Dataset Information

Indigenous compared with non-Indigenous Australian patients at entry to specialist palliative care: Cross-sectional findings from a multi-jurisdictional dataset.

ABSTRACT:

Background

There are few quantitative studies on palliative care provision to Indigenous Australians, a population known to experience distinctive barriers to quality healthcare and to have poorer health outcomes than other Australians.

Objectives

To investigate equity of specialist palliative care service provision through characterising and comparing Indigenous and non-Indigenous patients at entry to care.

Methods

Using data (01/01/2010-30/06/2015) from all services participating in the multi-jurisdictional Palliative Care Outcomes Collaboration, Indigenous and non-Indigenous patients entering palliative care were compared on proportions vis-à-vis those expected from national statutory datasets, demographic characteristics, and entry-to-care status across fourteen 'problem' domains (e.g., pain, functional impairment) after matching by age, sex, and specific diagnosis.

Results

Of 140,267 patients, 1,465 (1.0%, much lower than expected from statutory data) were Indigenous, 133,987 (95.5%) non-Indigenous, and 4,905 (3.5%) had a missing identifier. The proportion of patients with a missing identifier diminished markedly over the study period, without a corresponding increase in the proportion identified as Indigenous. Indigenous compared with non-Indigenous patients were younger (mean 62.8 versus 73.0 years, p<0.001), a higher proportion were female (51.5% versus 46.3%; p<0.001) or resided outside major cities (44.2% versus 21.5%, p<0.001). Across all domains, Indigenous compared with matched non-Indigenous patients had lower or equal risk of status requiring prompt intervention.

Conclusions

Indigenous patients (especially those residing outside major cities) are substantially under-represented in care by services participating in the nationwide specialist palliative care Collaboration, likely reflecting widespread access barriers. However, the similarity of status indicators among Indigenous and non-Indigenous patients at entry to care suggests that Indigenous patients who are able to access these services do not disproportionately experience clinically important impediments to care initiation.

SUBMITTER: Woods JA

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6497232 | biostudies-literature | 2019

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Indigenous compared with non-Indigenous Australian patients at entry to specialist palliative care: Cross-sectional findings from a multi-jurisdictional dataset.

Woods John A JA Newton Jade C JC Thompson Sandra C SC Malacova Eva E Ngo Hanh T HT Katzenellenbogen Judith M JM Murray Kevin K Shahid Shaouli S Johnson Claire E CE

PloS one 20190502 5

<h4>Background</h4>There are few quantitative studies on palliative care provision to Indigenous Australians, a population known to experience distinctive barriers to quality healthcare and to have poorer health outcomes than other Australians.<h4>Objectives</h4>To investigate equity of specialist palliative care service provision through characterising and comparing Indigenous and non-Indigenous patients at entry to care.<h4>Methods</h4>Using data (01/01/2010-30/06/2015) from all services parti ...[more]

PMID: 31048843

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundRapid effective responsiveness to patient needs is pivotal to high quality palliative care. Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander (Indigenous) people are susceptible to life-limiting illnesses at younger ages than other Australians and experience inequity of health service provision. The Palliative Care Outcomes Collaboration collects Australia-wide health service data on patient care, and has established performance benchmarks for specialist palliative care services. We investigated whether the benchmark for timely commencement of palliative care episodes (occurrence of delay >1 day after being designated 'ready for care' in <10% instances) is being met for Indigenous Australians in participating services. Additionally, we investigated the association between identification as Indigenous and delay.MethodsUsing multi-jurisdictional Palliative Care Outcomes Collaboration data, this cross-sectional analytical study investigated all episodes of care (n = 84,238) provided to patients ≥18 years (n = 61,073: Indigenous n = 645) in hospital and community settings commenced and completed during the period 01/07/2013-30/06/2015. Proportions of episodes resulting in delay were determined. Crude and adjusted odds of delay among Indigenous compared with non-Indigenous patients were investigated using multiple logistic regression, with missing data handled by multiple imputation.ResultsThe benchmark was met for both Indigenous and non-Indigenous patients (delay in 8.3 and 8.4% episodes respectively). However, the likelihood of delay was modestly higher in episodes provided to Indigenous than non-Indigenous patients (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 1.41; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.07-1.86). Excess delay among Indigenous patients was accentuated in first episodes (aOR, 1.53; 95% CI 1.14-2.06), in patients aged < 65 years (aOR, 1.66; 95% CI 1.14-2.41), and among those residing in Inner Regional areas (aOR, 1.97; 95% CI 1.19-3.28), and also approached significance among those in outer regional, remote and very remote areas collectively (aOR, 1.72; CI 0.97-3.05).ConclusionsAlthough the timeliness benchmark is being met for Indigenous Australians in palliative care, they may experience delayed initiation of care episodes, particularly if younger, and especially at first encounter with a service. Qualitative research is required to explore determinants of delay in initiating palliative care episodes. The timeliness of initial referral for specialist palliative care in this population remains to be determined.

