Home videophones improve direct observation in Tuberculosis treatment: a mixed methods evaluation

BACKGROUND: The use of direct observation to monitor tuberculosis treatment is controversial: cost, practical difficulties, and lack of patient acceptability limit effectiveness. Telehealth is a promising alternative delivery method for improving implementation. This study aimed to evaluate the clinical and cost-effectiveness of a telehealth service delivering direct observation, compared to an in-person drive-around service. METHODOLOGY/PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: The study was conducted within a community nursing service in South Australia. Telehealth patients received daily video calls at home on a desktop videophone provided by the nursing call center. A retrospective cohort study assessed the effectiveness of the telehealth and traditional forms of observation, defined by the proportion of missed observations recorded in case notes. This data was inputted to a model, estimating the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of telehealth. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with current patients, community nursing and Chest Clinic staff, concerning service acceptability, usability and sustainability. The percentage of missed observations for the telehealth service was 12.1 (n = 58), compared to 31.1 for the in-person service (n = 70). Most of the difference of 18.9% (95% CI: 12.2 – 25.4) was due to fewer pre-arranged absences. The economic analysis calculated the ICER to be AUD$1.32 (95$0.51 – $2.26) per extra day of successful observation. The video service used less staff time, and became dominant if implemented on a larger scale and/or with decreased technology costs. Qualitative analysis found enabling factors of flexible timing, high patient acceptance, staff efficiency, and Chest Clinic support. Substantial technical problems were manageable, and improved liaison between the nursing service and Chest Clinic was an unexpected side-benefit. CONCLUSIONS/SIGNIFICANCE: Home video observation is a patient-centered, resource efficient way of delivering direct observation for TB, and is cost-effective when compared with a drive-around service. Future research is recommended to determine applicability and effectiveness in other settings.Victoria A. Wade, Jonathan Karnon, Jaklin A. Eliott and Janet E. Hille

Hope and hoping in the talk of dying cancer patients

Hope is the subject of increasing research and discussion within the healthcare literature. However, although deemed of vital import to patient welfare, there is little examination of how hope features within patients' speech. This qualitative study presents the discursive properties of hope as it emerged unprompted during semi-structured interviews with 28 patients in the final phase of terminal cancer recruited from the oncology clinic of the Royal Adelaide Hospital, Australia. In the context of discussions about decision-making at the end of a terminal illness, when used as a noun, hope invariably referenced the medical domain--focussing either on the objective probability of medical cure (typically taking the negative form "there is no hope"), or the subjective possession of the patient, needed to fight their disease. Positioning the patient as relatively powerless and subject to external forces, this hope was most commonly associated with absolute solutions, and life-and-death stakes. Hope as a verb emphasised the patient's active engagement in life, identifying what was good and positive for them. It was used to assign responsibility to others, to indicate and establish solidarity or agreement between the speaker and others, effectively strengthening interpersonal ties between individuals. Through hoping, patients established connection with others and with the future. In the context of interactions between patients and clinical staff, we conclude that the use of hope-as-a-verb may have benefits, enabling the patient--even when dying--to focus on the positive, to connect to others, and to continue to engage with life.Australia Hope Discourse analysis Bioethics Clinical interaction Cancer

Dying cancer patients talk about euthanasia

Within developed nations, there is increasing public debate about and apparent endorsement of the appropriateness of euthanasia as an autonomous choice to die in the face of intolerable suffering. Surveys report socio-demographic differences in rates of acceptance of euthanasia, but there is little in-depth analysis of how euthanasia is understood and positioned within the social and moral lives of individuals, particularly those who might be considered suitable candidates--for example, terminally-ill cancer patients. During discussions with 28 such patients in Australia regarding medical decisions at the end of life, euthanasia was raised by 13 patients, with the others specifically asked about it. Twenty-four patients spoke positively of euthanasia, 19 of these voicing some concerns. None identified euthanasia as a currently favoured option. Four were completely against it. Endorsement for euthanasia was in the context of a hypothetical future or for a hypothetical other person, or temporally associated with acute pain. Arguments supporting euthanasia framed the issue as a matter of freedom of choice, as preserving dignity in death, and as curbing intolerable pain and suffering, both of the patient and of those around them. A common analogy featured was that of euthanising a dog. These arguments were typically presented as self-evident justification for euthanasia, construed as an appropriate choice to die, with opposers positioned as morally inferior or ignorant. The difficulties of ensuring 'choice' and the moral connotations of 'choosing to die,' however, worked to problematise the appropriateness of euthanising specific individuals. We recommend further empirical investigation of the moral and social meanings associated with euthanasia.Australia Euthanasia Discourse Cancer Patients

Clinician acceptance is the key factor for sustainable telehealth services

Telehealth, the delivery of health care services at a distance using information and communications technology, has been slow to be adopted and difficult to sustain. Researchers developing theories concerning the introduction of complex change into health care usually take a multifactorial approach; we intentionally sought a single point of intervention that would have maximum impact on implementation. We conducted a qualitative interview study of 36 Australian telehealth services, sampled for maximum variation, and used grounded theory methods to develop a model from which we chose the most important factor affecting the success of telehealth. We propose that clinician acceptance explains much of the variation in the uptake, expansion, and sustainability of Australian telehealth services, and that clinician acceptance could, in most circumstances, overcome low demand, technology problems, workforce pressure, and lack of resourcing. We conclude that our model offers practical advice to those seeking to implement change with limited resources

Videophone service uptake model.

<p>Videophone service uptake model.</p

Economic model input parameter values and sources.

*<p>Currency conversion using purchasing power parity $AUD1 = £UK0.42 <a href="http://www.plosone.org/article/info:doi/10.1371/journal.pone.0050155#pone.0050155-Organisation1" target="_blank">[47]</a>.</p

Uptake of direct observation by year and method.

*<p>to Nov 15 **pilot study patients.</p

Service outcome comparisons.

<p>BM = before matching AM = after matching and bootstrapping.</p>*<p>Comparisons after removing 13 videophone patients who had not yet completed treatment from the sample.</p

Patient characteristics.

<p>Patient characteristics.</p

One-way deterministic sensitivity analyses.

<p>One-way deterministic sensitivity analyses.</p