Telephone advice lines for adults with advanced illness and their family carers: a qualitative analysis and novel practical framework

BackgroundTelephone advice lines have been recommended internationally to support around-the-clock care for people living at home with advanced illness. While they undoubtedly support care, there is little evidence about what elements are needed for success. A national picture is needed to understand, improve and standardise service delivery/care. Aim To explore telephone advice lines for people living at home with advanced illness across the four UK nations, and to construct a practical framework to improve services.DesignA cross-national evaluation of telephone advice lines using structured qualitative interviews. A patient and public involvement workshop was conducted to refine the framework.Setting/participantsProfessionals with responsibilities for how palliative care services are delivered and/or funded at a local or regional level, were purposively sampled. ResultsSeventy-one interviews were conducted, covering 60 geographical areas. Five themes were identified. Availability: Ten advice line models were described. Variation led to confusion about who to call and when. Accessibility, awareness and promotion: It was assumed that patients/carers know who to call out-of-hours, but often they did not. Practicalities: Call handlers skills/expertise varied, which influenced how calls were managed. Possible responses ranged from signposting to organising home visits. Integration/continuity of care: Integration between care providers was limited by electronic medical records access/information sharing. Service structure/commissioning: Sustained funding was often an issue for charitably funded organisations.ConclusionsOur novel evidence-based practical framework could be transformative for service design/delivery, as it presents key considerations relating to the various elements of advice lines that may impact on the patient/carer experience

Telephone advice lines for adults with advanced illness and their family carers: a qualitative analysis and novel practical framework

Peer reviewed: TrueBackground:: Telephone advice lines have been recommended internationally to support around-the-clock care for people living at home with advanced illness. While they undoubtedly support care, there is little evidence about what elements are needed for success. A national picture is needed to understand, improve and standardise service delivery/care. Aim:: To explore telephone advice lines for people living at home with advanced illness across the four UK nations, and to construct a practical framework to improve services. Design:: A cross-national evaluation of telephone advice lines using structured qualitative interviews. A patient and public involvement workshop was conducted to refine the framework. Setting/participants:: Professionals with responsibilities for how palliative care services are delivered and/or funded at a local or regional level, were purposively sampled. Results:: Seventy-one interviews were conducted, covering 60 geographical areas. Five themes were identified. Availability: Ten advice line models were described. Variation led to confusion about who to call and when. Accessibility, awareness and promotion: It was assumed that patients/carers know who to call out-of-hours, but often they did not. Practicalities: Call handlers skills/expertise varied, which influenced how calls were managed. Possible responses ranged from signposting to organising home visits. Integration/continuity of care: Integration between care providers was limited by electronic medical records access/information sharing. Service structure/commissioning: Sustained funding was often an issue for charitably funded organisations. Conclusions:: Our novel evidence-based practical framework could be transformative for service design/delivery, as it presents key considerations relating to the various elements of advice lines that may impact on the patient/carer experience

Telephone advice lines for adults with advanced illness and their family carers: a qualitative analysis and novel practical framework.

BACKGROUND: Telephone advice lines have been recommended internationally to support around-the-clock care for people living at home with advanced illness. While they undoubtedly support care, there is little evidence about what elements are needed for success. A national picture is needed to understand, improve and standardise service delivery/care. AIM: To explore telephone advice lines for people living at home with advanced illness across the four UK nations, and to construct a practical framework to improve services. DESIGN: A cross-national evaluation of telephone advice lines using structured qualitative interviews. A patient and public involvement workshop was conducted to refine the framework. SETTING/PARTICIPANTS: Professionals with responsibilities for how palliative care services are delivered and/or funded at a local or regional level, were purposively sampled. RESULTS: Seventy-one interviews were conducted, covering 60 geographical areas. Five themes were identified. Availability: Ten advice line models were described. Variation led to confusion about who to call and when. Accessibility, awareness and promotion: It was assumed that patients/carers know who to call out-of-hours, but often they did not. Practicalities: Call handlers skills/expertise varied, which influenced how calls were managed. Possible responses ranged from signposting to organising home visits. Integration/continuity of care: Integration between care providers was limited by electronic medical records access/information sharing. Service structure/commissioning: Sustained funding was often an issue for charitably funded organisations. CONCLUSIONS: Our novel evidence-based practical framework could be transformative for service design/delivery, as it presents key considerations relating to the various elements of advice lines that may impact on the patient/carer experience

sj-pdf-1-pmj-10.1177_02692163241242329 – Supplemental material for Telephone advice lines for adults with advanced illness and their family carers: a qualitative analysis and novel practical framework

