Dataset Information

NUrsing Homes End of Life care Program (NUHELP): developing a complex intervention.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Nursing homes are likely to become increasingly important as end-of-life care facilities. Previous studies indicate that individuals residing in these facilities have a high prevalence of end-of-life symptoms and a significant need for palliative care. The aim of this study was to develop an end-of-life care program for nursing homes in Spain based on previous models yet adapted to the specific context and the needs of staff in nursing homes in the country.

Methods

A descriptive study of a complex intervention procedure was developed. The study consisted of three phases. The first phase was a prospective study assessing self-efficacy in palliative care (using the SEPC scale) and attitudes towards end-of-life care (using the FATCOD-B scale) among nursing home staff before and after the completion of a basic palliative care training program. In the second phase, objectives were selected using the Delphi consensus technique, where nursing home and primary care professionals assessed the relevance, feasibility, and level of attainment of 42 quality standards. In phase 3, interventions were selected for these objectives through two focus group sessions involving nursing home, primary care, and palliative care professionals.

Results

As a result of the training, an improvement in self-efficacy and attitudes towards end-of-life care was observed. In phase 2, 14 standards were selected and grouped into 5 objectives: to conduct a comprehensive assessment and develop a personalized care plan adapted to the palliative needs detected; to provide information in a clear and accessible way; to request and record advance care directives; to provide early care with respect to loss and grief; to refer patients to a specialized palliative care unit if appropriate, depending on the complexity of the palliative care required. Based on these objectives, the participants in the focus group sessions designed the 22 interventions that make up the program.

Conclusions

The objectives and interventions of the NUHELP program constitute an end-of-life care program which can be implemented in nursing homes to improve the quality of end-of-life care in these facilities by modifying their clinical practice, organization, and relationship with the health system as well as serving as an example of an effective health intervention program.

SUBMITTER: Mota-Romero E

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8234765 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BACKGROUND: A 'blended' (e-learning and facilitated workshops) training course for Group C staff (i.e. staff with relatively infrequent contact with end of life care) has been delivered across several English counties with the aim of improving end of life care in nursing and residential care homes. This paper evaluates the impact of the course on participants' understandings of and confidence in delivering end of life care in one nursing home, while also considering barriers to change in practice. METHODS: A mixed-methods case study approach, incorporating pre- and post-course questionnaires (SHA East of England End of Life Care Education Programme 'ABC' Project Work Force C or Non Nurse Workforce B Pre and Post Course Questionnaire; E-Learning in End of Life Care Study Pre and Post Course Questionnaire), documentary analysis, semi-structured interviews, and observation of course workshops. Participants were 20 members of staff at a nursing home in a city in the East of England, including 14 Health Care Assistants (carers) and 6 others (administrative, activities, hosting, and catering staff). The questionnaires and interviews assessed understandings of and confidence towards end of life care delivery. RESULTS: Improvements in participants' confidence in delivering end of life care were observed, particularly in the core competency areas of symptom management, communication, and advance care planning. A shift towards more detailed and more holistic understandings of end of life care was in evidence; some participants also championed end of life care in the home as a result of the course. Several barriers to changes in practice were encountered, including uneven participation, the absence of mechanisms for disseminating new insights and knowledge within the home, and a widespread perception that nurses' professional dominance in the home made sustainable change difficult to enact. CONCLUSIONS: While blended e-learning courses have the potential to generate positive change in participants' understandings of and confidence about End of Life Care, organizational and inter-professional obstacles must be overcome in order to translate these changes into improved end of life care delivery in nursing (and residential) homes.

Project description:BackgroundMany people with dementia die in nursing homes, but quality of care may be suboptimal. We developed the theory-driven 'Compassion Intervention' to enhance end-of-life care in advanced dementia.ObjectivesTo (1) understand how the Intervention operated in nursing homes in different health economies; (2) collect preliminary outcome data and costs of an interdisciplinary care leader (ICL) to facilitate the Intervention; (3) check the Intervention caused no harm.DesignA naturalistic feasibility study of Intervention implementation for 6 months.SettingsTwo nursing homes in northern London, UK.ParticipantsThirty residents with advanced dementia were assessed of whom nine were recruited for data collection; four of these residents' family members were interviewed. Twenty-eight nursing home and external healthcare professionals participated in interviews at 7 (n=19), 11 (n=19) and 15 months (n=10).InterventionAn ICL led two core Intervention components: (1) integrated, interdisciplinary assessment and care; (2) education and support for paid and family carers.Data collectedProcess and outcome data were collected. Symptoms were recorded monthly for recruited residents. Semistructured interviews were conducted at 7, 11 and 15 months with nursing home staff and external healthcare professionals and at 7 months with family carers. ICL hours were costed using Department of Health and Health Education England tariffs.ResultsContextual differences were identified between sites: nursing home 2 had lower involvement with external healthcare services. Core components were implemented at both sites but multidisciplinary meetings were only established in nursing home 1. The Intervention prompted improvements in advance care planning, pain management and person-centred care; we observed no harm. Six-month ICL costs were £18 255.ConclusionsImplementation was feasible to differing degrees across sites, dependent on context. Our data inform future testing to identify the Intervention's effectiveness in improving end-of-life care in advanced dementia.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov:NCT02840318: Results.

