Nationwide evaluation of palliative care (Q-PAC study) provided by specialized palliative care teams using quality indicators : Large variations in quality of care

BACKGROUND

Although a number of quality indicators for palliative care have been implemented worldwide, evidence regarding the performance of palliative care teams is scarce.

AIM

Evaluating the quality of palliative care using quality indicators; to describe the variation in quality between palliative care teams; and to suggest quality benchmarks for these teams.

DESIGN

A repeated cross-sectional study design to collect quality indicator data by means of a validated quality indicator set in 36 Belgian palliative care teams at home and in hospitals. Risk-adjustment procedures, taking into account patient-mix, were applied to suggest benchmarks.

PARTICIPANTS

Between 2014 and 2017, five quality measurements with questionnaires were conducted in 982 patients receiving palliative care, 4701 care providers and 1039 family members of deceased patients.

RESULTS

A total of 7622 assessments were received. Large risk-adjusted variations between the different palliative care teams were identified in: regularly updating patient files (IQR: 12%-39%), having multidisciplinary consultations about care objectives (IQR: 51%-73%), discussing end-of-life care decisions with patients (IQR: 26%-71%-92%), relieving shortness of breath (IQR: 57%-78%), regularly assessing pain (IQR: 43%-74%) and symptoms by means of validated scales (IQR: 23%-60%), initiating palliative care at least 2 weeks before death (IQR: 30%-50%), and weekly contact with the GP in the last 3 months of life (IQR 16%-43%).

CONCLUSION

The large risk-adjusted variation found across the quality indicator scores suggest that repeated and standardized quality improvement evaluations can allow teams to benchmark themselves to each other to identify areas of their palliative care delivery that need improvement.

Identification and operationalisation of indicators to monitor successful uptake of advance care planning policies: a modified Delphi study

BACKGROUND

In 2014, the province of Alberta, Canada implemented a province-wide policy and procedures for advance care planning (ACP) and goals of care designation (GCD) across its complex, integrated public healthcare system. This study was conducted to identify and operationalise performance indicators for ACP/GCD to monitor policy implementation success and sustainment of ACP/GCD practice change.

METHODS

A systematic review and environmental scan was conducted to identify potential indicators of ACP/GCD uptake (n=132). A purposive sample of ACP/GCD stakeholders was invited to participate in a modified Delphi study to evaluate, reduce and refine these indicators through a combination of face-to-face meetings and online surveys.

RESULTS

An evidence-informed Donabedian by Institute of Medicine (IOM) framework was adopted as an organising matrix for the indicators in an initial face-to-face meeting. Three online survey rounds reduced and refined the 132 indicators to 18. A final face-to-face meeting operationalised the indicators into a measurable format. Nine indicators, covering 11 of the 18 Donabedian×IOM domains, were operationalised.

CONCLUSIONS

Nine ACP/GCD evidence-informed indicators mapping to 11 of 18 Donabedian×IOM domains were endorsed, and have been operationalised into an online ACP/GCD dashboard. The indicators provide a characterisation of ACP/GCD uptake that could be generalised to other healthcare settings, measuring aspects related to ACP/GCD documentation, patient satisfaction and agreement between medical orders and care received. The final nine indicators reflect the stakeholders' expressed intent to strike a balance between comprehensiveness and feasibility within a large provincial healthcare system.

Inclusion of palliative care in health care policy for older people: A directed documentary analysis in 13 of the most rapidly ageing countries worldwide

BACKGROUND

Palliative care is insufficiently integrated in the continuum of care for older people. It is unclear to what extent healthcare policy for older people includes elements of palliative care and thus supports its integration.

AIM

(1) To develop a reference framework for identifying palliative care contents in policy documents; (2) to determine inclusion of palliative care in public policy documents on healthcare for older people in 13 rapidly ageing countries.

DESIGN

Directed documentary analysis of public policy documents (legislation, policies/strategies, guidelines, white papers) on healthcare for older people. Using existing literature, we developed a reference framework and data extraction form assessing 10 criteria of palliative care inclusion. Country experts identified documents and extracted data.

SETTING

Austria, Belgium, Canada, Czech Republic, England, Japan, Mexico, Netherlands, New Zealand, Singapore, Slovenia, South Korea, Spain.