Supplemental material, sj-pdf-1-pmj-10.1177_02692163241242329 for Telephone advice lines for adults with advanced illness and their family carers: a qualitative analysis and novel practical framework by Sophie Pask, Allen Omoruyi, Ahmed Mohamed, Rachel L Chambers, Phillippa G McFarlane, Therese Johansson, Rashmi Kumar, Andy Woodhead, Ikumi Okamoto, Stephen Barclay, Irene J Higginson, Katherine E Sleeman and Fliss EM Murtagh in Palliative Medicine</p

Measurements of the Total and Differential Higgs Boson Production Cross Sections Combining the H??????? and H???ZZ*???4??? Decay Channels at s\sqrt{s}=8??????TeV with the ATLAS Detector

Measurements of the total and differential cross sections of Higgs boson production are performed using 20.3~fb$^{-1}$ of $pp$ collisions produced by the Large Hadron Collider at a center-of-mass energy of $\sqrt{s} = 8$ TeV and recorded by the ATLAS detector. Cross sections are obtained from measured $H \rightarrow \gamma \gamma$ and $H \rightarrow ZZ ^{*}\rightarrow 4\ell$ event yields, which are combined accounting for detector efficiencies, fiducial acceptances and branching fractions. Differential cross sections are reported as a function of Higgs boson transverse momentum, Higgs boson rapidity, number of jets in the event, and transverse momentum of the leading jet. The total production cross section is determined to be $\sigma_{pp \to H} = 33.0 \pm 5.3 \, ({\rm stat}) \pm 1.6 \, ({\rm sys}) \mathrm{pb}$. The measurements are compared to state-of-the-art predictions.Measurements of the total and differential cross sections of Higgs boson production are performed using 20.3  fb-1 of pp collisions produced by the Large Hadron Collider at a center-of-mass energy of s=8  TeV and recorded by the ATLAS detector. Cross sections are obtained from measured H→γγ and H→ZZ*→4ℓ event yields, which are combined accounting for detector efficiencies, fiducial acceptances, and branching fractions. Differential cross sections are reported as a function of Higgs boson transverse momentum, Higgs boson rapidity, number of jets in the event, and transverse momentum of the leading jet. The total production cross section is determined to be σpp→H=33.0±5.3 (stat)±1.6 (syst)  pb. The measurements are compared to state-of-the-art predictions.Measurements of the total and differential cross sections of Higgs boson production are performed using 20.3 fb$^{-1}$ of $pp$ collisions produced by the Large Hadron Collider at a center-of-mass energy of $\sqrt{s} = 8$ TeV and recorded by the ATLAS detector. Cross sections are obtained from measured $H \rightarrow \gamma \gamma$ and $H \rightarrow ZZ ^{*}\rightarrow 4\ell$ event yields, which are combined accounting for detector efficiencies, fiducial acceptances and branching fractions. Differential cross sections are reported as a function of Higgs boson transverse momentum, Higgs boson rapidity, number of jets in the event, and transverse momentum of the leading jet. The total production cross section is determined to be $\sigma_{pp \to H} = 33.0 \pm 5.3 \, ({\rm stat}) \pm 1.6 \, ({\rm sys}) \mathrm{pb}$. The measurements are compared to state-of-the-art predictions

Search for Higgs and ZZ Boson Decays to J/ψγJ/\psi\gamma and Υ(nS)γ\Upsilon(nS)\gamma with the ATLAS Detector

A search for the decays of the Higgs and $Z$ bosons to $J/\psi\gamma$ and $\Upsilon(nS)\gamma$ ($n=1,2,3$) is performed with $pp$ collision data samples corresponding to integrated luminosities of up to $20.3\mathrm{fb}^{-1}$ collected at $\sqrt{s}=8\mathrm{TeV}$ with the ATLAS detector at the CERN Large Hadron Collider. No significant excess of events is observed above expected backgrounds and 95% CL upper limits are placed on the branching fractions. In the $J/\psi\gamma$ final state the limits are $1.5\times10^{-3}$ and $2.6\times10^{-6}$ for the Higgs and $Z$ bosons, respectively, while in the $\Upsilon(1S,2S,3S)\,\gamma$ final states the limits are $(1.3,1.9,1.3)\times10^{-3}$ and $(3.4,6.5,5.4)\times10^{-6}$, respectively