in-hospital death was observed (7.8%). Higher global health status at intake was associated with prolonged survival.

CONCLUSION

Structural measurement of patient-reported outcome together with clinical outcomes provides unique insight, which enables improvement of patient-centered counseling and care.

Conceptualising effective symptom management in palliative care: a novel model derived from qualitative data

Background

Pain, breathlessness and fatigue are some of the most challenging symptoms to manage in patients with advanced disease. Specialist palliative care leads to better symptom management, but factors contributing to successful symptom management in this context have not been explored. Our aim was to understand what facilitates effective symptom management in specialist palliative care within UK hospices and investigate what barriers are experienced.

Methods

This was a grounded theory study using qualitative semi-structured focus groups and interviews. Participants were recruited from multidisciplinary specialist palliative care teams (doctors, nurses, healthcare assistants, physiotherapists, occupational therapists, complementary therapists, social workers and chaplains) working in inpatient, outpatient and community services provided by five hospices in the United Kingdom.

Results

We present a novel qualitative data-derived model of effective symptom management in specialist palliative care. We describe a co-ordinated, multi-faceted, sequential approach involving a process of engagement, partnership, decision-making, and delivery. Interventions to manage symptoms are less effective in psychologically distressed patients. Our data highlights that families of patients have a key role in determining effectiveness of symptom management interventions A holistic approach by a co-ordinated, multi-disciplinary team, including support to recognise and minimise psychological distress might facilitate more effective symptom management. Barriers to symptom management include team discordance and lack of understanding about symptom management by patient and families.

Conclusions

Shared decision-making between patients and professionals and co-ordination of care by a multi-disciplinary team are key components of effective symptom management. Actions to address psychological distress and evaluate the understanding and expectations of patients and their families would enable more effective symptom management. A more effective multi-disciplinary approach would be facilitated by discussion within teams about role competencies and boundaries.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12904-022-00904-9.

Cultures that collide: an ethnographic study of the introduction of a palliative care consultation team on acute wards

Background

Acute care and palliative care (PC) are described as different incompatible organisational care cultures. Few studies have observed the actual meeting between these two cultures. In this paper we report part of ethnographic results from an intervention study where a palliative care consultation team (PCCT) used an integrative bedside education approach, trying to embed PC principles and interventions into daily practice in acute wards.

Purpose

To study the meeting and interaction of two different care cultures, palliative care and curative acute wards, when a PCCT introduces consulting services to acute wards regarding end-of-life palliative care, focusing on the differences between the cultures.

Methods

An ethnographic study design was used, including observations, interviews and diary entries. A PCCT visited acute care wards during 1 year. The analysis was inspired by Spradleys ethnography.

Results

Three themes were found: 1) Anticipations meets reality; 2) Valuation of time and prioritising; and 3) The content and creation of palliative care.

Conclusion

There are many differences in values, and the way PC are provided in the acute care wards compared to what a PCCT expects. The didactic challenges are many and the PC require effort.

Specialist palliative care teams and characteristics related to referral rate: a national cross-sectional survey among hospitals in the Netherlands

Background

Specialist palliative care teams (SPCTs) in hospitals improve quality of life and satisfaction with care for patients with advanced disease. However, referrals to SPCTs are often limited. To identify areas for improvement of SPCTs’ service penetration, we explored the characteristics and level of integration of palliative care programmes and SPCTs in Dutch hospitals and we assessed the relation between these characteristics and specialist palliative care referral rates.

Methods

We performed a secondary analysis of a national cross-sectional survey conducted among hospitals in the Netherlands from March through May 2018. For this survey, a previously developed online questionnaire, containing 6 consensus-based integration indicators, was sent to palliative care programme leaders in all 78 hospitals. For referral rate we calculated the number of annual inpatient referrals to the SPCT as a percentage of the number of total annual hospital admissions. Referral rate was dichotomized into high (≥ third quartile) and low (< third quartile). Characteristics of SPCTs with high and low referral rate were compared using univariate analyses. P-values < 0.05 were considered significant.

Results

In total, 63 hospitals (81%) participated in the survey, of which 62 had an operational SPCT. The palliative care programmes of these hospitals consisted of inpatient consultation services (94%), interdisciplinary staffing (61%), outpatient clinics (45%), dedicated acute care beds (21%) and community-based palliative care (27%). The median referral rate was 0.56% (IQR 0.23–1.0%), ranging from 0 to 3.7%. Comparing SPCTs with high referral rate (≥1%, n = 17) and low referral rate (< 1%, n = 45) showed significant differences for SPCTs’ years of existence, staffing, their level of education, participation in other departments’ team meetings, provision of education and conducting research. With regard to integration, significant differences were found for the presence of outpatient clinics and timing of referrals.

Conclusion

In the Netherlands, palliative care programmes and specialist palliative care teams in hospitals vary in their level of integration and development, with more mature teams showing higher referral rates. Appropriate staffing, dedicated outpatient clinics, education and research appear means to improve service penetration and timing of referral for patients with advanced diseases.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12904-021-00875-3.