Project description:ObjectivesAnticipation and prompt relief of symptoms among patients with a life-limiting illness is a core element of palliative care. Indigenous Australians commonly encounter cultural barriers in healthcare that may impair outcomes. The Palliative Care Outcomes Collaboration collects patient care data for the purposes of continuous quality improvement and benchmarking, with each recorded care episode divided into phases that reflect a patient's condition. We aimed to investigate differences between Indigenous and non-Indigenous patients in the occurrence and duration of 'unstable' phases (which indicate unanticipated deterioration in a patient's condition or circumstances), and determine attainment of the relevant benchmark (resolution of unstable phases in ≤3 days in 90% of cases) for both groups.DesignCohort study.SettingAustralia-wide hospital-based and community-based specialist palliative care (1 January 2010 to 30 June 2015).Participants139 556 (1502 Indigenous and 138 054 non-Indigenous) adult patients.Outcome measuresIndigenous and non-Indigenous patients were compared on (1) the risk of a phase being categorised as unstable, (2) the duration of unstable phases, and (3) the risk of unstable phases being prolonged (>3 days). Crude and adjusted estimates were produced from three-level robust Poisson regression and complementary log-log discrete time survival models.ResultsUnstable phases occurred with similar frequency overall among Indigenous and non-Indigenous patients (adjusted relative risks 1.06; 95% CI 1.00 to 1.11; not significant after correction for multiple comparisons). The duration and risk of prolongation of unstable phases were similar in both patient groups, with no significant differences evident among subgroups. The benchmark was not met for either Indigenous or non-Indigenous patients (unstable phase duration >3 days in 24.3% vs 25.5%; p=0.398).ConclusionsDespite well-documented shortcomings of healthcare for Indigenous Australians, there is no clear evidence of greater occurrence or prolongation of unanticipated problems among Indigenous patients accessing specialist palliative care services in hospital or the community.

Project description:BackgroundSpecialist 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.MethodsWe 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.ResultsIn 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.ConclusionIn 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.

Project description:BackgroundPalliative care phases (stable, unstable, deteriorating, terminal and bereavement) are routinely used in Australia and the UK to describe the clinical situation of patients and their families and to evaluate the associated care plan. In addition, it serves as a benchmark developed by the Australian Palliative Care Outcome Collaboration (PCOC) and is used nationwide for comparisons between services. In Germany, the concept is not used consistently due to various translations. Furthermore, there is no nationwide systematic approach to routinely assess clinical outcomes in palliative care. The study aims to develop a German version of the palliative care phase definitions by adapting them culturally, and to examine the inter-rater reliability of the adjusted definitions with healthcare professionals.MethodsMixed-methods approach: Cognitive interview study using 'think aloud' and verbal probing techniques and a consecutive multi-center cross-sectional study with two clinicians independently assigning the phase definitions. Interviewees/participants were selected through convenience and purposive sampling in specialist palliative care inpatient units, advisory and community services and in three specialist palliative care units with doctors, nursing staff and allied health professionals.ResultsFifteen interviews were conducted. Identified difficulties were: Some translated terms were 1) not self-explanatory (e.g. 'family/carer' or 'care plan') and (2) too limited to the medical dimension neglecting the holistic approach of palliative care. (3) Problems of comprehension regarding the concept in general occurred, e.g. in differentiating between the 'unstable' and 'deteriorating' phase. Inter-rater reliability was moderate (kappa = 0.44; 95% CI = 0.39-0.52). The assignment of the phase 'deteriorating' has caused the most difficulties.ConclusionOverall, the adapted palliative care phases are suitable to use in the German specialist palliative care setting. However, the concept of the phases is not self-explanatory. To implement it nationwide for outcome measurement/benchmarking, it requires further education, on-the-job training and experience as well as the involvement of healthcare professionals in implementation process. For the use of international concepts in different healthcare systems, a deeper discussion and cultural adaptation is necessary besides the formal translation.

Dataset Information

Indigenous compared with non-Indigenous Australian patients at entry to specialist palliative care: Cross-sectional findings from a multi-jurisdictional dataset.

Background

Objectives

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Publications

Indigenous compared with non-Indigenous Australian patients at entry to specialist palliative care: Cross-sectional findings from a multi-jurisdictional dataset.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets