Impact of a hospice rapid response service on preferred place of death, and costs

Background: Many people with a terminal illness would prefer to die at home. A new palliative rapid response service (RRS) provided by a large hospice provider in South East England was evaluated (2010) to provide evidence of impact on achieving preferred place of death and costs. The RRS was delivered by a team of trained health care assistants and available 24/7. The purpose of this study was to (i) compare the characteristics of RRS users and non-users, (ii) explore differences in the proportions of users and non-users dying in the place of their choice, (iii) monitor the whole system service utilisation of users and non-users, and compare costs. Methods: All hospice patients who died with a preferred place of death recorded during an 18 month period were included. Data (demographic, preferences for place of death) were obtained from hospice records. Dying in preferred place was modelled using stepwise logistic regression analysis. Service use data (period between referral to hospice and death) were obtained from general practitioners, community providers, hospitals, social services, hospice, and costs calculated using validated national tariffs. Results: Of 688 patients referred to the hospice when the RRS was operational, 247 (35.9 %) used it. Higher proportions of RRS users than non-users lived in their own homes with a co-resident carer (40.3 % vs. 23.7 %); more non-users lived alone or in residential care (58.8 % vs. 76.3 %). Chances of dying in the preferred place were enhanced 2.1 times by being a RRS user, compared to a non-user, and 1.5 times by having a co-resident carer, compared to living at home alone or in a care home. Total service costs did not differ between users and non-users, except when referred to hospice very close to death (users had higher costs). Conclusions: Use of the RRS was associated with increased likelihood of dying in the preferred place. The RRS is cost neutral

Review of patients' experiences with fungating wounds and associated quality of life

Objective:To investigate the evidence exploring the experiences of patients with fungating wounds and associated quality of life, and to subsequently provide recommendations to how these implications may be addressed in practice.Method:Using a systematic approach, a comprehensive literature search was conducted to investigate the most appropriate and relevant evidence regarding the experiences of patients with fungating wounds.Results:Studies unveiled the enormity of the unrelenting, unique and devastating consequences that these wounds have on an individual's life and that every domain of their life is negatively affected.Conclusion:These findings must galvanise nurses to become aware of the extent of the devastation experienced and aspects of life affected by these wounds. The issues raised have multifaceted and challenging implications for practice; however, all aspects need to be addressed and satisfied in an attempt to improve the quality of life of individuals with fungating wounds.Declaration of interest:There were no external sources of funding for this study. The authors have no conflicts of interest to declare

A qualitative meta‐synthesis investigating the experiences of the patient’s family when treatment is withdrawn in the intensive care unit

Aim To synthesize qualitative studies of patients’ families’ experiences and perceptions of end-of-life care in the intensive care unit when life-sustaining treatments are withdrawn. Design Qualitative meta-synthesis. Data sources Comprehensive search of 18 electronic databases for qualitative studies published between January 2005 - February 2019. Review Method Meta-aggregation. Results Thirteen studies met the inclusion criteria. A conceptual ‘Model of Preparedness’ was developed reflecting the elements of end-of-life care most valued by families: ‘End-of-life communication’; ‘Valued attributes of patient care’; ‘Preparing the family’; ‘Supporting the family’; and ‘Bereavement care’. Conclusion A family-centred approach to end-of-life care that acknowledges the values and preferences of families in the intensive care unit is important. Families have unmet needs related to communication, support, and bereavement care. Effective communication and support are central to preparedness and if these care components are in place, families can be better equipped to manage the death, their sadness, loss, and grief. The findings suggest that health professionals may benefit from specialist end-of-life care education to support families and guide the establishment of preparedness. Impact Understanding the role and characteristics of preparedness during end-of-life care will inform future practice in the intensive care unit and may improve family member satisfaction with care and recovery from loss. Nurses are optimally positioned to address the perceived shortfalls in end-of-life care. These findings have implications for health education, policies, and standards for end-of-life care in the intensive care unit

End-of-life care decisions for haemodialysis patients - ‘We only tend to have that discussion with them when they start deteriorating’

Background Haemodialysis patients receive very little involvement in their end-of-life care decisions. Issues relating to death and dying are commonly avoided until late in their illness. This study aimed to explore the experiences and perceptions of doctors and nurses in nephrology for involving haemodialysis patients in end-of-life care decisions. Methods A semi-structured qualitative interview study with 15 doctors and five nurses and thematic analysis of their accounts was conducted. The setting was a large teaching hospital in Wales, UK. Results Prognosis is not routinely discussed with patients, in part due to a difficulty in estimation and the belief that patients do not want or need this information. Advance care planning is rarely carried out, and end-of-life care discussions are seldom initiated prior to patient deterioration. There is variability in end-of-life practices amongst nephrologists; some patients are felt to be withdrawn from dialysis too late. Furthermore, the possibility and implications of withdrawal are not commonly discussed with well patients. Critical barriers hindering better end-of-life care involvement for these patients are outlined. Conclusions The study provides insights into the complexity of end-of-life conversations and the barriers to achieving better end-of-life communication practices. The results identify opportunities for improving the lives and deaths of haemodialysis patients