Continuity, Coordination, and Transitions of Care for Patients with Serious and Advanced Illness: A Systematic Review of Interventions

Objectives: Continuity, coordination, and transitions of care are key to high-quality medical care for patients with serious and advanced illness. We conducted a systematic review to evaluate the impact of interventions targeting these areas in this population. Methods: We searched PubMed, CINAHL, PsycINFO, Cochrane, and DARE from 2000 through 2011. We included prospective controlled studies targeting continuity, coordination, and transitions for patients with advanced illness that reported patient centered outcomes. Of 13,014 citations, 23 studies met inclusion criteria. Two investigators extracted and checked data on population, interventions, methods, outcomes, and methodological quality. Results: Four of the six studies evaluating patient satisfaction (67%) and four of the six studies evaluating caregiver satisfaction (67%) showed statistically significant improvements in these outcomes in the intervention compared to the control group. Only three of the nine studies (33%) measuring quality of life and five of the 16 (31%) measuring health care utilization showed improvement. Results were similar across different types of interventions. Conclusions: Many studies were limited by methodologic issues such as use of measurement tools not developed for patients with advanced disease and small sample size. Interventions and outcomes were too heterogeneous for meta-analysis. We found moderate evidence that interventions targeting continuity, coordination, and transitions in patients with advanced and serious illness improve patient and caregiver satisfaction, but low evidence for other outcomes. Further research is needed on how to target these domains for outcomes such as health care utilization.Peer Reviewedhttps://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/140114/1/jpm.2012.0317.pd

The PAMINO-project: evaluating a primary care-based educational program to improve the quality of life of palliative patients

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>The care of palliative patients challenges the health care system in both quantity and quality. Especially the role of primary care givers needs to be strengthened to provide them with the knowledge and the confidence of applying an appropriate end-of-life care to palliative patients. To improve health care services for palliative patients in primary care, interested physicians in and around Heidelberg, Germany, are enabled to participate in the community-based program 'Palliative Medical Initiative North Baden (PAMINO)' to improve their knowledge in dealing with palliative patients. The impact of this program on patients' health and quality of life remains to be evaluated.</p> <p>Methods/Design</p> <p>The evaluation of PAMINO is a non-randomized, controlled study. Out of the group of primary care physicians who took part in the PAMINO program, a sample of 45 physicians and their palliative patients will be compared to a sample of palliative patients of 45 physicians who did not take part in the program. Every four weeks for 6 months or until death, patients, physicians, and the patients' family caregivers in both groups answer questions to therapy strategies, quality of life (QLQ-C15-PAL, POS), pain (VAS), and burden for family caregivers (BSFC). The inclusion of physicians and patients in the study starts in March 2007.</p> <p>Discussion</p> <p>Although participating physicians value the increase in knowledge they receive from PAMINO, the effects on patients remain unclear. If the evaluation reveals a clear benefit for patients' quality of life, a larger-scale implementation of the program is considered. </p> <p><b>Trial registration</b>: The study was registered at ‘current controlled trials (CCT)’, registration number: ISRCTN78021852.</p

Methodological bias in cluster randomised trials

Background: Cluster randomised trials can be susceptible to a range of methodological problems. These problems are not commonly recognised by many researchers. In this paper we discuss the issues that can lead to bias in cluster trials. Methods: We used a sample of cluster randomised trials from a recent review and from a systematic review of hip protectors. We compared the mean age of participants between intervention groups in a sample of 'good' cluster trials with a sample of potentially biased trials. We also compared the effect sizes, in a funnel plot, between hip protector trials that used individual randomisation compared with those that used cluster randomisation. Results: There is a tendency for cluster trials, with evidence methodological biases, to also show an age imbalance between treatment groups. In a funnel plot we show that all cluster trials show a large positive effect of hip protectors whilst individually randomised trials show a range of positive and negative effects, suggesting that cluster trials may be producing a biased estimate of effect. Conclusion: Methodological biases in the design and execution of cluster randomised trials is frequent. Some of these biases associated with the use of cluster designs can be avoided through careful attention to the design of cluster trials. Firstly, if possible, individual allocation should be used. Secondly, if cluster allocation is required, then ideally participants should be identified before random allocation of the clusters. Third, if prior identification is not possible, then an independent recruiter should be used to recruit participants

Place of death in patients with lung cancer: a retrospective cohort study from 2004-2013

