There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.
Abstract
Introduction:
After more than 25 years working in palliative care (PC) observing thousands
of patients and family behaviors, I use my long experience and notes as a
source of data for a qualitative research study. The aim is to identify
frequent families’ behavior patterns in PC and better describe the culture
in PC.
Methods:
This article is part of a larger project, using autoethnography as
methodology, with the aim of helping doctors and interested health
professionals better understand the culture and reality of PC. The focus is
not
the author but patients and families’ patterns of
social behavior –
the social context – within the
end-of-life period and how to deal with these professionally.
Confidentiality and privacy of patients’ data were guaranteed.
Results:
The vast number of treated cases, the regular observation and recording, and
the continuous reflection and analysis over many years have led to these
results. Due to editorial restrictions, in this article I only describe four
of at least eight typical scenarios I have identified. Each is given a short
title and I explore some of their inside-issues, integrating previous
knowledge, research, and explanations, with practical suggestions on how to
deal with them.
Significance:
As far as we know, these scenarios/patterns have never been described in this
way. This work expands knowledge, innovates, and contributes to better
describing PC culture. The final goal is to create a set of scripts that can
be used to help clinicians quickly identify the clinical situation and how
to deal with it in clinical practice. Reflecting on how patients and
families frequently behave in PC can be very useful and then teach other
professionals to better deal with these challenges.
Background Extensive evidence shows that well over 50% of people prefer to be cared for and to die at home provided circumstances allow choice. Despite best efforts and policies, one-third or less of all deaths take place at home in many countries of the world. Objectives 1. To quantify the effect of home palliative care services for adult patients with advanced illness and their family caregivers on patients' odds of dying at home; 2. to examine the clinical effectiveness of home palliative care services on other outcomes for patients and their caregivers such as symptom control, quality of life, caregiver distress and satisfaction with care; 3. to compare the resource use and costs associated with these services; 4. to critically appraise and summarise the current evidence on cost-effectiveness. Search methods We searched 12 electronic databases up to November 2012. We checked the reference lists of all included studies, 49 relevant systematic reviews, four key textbooks and recent conference abstracts. We contacted 17 experts and researchers for unpublished data. Selection criteria We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs), controlled clinical trials (CCTs), controlled before and after studies (CBAs) and interrupted time series (ITSs) evaluating the impact of home palliative care services on outcomes for adults with advanced illness or their family caregivers, or both. Data collection and analysis One review author assessed the identified titles and abstracts. Two independent reviewers performed assessment of all potentially relevant studies, data extraction and assessment of methodological quality. We carried out meta-analysis where appropriate and calculated numbers needed to treat to benefit (NNTBs) for the primary outcome (death at home). Main results We identified 23 studies (16 RCTs, 6 of high quality), including 37,561 participants and 4042 family caregivers, largely with advanced cancer but also congestive heart failure (CHF), chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), HIV/AIDS and multiple sclerosis (MS), among other conditions. Meta-analysis showed increased odds of dying at home (odds ratio (OR) 2.21, 95% CI 1.31 to 3.71; Z = 2.98, P value = 0.003; Chi2 = 20.57, degrees of freedom (df) = 6, P value = 0.002; I2 = 71%; NNTB 5, 95% CI 3 to 14 (seven trials with 1222 participants, three of high quality)). In addition, narrative synthesis showed evidence of small but statistically significant beneficial effects of home palliative care services compared to usual care on reducing symptom burden for patients (three trials, two of high quality, and one CBA with 2107 participants) and of no effect on caregiver grief (three RCTs, two of high quality, and one CBA with 2113 caregivers). Evidence on cost-effectiveness (six studies) is inconclusive. Authors' conclusions The results provide clear and reliable evidence that home palliative care increases the chance of dying at home and reduces symptom burden in particular for patients with cancer, without impacting on caregiver grief. This justifies providing home palliative care for patients who wish to die at home. More work is needed to study cost-effectiveness especially for people with non-malignant conditions, assessing place of death and appropriate outcomes that are sensitive to change and valid in these populations, and to compare different models of home palliative care, in powered studies. PLAIN LANGUAGE SUMMARY Effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of home-based palliative care services for adults with advanced illness and their caregivers When faced with the prospect of dying with an advanced illness, the majority of people prefer to die at home, yet in many countries around the world they are most likely to die in hospital. We reviewed all known studies that evaluated home palliative care services, i.e. experienced home care teams of health professionals specialised in the control of a wide range of problems associated with advanced illness – physical, psychological, social, spiritual. We wanted to see how much of a difference these services make to people's chances of dying at home, but also to other important aspects for patients towards the end of life, such as symptoms (e.g. pain) and family distress. We also compared the impact on the costs with care. On the basis of 23 studies including 37,561 patients and 4042 family caregivers, we found that when someone with an advanced illness gets home palliative care, their chances of dying at home more than double. Home palliative care services also help reduce the symptom burden people may experience as a result of advanced illness, without increasing grief for family caregivers after the patient dies. In these circumstances, patients who wish to die at home should be offered home palliative care. There is still scope to improve home palliative care services and increase the benefits for patients and families without raising costs.
Cancer end-of-life care (EoLC) policies assume people want to die at home. We aimed to examine variations in preferences for place of death cross-nationally. A telephone survey of a random sample of individuals aged ≥16 in England, Flanders, Germany, Italy, the Netherlands, Portugal and Spain. We determined where people would prefer to die if they had a serious illness such as advanced cancer, facilitating circumstances, personal values and experiences of illness, death and dying. Of 9344 participants, between 51% (95% CI: 48% to 54%) in Portugal and 84% (95% CI: 82% to 86%) in the Netherlands would prefer to die at home. Cross-national analysis found there to be an influence of circumstances and values but not of experiences of illness, death and dying. Four factors were associated with a preference for home death in more than one country: younger age up to 70+ (Germany, the Netherlands, Portugal, Spain), increased importance of dying in the preferred place (England, Germany, Portugal, Spain), prioritizing keeping a positive attitude (Germany, Spain) and wanting to involve family in decisions if incapable (Flanders, Portugal). At least two-thirds of people prefer a home death in all but one country studied. The strong association with personal values suggests keeping home care at the heart of cancer EoLC.
This paper aims to provide an overview of the use and assessment of qualitative research methods in the health sciences. Qualitative research can be defined as the study of the nature of phenomena and is especially appropriate for answering questions of why something is (not) observed, assessing complex multi-component interventions, and focussing on intervention improvement. The most common methods of data collection are document study, (non-) participant observations, semi-structured interviews and focus groups. For data analysis, field-notes and audio-recordings are transcribed into protocols and transcripts, and coded using qualitative data management software. Criteria such as checklists, reflexivity, sampling strategies, piloting, co-coding, member-checking and stakeholder involvement can be used to enhance and assess the quality of the research conducted. Using qualitative in addition to quantitative designs will equip us with better tools to address a greater range of research problems, and to fill in blind spots in current neurological research and practice.
Role: ConceptualizationRole: Data curationRole: Formal analysisRole: InvestigationRole:
MethodologyRole: Project administrationRole: VisualizationRole: Writing original draftRole:
Writing review editing
Journal
Journal ID (nlm-ta): Palliat Care Soc Pract
Journal ID (iso-abbrev): Palliat Care Soc Pract
Journal ID (publisher-id): PCR
Journal ID (hwp): sppcr
Title:
Palliative Care and Social Practice
Publisher:
SAGE Publications
(Sage UK: London, England
)
ISSN
(Electronic):
2632-3524
Publication date
(Electronic):
14
September
2022
Publication date Collection: 2022
Volume: 16
Electronic Location Identifier: 26323524221122346
Affiliations
[1-26323524221122346]Palliative Care Unit, Hospital da Luz-Lisboa,
Lisbon University Medical School, Catolica University Medical School, Av.Lusíada
100, Lisboa 1500-650, Portugal
This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons
Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 License (
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/) which
permits non-commercial use, reproduction and distribution of the work
without further permission provided the original work is attributed as
specified on the SAGE and Open Access pages (
https://us.sagepub.com/en-us/nam/open-access-at-sage).
scite shows how a scientific paper has been cited by providing the context of the citation, a classification describing whether it supports, mentions, or contrasts the cited claim, and a label indicating in which section the citation was made.