Challenges in supporting lay carers of patients at the end of life: results from focus group discussions with primary healthcare providers

Background: Family caregivers (FCGs) of patients at the end of life (EoL) cared for at home receive support from professional and non-professional care providers. Healthcare providers in general practice play an important role as they coordinate care and establish contacts between the parties concerned. To identify potential intervention targets, this study deals with the challenges healthcare providers in general practice face in EoL care situations including patients, caregivers and networks. Methods: Focus group discussions with general practice teams in Germany were conducted to identify barriers to and enablers of an optimal support for family caregivers. Focus group discussions were analysed using content analysis. Results: Nineteen providers from 11 general practices took part in 4 focus group discussions. Participants identified challenges in communication with patients, caregivers and within the professional network. Communication with patients and caregivers focused on non-verbal messages, communicating at an appropriate time and perceiving patient and caregiver as a unit of care. Practice teams perceive themselves as an important part of the healthcare network, but also report difficulties in communication and cooperation with other healthcare providers. Conclusion: Healthcare providers in general practice identified relational challenges in daily primary palliative care with potential implications for EoL care. Communication and collaboration with patients, caregivers and among healthcare providers give opportunities for improving palliative care with a focus on the patient-caregiver dyad. It is insufficient to demand a (professional) support network; existing structures need to be recognized and included into the care

METACOHORTS for the study of vascular disease and its contribution to cognitive decline and neurodegeneration: an initiative of the Joint Programme for Neurodegenerative Disease Research

Dementia is a global problem and major target for health care providers. Although up to 45% of cases are primarily or partly due to cerebrovascular disease, little is known of these mechanisms or treatments because most dementia research still focuses on pure Alzheimer's disease. An improved understanding of the vascular contributions to neurodegeneration and dementia, particularly by small vessel disease, is hampered by imprecise data, including the incidence and prevalence of symptomatic and clinically “silent” cerebrovascular disease, long-term outcomes (cognitive, stroke, or functional), and risk factors. New large collaborative studies with long follow-up are expensive and time consuming, yet substantial data to advance the field are available. In an initiative funded by the Joint Programme for Neurodegenerative Disease Research, 55 international experts surveyed and assessed available data, starting with European cohorts, to promote data sharing to advance understanding of how vascular disease affects brain structure and function, optimize methods for cerebrovascular disease in neurodegeneration research, and focus future research on gaps in knowledge. Here, we summarize the results and recommendations from this initiative. We identified data from over 90 studies, including over 660,000 participants, many being additional to neurodegeneration data initiatives. The enthusiastic response means that cohorts from North America, Australasia, and the Asia Pacific Region are included, creating a truly global, collaborative, data sharing platform, linked to major national dementia initiatives. Furthermore, the revised World Health Organization International Classification of Diseases version 11 should facilitate recognition of vascular-related brain damage by creating one category for all cerebrovascular disease presentations and thus accelerate identification of targets for dementia prevention

Endarteriëctomie bij asymptomatische carotisstenose: het risico niet waard

A recent trial revealed a reduction in ischaemic infarcts after carotid endarterectomy in patients with asymptomatic carotid stenosis. However, the number needed to treat (NNT) was 22 to prevent 1 stroke in 10 years (including perioperative death as a primary outcome measurement). This is a modest effect in comparison to the trials with symptomatic patients with a 70-99% stenosis (NNT: 6). Furthermore, the number of surgical complications outweighs the benefits of surgery during the first 2 years after treatment. Finally, current medical treatment is significantly more effective than the medical treatment used in the control arm of this trial. Therefore, in our opinion, endarterectomy should not be performed routinely in asymptomatic patient

Scores on trait and state anxiety of female karateka before the commencement of shotokan karate training

BACKGROUND: Most patients with advanced cancer, debilitating COPD or chronic heart failure (CHF) live at home. General practitioners (GPs) asked for guidance in how to recognize patients in need of palliative care in a timely way and to structure anticipatory care. For that reason, we developed a training for GPs in identifying patients in need of palliative care and in structuring anticipatory palliative care planning and studied its effect on out-of-hours contacts, contacts with their own GP, hospitalizations and place of death. METHODS: We performed a cluster randomised controlled trial. GPs in the intervention group were trained in identifying patients in need of palliative care and anticipatory care planning. Next, for each identified patient, they were offered a coaching session with a specialist in palliative care to fine-tune a structured care plan. The GPs in the control group did not receive training or coaching, and were asked to provide care as usual. After one year, characteristics of patients deceased of cancer, COPD or CHF in both study groups were compared with mixed effects models for out-of-hours contacts (primary outcome), contacts with their own GP, place of death and hospitalizations in the last months of their life (secondary outcomes). As a post-hoc analysis, of identified patients (of the intervention GPs) these figures were compared to all other deceased patients, who had not been identified as in need of palliative care. RESULTS: We did not find any differences between the intervention and control group. Yet, only half of the trained GPs (28) identified patients (52), which was only 24 % of the deceased patients. Those identified patients had significantly more contacts with their own GP (B 4.5218; p <0.0006), were less often hospitalized (OR 0.485; p 0.0437) more often died at home (OR 2.126; p 0.0572) and less often died in the hospital (OR 0.380; p 0.0449). CONCLUSIONS: Although we did not find differences between the intervention and control group, we found in a post-hoc analysis that those patients that had been identified as in need of palliative care had more contacts with their GP, less hospitalizations, and more often died at home. We recommend future controlled studies that try to further increase identification of patients eligible for anticipatory palliative care. The Netherlands National Trial Register: NTR2815 date 07-04-2010

Training general practitioners contributes to the identification of palliative patients and to multidimensional care provision: secondary outcomes of an RCT

Introduction To support general practitioners (GPs) in providing early palliative care to patients with cancer, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease or heart failure, the RADboud university medical centre indicators for PAlliative Care needs tool (RADPAC) and a training programme were developed to identify such patients and to facilitate anticipatory palliative care planning. We studied whether GPs, after 1 year of training, identified more palliative patients, and provided multidimensional and multidisciplinary care more often than untrained GPs. Methods We performed a survey 1 year after GPs in the intervention group of an RCT were trained. With the help of a questionnaire, all 134 GPs were asked how many palliative patients they had identified, and whether anticipatory care was provided. We studied number of identified palliative patients, expected lifetime, contact frequency, whether multidimensional care was provided and which other disciplines were involved. Results Trained GPs identified more palliative patients than did untrained GPs (median 3 vs 2; p 0.046) and more often provided multidimensional palliative care (p 0.024). In both groups, most identified patients had cancer. Conclusions RADPAC sensitises GPs in the identification of palliative patients. Trained GPs more often provided multidimensional palliative care. Further adaptation and evaluation of the tools and training are necessary to improve early palliative care for patients with organ failure. Trial registration number NTR2815; post resultsThe study was financially supported by a grant from the Netherlands Organisation for Health Research and Development—ZonMw Foundation. Grant number 1150.0002