Introduction: Many patients with cancer die in an acute hospital bed, which has been frequently identified as the least preferred location, with psychological and financial implications. This study looks at place and cause of death in patients with lung cancer and identifies which factors are associated with dying in an acute hospital bed versus at home. Methods and Findings: We used the National Lung Cancer Audit linked to Hospital Episode Statistics and Office for National Statistics data to determine cause and place of death in those with lung cancer; both overall and by cancer Network. We used multivariate logistic regression to compare features of those who died in an acute hospital versus those who died at home. Results: Of 143627 patients identified 40% (57678) died in an acute hospital, 29% (41957) died at home and 17% (24108) died in a hospice. Individual factors associated with death in an acute hospital bed compared to home were male sex, increasing age, poor performance status, social deprivation and diagnosis via an emergency route. There was marked variation between cancer Networks in place of death. The proportion of patients dying in an acute hospital ranged from 28% to 48%, with variation most notable in provision of hospice care (9% versus 33%). Cause of death in the majority was lung cancer (86%), with other malignancies, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) and ischaemic heart disease (IHD) comprising 9% collectively. Conclusions: A substantial proportion of patients with lung cancer die in acute hospital beds and this is more likely with increasing age, male sex, social deprivation and in those with poor performance status. There is marked variation between Networks, suggesting a need to improve end-of-life planning in those at greatest risk, and to review the allocation of resources to provide more hospice beds, enhanced community support and ensure equal access

Preventing Bias in Cluster Randomised Trials

Bruno Giraudeau and Philippe Ravaud discuss the difficulties in preventing selection bias and applying intention-to-treat analysis in cluster randomized trials, and propose some solutions

Patterns and predictors of place of cancer death for the oldest old

BACKGROUND: Cancer patients increasingly are among older age groups, but to date little work has examined the trends in cancer among older people, particularly in relation to end of life care and death. This study describes the older population who die of cancer and the factors which may affect their place of death. METHODS: A Cross-sectional analysis of national data was performed. The study included all people aged 75 and over dying of cancer in England and Wales between 1995 and 1999. The population was divided into exclusive 5 year age cohorts, up to 100 years and over. Descriptive analysis explored demographic characteristics, cancer type and place of death. RESULTS: Between 1995 and 1999, 315,462 people aged 75 and over were registered as dying from cancer. The number who died increased each year slightly over the 5 year period (1.2%). In the 75–79 age group, 55 % were men, in those aged 100 and over this fell to 16%. On reaching their hundreds, the most common cause of death for men was malignancies of the genital organs; and for women it was breast cancer. The most frequent place of death for women in their hundreds was the care home; for men it was hospitals. Those dying from lymphatic and haematopoietic malignancies were most likely to die in hospitals, those with head and neck malignancies in hospices and breast cancer patients in a care home. CONCLUSION: The finding of rising proportions of cancer deaths in institutions with increasing age suggests a need to ensure that appropriate high quality care is available to this growing section of the population

Randomised controlled trial of a new palliative care service: Compliance, recruitment and completeness of follow-up

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Palliative care has been proposed for progressive non-cancer conditions but there have been few evaluations of service developments. We analysed recruitment, compliance and follow-up data of a fast track (or wait list control) randomised controlled trial of a new palliative care service – a design not previously used to assess palliative care.</p> <p>Methods/Design</p> <p>An innovative palliative care service (comprising a consultant in palliative medicine, a clinical nurse specialist, an administrator and a psychosocial worker) was delivered to people severely affected by multiple sclerosis (MS), and their carers, in southeast London. Our design followed the MRC Framework for the Evaluation of Complex Interventions. In phase II we conducted randomised controlled trial, of immediate referral to the service (fast-track) versus a 12-week wait (standard best practice). Main outcome measures were: compliance (the extent the trial protocol was adhered to), recruitment (target 50 patients), attrition and missing data rates; trial outcomes were Palliative Care Outcome Scale and MS Impact Scale.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>69 patients were referred, 52 entered the trial (26 randomised to each arm), 5 refused consent and 12 were excluded from the trial for other reasons, usually illness or urgent needs, achieving our target numbers. 25/26 fast track and 21/26 standard best practice patients completed the trial, resulting in 217/225 (96%) of possible interviews completed, 87% of which took place in the patient's home. Main reasons for failure to interview and/or attrition were death or illness. There were three deaths in the standard best practice group and one in the fast-track group during the trial. At baseline there were no differences between groups. Missing data for individual questionnaire items were small (median 0, mean 1–5 items out of 56+ items per interview), not associated with any patient or carer characteristics or with individual questionnaires, but were associated with interviewer.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>This is the first time a fast track (or wait list) randomised trial has been reported in palliative care. We found it achieved good recruitment and is a feasible method to evaluate palliative care services when patients are expected to live longer than 3–6 months. Home interviews are needed for a trial of this kind; interviewers need careful recruitment, training and supervision; and there should be careful separation from the clinical service of the control patients to prevent accidental contamination.</p> <p>Trial Registration</p> <p>Clinical Trials.Gov NCT00364963</p

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