Dataset Information

Context and mechanisms that enable implementation of specialist palliative care Needs Rounds in care homes: results from a qualitative interview study.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Improving quality of palliative and end of life care in older people's care homes is essential. Increasing numbers of people die in these settings, yet access to high quality palliative care is not routinely provided. While evidence for models of care are growing, there remains little insight regarding how to translate evidence-based models into practice. Palliative Care Needs Rounds (hereafter Needs Rounds) have a robust evidence base, for providing palliative care in care homes, reducing resident hospitalisations, improving residents' quality of death, and increasing staff confidence in caring for dying residents. This study aimed to identify and describe the context and mechanisms of change that facilitate implementation of Needs Rounds in care homes, and enable other services to reap the benefits of the Needs Rounds approach to care provision.

Methods

Qualitative interviews, embedded within a large randomised control trial, were conducted with a purposive sample of 21 staff from 11 care homes using Needs Rounds. The sample included managers, nurses, and care assistants. Staff participated in individual or dyadic semi-structured interviews. Implementation science frameworks and thematic analysis were used to interpret and analyse the data.

Results

Contextual factors affecting implementation included facility preparedness for change, leadership, staff knowledge and skills, and organisational policies. Mechanisms of change that facilitated implementation included staff as facilitators, identifying and triaging residents, strategizing knowledge exchange, and changing clinical approaches to care. Care home staff also identified planning and documentation, and shifts in communication. The outcomes reported by staff suggest reductions in hospitalisations and problematic symptoms for residents, improved staff skills and confidence in caring for residents in their last months, weeks and days of life.

Conclusions

The significance of this paper is in offering care homes detailed insights into service contexts and mechanisms of change that will enable them to reap the benefits of Needs Rounds in their own services. The paper thus will support the implementation of an approach to care that has a robust evidence base, for a population under-served by specialist palliative care.

Trial registration

ACTRN12617000080325 .

SUBMITTER: Koerner J

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8299598 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:IntroductionPalliative and end-of-life care in care homes is often inadequate, despite high morbidity and mortality. Residents can experience uncontrolled symptoms, poor quality deaths and avoidable hospitalisations. Care home staff can feel unsupported to look after residents at the end of life. Approaches for improving end-of-life care are often education-focused, do not triage residents and rarely integrate clinical care. This study will adapt an evidence-based approach from Australia for the UK context called 'Palliative Care Needs Rounds' (Needs Rounds). Needs Rounds combine triaging, anticipatory person-centred planning, case-based education and case-conferencing; the Australian studies found that Needs Rounds reduce length of stay in hospital, and improve dying in preferred place of care, and symptoms at the end of life.Methods and analysisThis implementation science study will codesign and implement a scalable UK model of Needs Rounds. The Integrated Promoting Action on Research Implementation in Health Services (i-PARIHS) framework will be used to identify contextual barriers and use facilitation to enable successful implementation. Six palliative care teams, working with 4-6 care homes each, will engage in two phases. In phase 1 (February 2021), stakeholder interviews (n=40) will be used to develop a programme theory to meet the primary outcome of identifying what works, for whom in what circumstances for UK Needs Rounds. Subsequently a workshop to codesign UK Needs Rounds will be run. Phase 2 (July 2021) will implement the UK model for a year. Prospective data collection will focus on secondary outcomes regarding hospitalisations, residents' quality of death and care home staff capability of adopting a palliative approach.Ethics and disseminationFrenchay Research Ethics Committee (287447) approved the study. Findings will be disseminated to policy-makers, care home/palliative care practitioners, residents/relatives and academic audiences. An implementation package will be developed for practitioners to provide the tools and resources required to adopt UK Needs Rounds.Registration detailsRegistration details: ISRCTN15863801.

Project description:BackgroundIn patients with serious illness, use of specialist palliative care may result in improved quality of life, patient and caregiver satisfaction and advance care planning, as well as lower health care utilization. However, evidence of efficacy is limited for patients with dementia, particularly in the setting of an acute hospitalization.ObjectiveTo determine whether implementation of hospital-based specialist palliative care was associated with differences in treatment intensity outcomes for hospitalized patients with dementia.DesignRetrospective cohort study.SettingFifty-one hospitals in New York State that either did or did not implement a palliative care program between 2008 and 2014. Hospitals that consistently had a palliative care program during the study period were excluded.ParticipantsHospitalized patients with dementia.MeasurementsThe primary outcome of this study was discharge to hospice from an acute hospitalization. Secondary outcomes included hospital length of stay, use of mechanical ventilation and dialysis, and days in intensive care. Difference-in-difference analyses were performed using multilevel regression to assess the association between implementing a palliative care program and outcomes, while adjusting for patient and hospital characteristics and time trends.ResultsDuring the study period, 82,118 patients with dementia (mean (SD) age, 83.04 (10.04), 51,170 (62.21%) female) underwent an acute hospitalization, of which 41,227 (50.27%) received care in hospitals that implemented a palliative care program. In comparison to patients who received care in hospitals without palliative care, patients with dementia who received care in hospitals after the implementation of palliative care were more 35% likely to be discharged to hospice (adjusted odds ratio (aOR) = 1.35 (1.19-1.51), P < .001). No meaningful differences in secondary outcomes were observed.ConclusionImplementation of a specialist palliative care program was associated with an increase in discharge to hospice following acute hospitalization in patients with dementia.

Project description:Background/aimsThe use and costs of health care rise substantially in the months prior to death, and although the use of palliative care services may be expected to lead to less costly care, the evidence is mixed. We analysed the costs of care over the last year of life and the extent to which these are associated with the use and duration of specialist palliative care (SPC) for decedents who died from cancer or another life-limiting illness.MethodsThe decedents were participants in a cohort study of older residents of the state of New South Wales, Australia. Using linked survey and administrative health data from 2007 to 2016, two cohorts were identified: n = 10,535 where the cause of death was cancer; and n = 11,179 where the cause of death was another life-limiting illness. Costs of various types were analysed with separate risk-adjusted linear regression models for the last 1, 3, 6, 9 and 12 months before death and for both cohorts. SPC was categorised according to time to death from first contact with the service as 1-7 days, 7-30 days, 30-180 days and more than 180 days.ResultsSPC use was higher among the cancer cohort (30.0%) relative to the non-cancer cohort (4.8%). The mean costs over the final year of life were AU$55,037 (SD 45,059) for the cancer cohort and AU$35,318 (SD 41,948) for the non-cancer cohort. Earlier use of SPC was associated with higher costs over the last year of life but lower costs in the last 1 and 3 months for both cohorts. Initiating SPC use more than 180 days before death was associated with a mean difference relative to the no SPC group of AU$15,590 (95% CI 10,617 to 20,562) and AU$13,739 (95% CI 733 to 26,746) over the last year of life for those dying from cancer and another illness, respectively. The same differences over the last month of life were - AU$2810 (95% CI - 3945 to - 1676) and - AU$4345 (95% CI - 6625 to - 2066). Admitted hospital care was the major driver of costs, with longer SPC associated with lower rates of death in hospital for both cohorts.ConclusionEarly initiation of SPC was associated with higher costs over the last year of life and lower costs over the last months of life. This was the case for both the cancer and non-cancer cohorts, and appeared to be largely attributed to reduced hospitalisation. Although further investigation is required, our results suggest that expanding the availability of SPC services to provide more equitable access could enable patients to spend more time at their usual place of residence, reduce pressure on inpatient services and facilitate death at home when that is preferred.