RESULTS

Of 139 identified documents, 50 met inclusion criteria. The most frequently addressed palliative care elements were coordination and continuity of care (12 countries), communication and care planning, care for family, and ethical and legal aspects (11 countries). Documents in 10 countries explicitly mentioned palliative care, nine addressed symptom management, eight mentioned end-of-life care, and five referred to existing palliative care strategies (out of nine that had them).

CONCLUSIONS

Health care policies for older people need revising to include reference to end-of-life care and dying and ensure linkage to existing national or regional palliative care strategies. The strong policy focus on care coordination and continuity in policies for older people is an opportunity window for palliative care advocacy.

Pilot Study to Develop and Test Palliative Care Quality Indicators for Nursing Homes

An increasingly frail population in nursing homes accentuates the need for high quality care at the end of life and better access to palliative care in this context. Implementation of palliative care and its outcomes can be monitored by using quality indicators. Therefore, we developed a quality indicator set for palliative care in nursing homes and a tailored measurement procedure while using a mixed-methods design. We developed the instrument in three phases: (1) literature search, (2) interviews with experts, and (3) indicator and measurement selection by expert consensus (RAND/UCLA). Second, we pilot tested and evaluated the instrument in nine nursing homes in Flanders, Belgium. After identifying 26 indicators in the literature and expert interviews, 19 of them were selected through expert consensus. Setting-specific themes were advance care planning, autonomy, and communication with family. The quantitative and qualitative analyses showed that the indicators were measurable, had good preliminary face validity and discriminative power, and were considered to be useful in terms of quality monitoring according to the caregivers. The quality indicators can be used in a large implementation study and process evaluation in order to achieve continuous monitoring of the access to palliative care for all of the residents in nursing homes.

The Impact of Measuring Patient-Reported Outcome Measures on Quality of and Access to Palliative Care

BACKGROUND

Measuring performance for palliative care is complex as care is delivered in many sites, over time and jointly to the patient and family. Measures of structural processes do not necessarily capture aspects that are important to patients and families nor reflect holistic multidisciplinary outcomes of care. This article focuses on the question as to whether measurement of patient-reported outcome measures improves the outcomes of quality and access to palliative care.

OBJECTIVES

To review the international evidence that measurement of indicators of desired outcomes improves the quality of and access to palliative care, in order to apply them to the Canadian context.

DESIGN

Rapid review.

SETTING

Canadian context.

FINDINGS

This review identified six systematic reviews and forty-seven studies that describe largely national efforts to arrive at a consensus as to what needs to be measured to assess quality of palliative care. Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) are becoming more prevalent, with emerging evidence to suggest that their measurement improves outcomes that are important to patients. Several Canadian initiatives are in place, including the Canadian Partnership Against Cancer's efforts, in conjunction with other partners, to develop common quality measures. Results from Australia's Palliative Care Outcomes Collaborative demonstrate that patient-centered improvements in palliative care can be measured by using patient-reported outcomes derived at the point of care and delivered nationally.

CONCLUSIONS

Measurement of quality palliative and end-of-life care is very complex. It requires that both administrative data and PROMs be assessed to reflect outcomes that are important to patients and families. Australia's national initiative is a promising exemplar for continued work in this area.

Family carer support in home and hospital: a cross-sectional survey of specialised palliative care

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate: (1) to what extent family carers of people supported by specialised palliative care services felt they had been provided with information, support and aftercare and (2) how this varied by type of palliative care service, length of enrolment and characteristics of deceased.

METHODS

A cross-sectional postal survey was conducted using a structured questionnaire with nine items on information, support and aftercare provided by specialised palliative care services to family carers. Flemish family carers of people who had made use of specialised palliative care services at home or in hospital were contacted.

RESULTS

Of all primary family carers (response rate of 53.5% resulting in n=1504), 77.7% indicated they were asked frequently by professionals how they were feeling. Around 75% indicated they had been informed about specific end-of-life topics and around 90% felt sufficiently supported before and immediately after the death. Family carers of people who had died in a palliative care unit, compared with other types of specialised palliative care services, indicated having received more information, support and aftercare.

CONCLUSIONS

Family carers evaluate the professional assistance provided more positively when death occurred in a palliative care unit. Policy changes might be needed to reach the same level of care across all specialised palliative care services.