Project description:ImportanceNearly 10% of the 1.5 million persons residing in nursing homes (NHs) have received or will receive a diagnosis of cancer. Although aggressive end-of-life (EOL) care is common among community-dwelling patients with cancer, little is known about such patterns of care among NH residents with cancer.ObjectiveTo compare markers of aggressive EOL care between older adults with metastatic cancer who are NH residents and their community-dwelling counterparts.Design, setting, and participantsThis cohort study used the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results database linked with the Medicare database and the Minimum Data Set (including NH clinical assessment data) for deaths occurring from January 1, 2013, to December 31, 2017, among 146 329 older patients with metastatic breast, colorectal, lung, pancreas, or prostate cancer, with a lookback period in claims data through July 1, 2012. Statistical analysis was conducted between March 2021 and September 2022.ExposuresNursing home status.Main outcomes and measuresMarkers of aggressive EOL care were cancer-directed treatment, intensive care unit admission, more than 1 emergency department visit or more than 1 hospitalization in the last 30 days of life, hospice enrollment in the last 3 days of life, and in-hospital death.ResultsThe study population included 146 329 patients 66 years of age or older (mean [SD] age, 78.2 [7.3] years; 51.9% men). Aggressive EOL care was more common among NH residents than community-dwelling residents (63.6% vs 58.3%). Nursing home status was associated with 4% higher odds of receiving aggressive EOL care (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 1.04 [95% CI, 1.02-1.07]), 6% higher odds of more than 1 hospital admission in the last 30 days of life (aOR, 1.06 [95% CI, 1.02-1.10]), and 61% higher odds of dying in the hospital (aOR, 1.61 [95% CI, 1.57-1.65]). Conversely, NH status was associated with lower odds of receiving cancer-directed treatment (aOR, 0.57 [95% CI, 0.55-0.58]), intensive care unit admission (aOR, 0.82 [95% CI, 0.79-0.84]), or enrollment in hospice in the last 3 days of life (aOR, 0.89 [95% CI, 0.86-0.92]).Conclusions and relevanceDespite increased emphasis to reduce aggressive EOL care in the past several decades, such care remains common among older persons with metastatic cancer and is slightly more prevalent among NH residents than their community-dwelling counterparts. Multilevel interventions to decrease aggressive EOL care should target the main factors associated with its prevalence, including hospital admissions in the last 30 days of life and in-hospital death.

Project description:Background/objectivesGeriatric guidelines recommend against statin use in older adults with limited life expectancy (LLE) or advanced dementia (AD). This study examined resident and facility factors predicting statin discontinuation after nursing home (NH) admission in veterans with LLE/AD taking statins for secondary prevention.DesignRetrospective cohort study of Veterans Affairs (VA) bar code medication administration records, Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessments, and utilization records linked to Medicare claims.SettingVA NHs, known as community living centers (CLCs).ParticipantsVeterans aged 65 and older with coronary artery disease, stroke, or diabetes mellitus, type II, admitted in fiscal years 2009 to 2015, who met criteria for LLE/AD on their admission MDS and received statins in the week after admission (n = 13,110).MeasurementsResidents were followed until statin discontinuation (ie, gap in statin use ≥14 days), death, or censoring due to discharge, day 91 of the stay, or end of the study period. Competing risk models assessed cumulative incidence and predictors of discontinuation, stratified by whether the resident had their end-of-life (EOL) status designated or used hospice at admission.ResultsOverall cumulative incidence of statin discontinuation was 31% (95% confidence interval [CI] = 30%-32%) by day 91, and it was markedly higher in those with (52%; 95% CI = 50%-55%) vs without (25%; 95% CI = 24%-26%) EOL designation/hospice. In patients with EOL designation/hospice (n = 2,374), obesity, congestive heart failure, and admission from nonhospital settings predicted decreased likelihood of discontinuation; AD, dependency in activities of daily living, greater number of medications, and geographic region predicted increased likelihood of discontinuation. In patients without EOL designation/hospice (n = 10,736), older age and several specific markers of poor prognosis predicted greater discontinuation, whereas obesity/overweight predicted decreased discontinuation.ConclusionMost veterans with LLE/AD taking statins for secondary prevention do not discontinue statins following CLC admission. Designating residents as EOL status, hospice use, and individual clinical factors indicating poor prognosis may prompt deprescribing.

