Implementing patient reported outcome measures (PROMs) in palliative care - users' cry for help

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Patient-reported outcome measurement (PROM) plays an increasingly important role in palliative care. A variety of measures exists and is used in clinical care, audit and research. However, little is known about professionals' views using these measures. The aim of this study is to describe the use and experiences of palliative care professionals with outcome measures.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>A web-based online survey was conducted in Europe and Africa. Professionals working in clinical care, audit and research in palliative care were invited to the survey via national palliative care associations and various databases. Invitation e-mails were sent with a link to the questionnaire.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Overall participation rate 42% (663/1592), overall completion rate 59% (392/663). The majority of respondents were female (63.4%), mean age 46 years (SD 9). 68.1% respondents from Europe and 73.3% from Africa had experiences with outcome measures in palliative care. Non-users reported time constraints, burden, lack of training and guidance as main reasons. In clinical care/audit, assessment of patients' situation, monitoring changes and evaluation of services were main reasons for use. Choice of OMs for research was influenced by validity of the instrument in palliative care and comparability with international literature. Main problems were related to patient characteristics, staff, and outcome measures. Participants expressed the need for more guidance and training in the use of PROMs.</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>Professionals need more support for the use and implementation of PROMs in clinical practice and research through training and guidance in order to improve patient care.</p

Towards person-centered quality care for children with life-limiting and life-threatening illness: self-reported symptoms, concerns and priority outcomes from a multi-country qualitative study

Abstract Background: Paediatric life-limiting and life-threatening conditionslife-limiting conditions place significant strain on children, families and health systems. Given high service use among this population, it is essential that care addresses their main symptoms and concerns. Aim: This study aimed to identify the symptoms, concerns, and other outcomes that matter to children with life-limiting conditions and their families in sub-Saharan Africa.Setting and participants: Cross-sectional qualitative study in Kenya, Namibia, South Africa and Uganda. Children/caregivers of children aged 0-17 years with life-limiting conditions were purposively sampled by age, sex, and diagnosis. Children aged 7 and above self-reported; caregiver proxies reported for children below 7 and those aged 7 and above unable to self-report.Results: 120 interviews were conducted with children with life-limiting conditions (n=61 age range 7-17 years), and where self-report was not possible caregivers (n=59) of children (age range 0-17). Conditions included advanced HIV (22%), cancer (19%), heart disease (16%) endocrine, blood and immune disorders (13%), neurological conditions (12%), sickle cell anaemia (10%) and renal disease (8%). Outcomes identified included: physical concerns – pain and symptom distress; psycho-social concerns – family and social relationships, ability to engage with age-appropriate activities (e.g., play, school attendance); existential concerns – worry about death, and loss of ambitions,health care quality– child- and adolescent-friendly services. Priority psycho-social concerns and health service factors varied by age.Conclusion: This study bridges an important knowledge gap regarding symptoms, concerns and outcomes that matter to children living with life-limiting conditions and their families and informs service development and evaluation

Promotion of access to essential medicines for Non-Communicable Diseases: Practical implications of the UN Political Declaration

Access to medicines and vaccines to prevent and treat non-communicable diseases (NCDs) is unacceptably low worldwide. In the 2011 UN political declaration on the prevention and control of NCDs, heads of government made several commitments related to access to essential medicines, technologies, and vaccines for such diseases. 30 years of experience with policies for essential medicines and 10 years of scaling up of HIV treatment have provided the knowledge needed to address barriers to long-term effective treatment and prevention of NCDs. More medicines can be acquired within existing budgets with efficient selection, procurement, and use of generic medicines. Furthermore, low-income and middle-income countries need to increase mobilisation of domestic resources to cater for the many patients with NCDs who do not have access to treatment. Existing initiatives for HIV treatment offer useful lessons that can enhance access to pharmaceutical management of NCDs and improve adherence to long-term treatment of chronic illness; policy makers should also address unacceptable inequities in access to controlled opioid analgesics. In addition to off-patent medicines, governments can promote access to new and future on-patent medicinal products through coherent and equitable health and trade policies, particularly those for intellectual property. Frequent conflicts of interest need to be identified and managed, and indicators and targets for access to NCD medicines should be used to monitor progress. Only with these approaches can a difference be made to the lives of hundreds of millions of current and future patients with NCDs

Public preferences and priorities for end-of-life care in Kenya:a population-based street survey

BACKGROUND: End-of-life care needs are great in Africa due to the burden of disease. This study aimed to explore public preferences and priorities for end-of-life care in Nairobi, Kenya. METHODS: Population-based street survey of Kenyans aged ≥18; researchers approached every 10th person, alternating men and women. Structured interviews investigated quality vs. quantity of life, care priorities, preferences for information, decision-making, place of death (most and least favourite) and focus of care in a hypothetical scenario of serious illness with <1 year to live. Descriptive analysis examined variations. RESULTS: 201 individuals were interviewed (100 women) representing 17 tribes (n = 90 44.8%, Kikuyu). 56.7% (n = 114) said they would always like to be told if they had limited time left. The majority (n = 121, 61.4%) preferred quality of life over quantity i.e. extending life (n = 47, 23.9%). Keeping a positive attitude and ensuring relatives/friends were not worried were prioritised above having pain/discomfort relieved. The three most concerning problems were pain (45.8%), family burden (34.8%) and personal psychological distress (29.8%). Home was both the most (51.1% n = 98) and least (23.7% n = 44) preferred place of death. CONCLUSION: This first population-based survey on preferences and priorities for end-of-life care in Africa revealed that psycho-social domains were of greatest importance to the public, but also identified variations that require further exploration. If citizens’ preferences and priorities are to be met, the development of end-of-life care services to deliver preferences in Kenya should ensure an holistic model of palliative care responsive to individual preferences across care settings including at home

Provision of Palliative Care in Low- and Middle-Income Countries: Overcoming Obstacles for Effective Treatment Delivery

Despite being declared a basic human right, access to adult and pediatric palliative care for millions of individuals in need in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) continues to be limited or absent. The requirement to make palliative care available to patients with cancer is increasingly urgent because global cancer case prevalence is anticipated to double over the next two decades. Fifty percent of these cancers are expected to occur in LMICs, where mortality figures are disproportionately greater as a result of late detection of disease and insufficient access to appropriate treatment options. Notable initiatives in many LMICs have greatly improved access to palliative care. These can serve as development models for service scale-up in these regions, based on rigorous evaluation in the context of specific health systems. However, a multipronged public health approach is needed to fulfill the humane and ethical obligation to make palliative care universally available. This includes health policy that supports the integration of palliative care and investment in systems of health care delivery; changes in legislation and regulation that inappropriately restrict access to opioid medications for individuals with life-limiting illnesses; education and training of health professionals; development of a methodologically rigorous data and research base specific to LMICs that encompasses health systems and clinical care; and shifts in societal and health professional attitudes to palliative and end-of-life care. International partnerships are valuable to achieve these goals, particularly in education and research, but leadership and health systems stewardship within LMICs are critical factors that will drive and implement change

Palliative care as a human right

With the enormous disparities in the provision of palliative care globally and the significant benefits that flow from its provision, the palliative care community began articulating a profound but challenging idea—that palliative care should be seen as a human right. There have been many such statements, from both the perspective of pain management and palliative care. This chapter explores how this proposition can be justified, what this proposition means in reality, and how using these concepts can be tools of advocacy and change.</p