A systematic review and critical appraisal of quality indicators to assess optimal palliative care for older people with dementia

BACKGROUND

A challenge for commissioners and providers of end-of-life care in dementia is to translate recommendations for good or effective care into quality indicators that inform service development and evaluation.

AIM

To identify and critically evaluate quality indicators for end-of-life care in dementia.

RESULTS

We found 8657 references, after de-duplication. In all, 19 publications describing 10 new and 3 updated sets of indicators were included in this review. Ultimately, 246 individual indicators were identified as being relevant to dementia end-of-life care and mapped against EAPC guidelines.

CONCLUSIONS

We systematically derived and assessed a set of quality indicators using a robust framework that provides clear definitions of aspects of palliative care, which are dementia specific, and strengthens the theoretical underpinning of new complex interventions in end-of-life care in dementia.

Potential quality indicators for seriously ill home care clients: a cross-sectional analysis using Resident Assessment Instrument for Home Care (RAI-HC) data for Ontario

Background

Currently, there are no formalized measures for the quality of home based palliative care in Ontario. This study developed a set of potential quality indicators for seriously ill home care clients using a standardized assessment.

Methods

Secondary analysis of Resident Assessment Instrument for Home Care data for Ontario completed between 2006 and 2013 was used to develop quality indicators (QIs) thought to be relevant to the needs of older (65+) seriously ill clients. QIs were developed through a review of the literature and consultation with subject matter experts in palliative care. Serious illness was defined as a prognosis of less than 6 months to live or the presence of severe health instability. The rates of the QIs were stratified across Ontario’s geographic regions, and across four common life-limiting illnesses to observe variation.

Results

Within the sample, 14,312 clients were considered to be seriously ill and were more likely to experience negative health outcomes such as cognitive performance (OR = 2.77; 95% CI: 2.66–2.89) and pain (OR = 1.59; 95% CI: 1.53–1.64). Twenty subject matter experts were consulted and a list of seven QIs was developed. Indicators with the highest overall rates were prevalence of falls (50%) prevalence of daily pain (47%), and prevalence of caregiver distress (42%). The range in QI rates was largest across regions for prevalence of caregiver distress (21.5%), the prevalence of falls (16.6%), and the prevalence of social isolation (13.7%). Those with some form of dementia were most likely to have a caregiver that was distressed (52.6%) or to experience a fall (53.3%).

Conclusion

Home care clients in Ontario who are seriously ill are experiencing high rates of negative health outcomes, many of which are amenable to change. The RAI-HC can be a useful tool in identifying these clients in order to better understand their needs and abilities. These results contribute significantly to the process of creating and validating a standardized set of QIs that can be generated by organizations using the RAI-HC as part of normal clinical practice.

Quality indicators for responsible use of medicines: a systematic review

OBJECTIVE

All healthcare systems require valid ways to evaluate service delivery. The objective of this study was to identify existing content validated quality indicators (QIs) for responsible use of medicines (RUM) and classify them using multiple frameworks to identify gaps in current quality measurements.

DESIGN

Systematic review without meta-analysis.

SETTING

All care settings.

SEARCH STRATEGY

CINAHL, Embase, Global Health, International Pharmaceutical Abstract, MEDLINE, PubMed and Web of Science databases were searched up to April 2018. An internet search was also conducted. Articles were included if they described medication-related QIs developed using consensus methods. Government agency websites listing QIs for RUM were also included.

ANALYSIS

Several multidimensional frameworks were selected to assess the scope of QI coverage. These included Donabedian's framework (structure, process and outcome), the Anatomical Therapeutic Chemical (ATC) classification system and a validated classification for causes of drug-related problems (c-DRPs; drug selection, drug form, dose selection, treatment duration, drug use process, logistics, monitoring, adverse drug reactions and others).

RESULTS

2431 content validated QIs were identified from 131 articles and 5 websites. Using Donabedian's framework, the majority of QIs were process indicators. Based on the ATC code, the largest number of QIs pertained to medicines for nervous system (ATC code: N), followed by anti-infectives for systemic use (J) and cardiovascular system (C). The most common c-DRPs pertained to 'drug selection', followed by 'monitoring' and 'drug use process'.

CONCLUSIONS

This study was the first systematic review classifying QIs for RUM using multiple frameworks. The list of the identified QIs can be used as a database for evaluating the achievement of RUM. Although many QIs were identified, this approach allowed for the identification of gaps in quality measurement of RUM. In order to more effectively evaluate the extent to which RUM has been achieved, further development of QIs may be required.

Building Bridges, Paediatric Palliative Care in Belgium: A secondary data analysis of annual paediatric liaison team reports from 2010 to 2014

Background

Although continuity of care in paediatric palliative care (PPC) is considered to be an essential element of quality of care, it’s implementation is challenging. In Belgium, five paediatric liaison teams (PLTs) deliver palliative care. A Royal Decree issued in 2010 provides the legal framework that defines the PLTs’ missions, as ensuring continuity of curative and palliative care between the hospital and home for children diagnosed with life-limiting conditions. This national study describes how PLTs ensure continuity of care by describing their activities and the characteristics of the children they cared for from 2010 to 2014.

Methods

Thematic analysis of open-ended questions was performed and descriptive statistics of aggregated data issued from annual reports, collected by the Belgian Ministry of Public Health through the Cancer Plan was used. A review panel of PLT members discussed the results and contributed to their interpretation.

Results

Between 2010 and 2014, 3607 children and young adults (0–21 years) were cared for by the 5 Belgian PLTs (mean of 721/per year). Of these children, 50% were diagnosed with an oncological disease, 27% with a neurological or metabolic disease. Four hundred and twenty eight (428) children had died. For 51% of them, death took place at home. PLT activities include coordination; communication; curative and palliative care; education; research and fundraising. Different perceptions of what constitutes a palliative stage, heterogeneity in reporting diagnosis and the current lack of specific valid indicators to report PPC activities were found.

Conclusion

PLTs are offering highly individualised, flexible and integrated care from diagnosis to bereavement in all care settings. Improvements in data registration and implementation of outcome measures are foreseen.

Phase of Illness in palliative care: Cross-sectional analysis of clinical data from community, hospital and hospice patients

BACKGROUND

Phase of Illness describes stages of advanced illness according to care needs of the individual, family and suitability of care plan. There is limited evidence on its association with other measures of symptoms, and health-related needs, in palliative care.

AIMS

The aims of the study are as follows. (1) Describe function, pain, other physical problems, psycho-spiritual problems and family and carer support needs by Phase of Illness. (2) Consider strength of associations between these measures and Phase of Illness.

DESIGN AND SETTING

Secondary analysis of patient-level data; a total of 1317 patients in three settings. Function measured using Australia-modified Karnofsky Performance Scale. Pain, other physical problems, psycho-spiritual problems and family and carer support needs measured using items on Palliative Care Problem Severity Scale.

RESULTS

Australia-modified Karnofsky Performance Scale and Palliative Care Problem Severity Scale items varied significantly by Phase of Illness. Mean function was highest in stable phase (65.9, 95% confidence interval = 63.4-68.3) and lowest in dying phase (16.6, 95% confidence interval = 15.3-17.8). Mean pain was highest in unstable phase (1.43, 95% confidence interval = 1.36-1.51). Multinomial regression: psycho-spiritual problems were not associated with Phase of Illness ( χ² = 2.940, df = 3, p = 0.401). Family and carer support needs were greater in deteriorating phase than unstable phase (odds ratio (deteriorating vs unstable) = 1.23, 95% confidence interval = 1.01-1.49). Forty-nine percent of the variance in Phase of Illness is explained by Australia-modified Karnofsky Performance Scale and Palliative Care Problem Severity Scale.

CONCLUSION

Phase of Illness has value as a clinical measure of overall palliative need, capturing additional information beyond Australia-modified Karnofsky Performance Scale and Palliative Care Problem Severity Scale. Lack of significant association between psycho-spiritual problems and Phase of Illness warrants further investigation.

Developing indicators of appropriate and inappropriate end-of-life care in people with Alzheimer's disease, cancer or chronic obstructive pulmonary disease for population-level administrative databases: A RAND/UCLA appropriateness study

BACKGROUND

A substantial amount of aggressive life-prolonging treatments in the final stages of life has been reported for people with progressive life-shortening conditions. Monitoring appropriate and inappropriate end-of-life care is an important public health challenge and requires validated quality indicators.

AIM

To develop indicators of appropriate and inappropriate end-of-life care for people with cancer, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease or Alzheimer's disease, measurable with population-level administrative data.

DESIGN

modified RAND/UCLA appropriateness method.

SETTING/PARTICIPANTS

Potential indicators were identified by literature review and expert interviews and scored in a survey among three panels of experts (one for each disease group). Indicators for which no consensus was reached were taken into group discussions. Indicators with consensus among the experts were retained for the final quality indicator sets.

RESULTS

The final sets consist of 28 quality indicators for Alzheimer's disease, 26 quality indicators for cancer and 27 quality indicators for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. The indicator sets measure aspects of aggressiveness of care, pain and symptom treatment, specialist palliative care, place of care and place of death and coordination and continuity of care.

CONCLUSION

We developed a comprehensive set of quality indicators of appropriate and inappropriate end-of-life care in people with Alzheimer's disease, cancer or chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, to be used in population-level research. Our focus on administrative healthcare databases limits us to treatment and medication, excluding other important quality aspects such as communication, which can be monitored using complementary approaches. Nevertheless, our sets will enable an efficient comparison of healthcare providers, regions and countries in terms of their performance on appropriateness of end-of-life care.

Strengthening primary health care teams with palliative care leaders: protocol for a cluster randomized clinical trial

Background

The objective of the Balearic Islands Palliative Care (PC) Program is to improve the quality of PC through a shared model consisting of primary health care professionals, home-based PC teams, and PC units in hospitals. According to the World Health Organization (WHO), patients with advanced cancer and other terminal diseases benefit from early identification and proactive PC. We will evaluate the effectiveness of an intervention in which a PC leader is established in the primary health care center, and assess the effect of this intervention on the early identification of patients in need of PC, the efficient use of health care services, and direct health care costs.

Methods

Design: A two-arm cluster randomized clinical trial of 30 Primary Health Care Centers (PHCC) in Mallorca (Spain), in which each center was randomized to an intervention arm or a usual care arm. We expect that the number of patients identified as suitable for PC (including non-oncological PC) is at least 5% greater in the intervention arm.

Sample size: A total of 4640 deceased patients. Outcomes will be assessed by a blinded external review of the electronic records.

Interventions: General practitioners (GPs) and nurse leaders in PC for each PHCC will be appointed. These leaders will help promote PC training of colleagues, improve symptom management and psychological support of patients, and evaluate the complexity of individual cases so that these cases receive assistance from PC home-based teams.

Measurements: Early identification (>90 days before death), evaluation of case complexity, level of case complexity (with referral to a home-based PC team), use and cost of hospital and primary care services, and quality of life during the last month of life (≥2 emergency room visits, ≥2 hospital admissions, ≥14 days of hospitalization).

Discusion

PC leaders in primary care teams will improve the early identification of patients eligible for PC. This initiative could improve the quality of end-of-life care and utilization of hospital resources.

Trial registration

ISRCTN Registry identifier: ISRCTN92479122. Retrospectively registered on 28 February 2017.

From concept to practice, is multidimensional care the leading principle in hospice care? An exploratory mixed method study

BACKGROUND

Hospice care (HC) aims to optimise the quality of life of patients and their families by relief and prevention of multidimensional suffering. The aim of this study is to gain insight into multidimensional care (MC) provided to hospice inpatients by a multiprofessional team (MT) and identify facilitators, to ameliorate multidimensional HC.

METHODS

This exploratory mixed-method study with a sequential quantitative-qualitative design was conducted from January to December 2015. First a quantitative study of 36 patient records (12 hospices, 3 patient records/hospice) was performed. The outcomes were MC, clinical reasoning and assessment tools. Second, MC was qualitatively explored using semistructured focus group interviews with multiprofessional hospice teams. Both methods had equal priority and were integrated during analysis.

RESULTS

The physical dimension was most prevalent in daily care, reflecting the patients' primary expressed priority at admission and the nurses' and physicians' primary focus. The psychological, social and spiritual dimensions were less frequently described. Assessment tools were used systematically by 4/12 hospices. Facilitators identified were interdisciplinary collaboration, implemented methods of clinical reasoning and structures.

CONCLUSIONS

MC is not always verifiable in patient records; however, it is experienced by hospice professionals. The level of MC varied between hospices. The use of assessment tools and a stepped skills approach for spiritual care are recommended and multidimensional assessment tools should be developed. Leadership and commitment of all members of the MT is needed to establish the integration of multidimensional symptom management and interdisciplinary collaboration as preconditions for integrated multidimensional HC.