Project description:BACKGROUND:The goals of palliative care are to relieve suffering and promote quality of life. Palliative care for older persons has been less prioritised than palliative care for younger people with cancer, which may lead to unnecessary suffering and decreased quality of life at the final stage of life. AIM:To evaluate whether a palliative care intervention had any influence on the perceived quality of life of older persons (?65 years). METHODS:This study was conducted as a complex intervention performed with an experimental crossover design. The intervention was implemented in 20 nursing homes, with a six-month intervention period in each nursing home. Twenty-three older persons (?65 years) in the intervention group and 29 in the control group were interviewed using the WHOQOL-BREF and WHOQOL-OLD questionnaires at both baseline and follow-up. The collected data were analysed using the Wilcoxon signed-rank test to compare paired data between baseline and follow-up. RESULTS:In the intervention group, no statistically significant increases in quality of life were found. This result contrasted with the control group, which revealed statistically significant declines in quality of life at both the dimension and item levels. Accordingly, this study showed a trend of decreased health after nine months in both the intervention and control groups. CONCLUSION:It is reasonable to believe that quality of life decreases with age as part of the natural course of the ageing process. However, it seems that the palliative care approach of the intervention prevented unnecessary quality of life decline by supporting sensory abilities, autonomy and social participation among older persons in nursing homes. From the ageing perspective, it may not be realistic to strive for an increased quality of life in older people living in nursing homes; maybe the goal should be to delay or prevent reduced quality of life. Based on this perspective, the intervention prevented decline in quality of life in nursing home residents. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE:The high number of deaths shows the importance to identify palliative care needs in older persons at an early stage to prevent or delay deterioration of quality of life.

Project description:ObjectivesMany older adults with limited life expectancy and/or advanced dementia (LLE/AD) are potentially overtreated for diabetes and may benefit from deintensification. Our aim was to examine the incidence and predictors of diabetes medication deintensification in older Veterans with LLE/AD who were potentially overtreated at admission to Veterans Affairs (VA) nursing homes (community living centers [CLCs]).DesignRetrospective cohort study using linked VA and Medicare clinical/administrative data and Minimum Data Set assessments.SettingVA CLCs.ParticipantsA total of 6960 Veterans with diabetes and LLE/AD admitted to VA CLCs in fiscal years 2009 to 2015 with hemoglobin (Hb)A1c measured within 90 days of admission.MeasurementsWe evaluated treatment deintensification (discontinuation or dose reduction for a consecutive 7-day period) among residents who were potentially overtreated (HbA1c ≤7.5% and receiving hypoglycemic medications). Competing risk models assessed 90-day cumulative incidence of deintensification.ResultsMore than 40% (n = 3056) of Veteran CLC residents with diabetes were potentially overtreated. The cumulative incidence of deintensification at 90 days was 45.5%. Higher baseline HbA1c values were associated with a lower likelihood of deintensification (e.g., HbA1c 7.0-7.5% vs <6.0%; adjusted risk ratio [aRR] = .57; 95% confidence interval [CI] = .50-.66). Compared with non-sulfonylurea oral agents (e.g., metformin), other treatment regimens were more likely to be deintensified (aRR = 1.31-1.88), except for basal insulin (aRR = .59; 95% CI = .52-.66). The only resident factor associated with increased likelihood of deintensification was documented end-of-life status (aRR = 1.12; 95% CI = 1.01-1.25). Admission from home/assisted living (aRR = .85; 95% CI = .75-.96), obesity (aRR = .88; 95% CI = .78-.99), and peripheral vascular disease (aRR = .90; 95% CI = .81-.99) were associated with decreased likelihood of deintensification.ConclusionDeintensification of treatment regimens occurred in less than one-half of potentially overtreated Veterans and was more strongly associated with low HbA1c values and use of medications with high risk for hypoglycemia, rather than other resident characteristics. J Am Geriatr Soc 68:736-745, 2020.