65 research outputs found
Over a third of palliative medicine physicians meet burnout criteria: Results from a survey study during the COVID-19 pandemic
Background: Palliative medicine physicians may be at higher risk of burnout due to increased stressors and compromised resilience during the COVID-19 pandemic. Burnout prevalence and factors influencing this among UK and Irish palliative medicine physicians is unknown. Aim: To determine the prevalence of burnout and the degree of resilience among UK and Irish palliative medicine physicians during the COVID-19 pandemic, and associated factors. Design: Online survey using validated assessment scales assessed burnout and resilience: The Maslach Burnout Inventory Human Services Survey for Medical Personnel [MBI-HSS (MP)] and the Connor-Davidson Resilience Scale (CD-RISC). Additional tools assessed depressive symptoms, alcohol use, and quality of life. Setting/participants: Association of Palliative Medicine of UK and Ireland members actively practising in hospital, hospice or community settings. Results: There were 544 respondents from the 815 eligible participants (66.8%), 462 provided complete MBI-HSS (MP) data and were analysed. Of those 181/462 (39.2%) met burnout criteria, based on high emotional exhaustion or depersonalisation subscales of the MBI-HSS (MP). A reduced odds of burnout was observed among physicians who worked ⩽20 h/week (vs 31–40 h/week, adjusted odds ratio (aOR) 0.03, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.002–0.56) and who had a greater perceived level of clinical support (aOR 0.70, 95% CI 0.62–0.80). Physicians with higher levels of depressive symptoms had higher odds of burnout (aOR 18.32, 95% CI 6.75–49.73). Resilience, mean (SD) CD-RISC score, was lower in physicians who met burnout criteria compared to those who did not (62.6 (11.1) vs 70.0 (11.3); p < 0.001). Conclusions: Over one-third of palliative medicine physicians meet burnout criteria. The provision of enhanced organisational and colleague support is paramount in both the current and future pandemics
Delirium management by palliative medicine specialists: a survey from the association for palliative medicine of Great Britain and Ireland
Objectives Delirium is common in palliative care settings. Management includes detection, treatment of cause(s), non-pharmacological interventions and family support; strategies which are supported with varying levels of evidence. Emerging evidence suggests that antipsychotic use should be minimised in managing mild to moderate severity delirium, but the integration of this evidence into clinical practice is unknown.Methods A 21-question online anonymous survey was emailed to Association for Palliative Medicine members in current clinical practice (n=859), asking about delirium assessment, management and research priorities.Results Response rate was 39%: 70% of respondents were palliative medicine consultants. Delirium guidelines were used by some: 42% used local guidelines but 38% used none. On inpatient admission, 59% never use a delirium screening tool. Respondents would use non-pharmacological interventions to manage delirium, either alone (39%) or with an antipsychotic (58%). Most respondents (91%) would prescribe an antipsychotic and 6% a benzodiazepine, for distressing hallucinations unresponsive to non-pharmacological measures. Inpatient (57%) and community teams (60%) do not formally support family carers. Research priorities were delirium prevention, management and prediction of reversibility.Conclusion This survey of UK and Irish Palliative Medicine specialists shows that delirium screening at inpatient admission is suboptimal. Most specialists continue to use antipsychotics in combination with non-pharmacological interventions to manage delirium. More support for family carers should be routinely provided by clinical teams. Further rigorously designed clinical trials are urgently needed in view of management variability, emerging evidence and perceived priorities for research
Stakeholder perspectives of a pilot multicomponent delirium prevention intervention for adult patients with advanced cancer in palliative care units: A behaviour change theory-based qualitative study
Background: Theory-based and qualitative evaluations in pilot trials of complex clinical interventions help to understand quantitative results, as well as inform the feasibility and design of subsequent effectiveness and implementation trials.
Aim: To explore patient, family, clinician and volunteer (‘stakeholder’) perspectives of the feasibility and acceptability of a multicomponent non-pharmacological delirium prevention intervention for adult patients with advanced cancer in four Australian palliative care units that participated in a phase II trial, the ‘PRESERVE pilot study’.
Design: A trial-embedded qualitative study via semi-structured interviews and directed content analysis using Michie’s Behaviour Change Wheel and the Theoretical Domains Framework.
Setting/participants: Thirty-nine people involved in the trial: nurses (n = 17), physicians (n = 6), patients (n = 6), family caregivers (n = 4), physiotherapists (n = 3), a social worker, a pastoral care worker and a volunteer.
Results: Participants’ perspectives aligned with the ‘capability’, ‘opportunity’ and ‘motivation’ domains of the applied frameworks. Of seven themes, three were around the alignment of the delirium prevention intervention with palliative care (intervention was considered routine care; intervention aligned with the compassionate and collaborative culture of palliative care; and differing views of palliative care priorities influenced perspectives of the intervention) and four were about study processes more directly related to adherence to the intervention (shared knowledge increased engagement with the intervention; impact of the intervention checklist on attention, delivery and documentation of the delirium prevention strategies; clinical roles and responsibilities; and addressing environmental barriers to delirium prevention).
Conclusion: This theory-informed qualitative study identified multiple influences on the delivery and documentation of a pilot multicomponent non-pharmacological delirium prevention intervention in four palliative care units. Findings inform future definitive studies of delirium prevention in palliative care
Recommended from our members
Expression of the receptor tyrosine kinase ephb2 on dendritic cells is modulated by toll-like receptor ligation but is not required for t cell activation
The Eph receptor tyrosine kinases interact with their ephrin ligands on adjacent cells to facilitate contact-dependent cell communication. Ephrin B ligands are expressed on T cells and have been suggested to act as co-stimulatory molecules during T cell activation. There are no detailed reports of the expression and modulation of EphB receptors on dendritic cells, the main antigen presenting cells that interact with T cells. Here we show that mouse splenic dendritic cells (DC) and bone-marrow derived DCs (BMDC) express EphB2, a member of the EphB family. EphB2 expression is modulated by ligation of TLR4 and TLR9 and also by interaction with ephrin B ligands. Co-localization of EphB2 with MHC-II is also consistent with a potential role in T cell activation. However, BMDCs derived from EphB2 deficient mice were able to present antigen in the context of MHC-II and produce T cell activating cytokines to the same extent as intact DCs. Collectively our data suggest that EphB2 may contribute to DC responses, but that EphB2 is not required for T cell activation. This result may have arisen because DCs express other members of the EphB receptor family, EphB3, EphB4 and EphB6, all of which can interact with ephrin B ligands, or because EphB2 may be playing a role in another aspect of DC biology such as migration
Driving quality in delirium care through a patient-centered monitoring system in palliative care: Protocol for the two-staged exploratory sequential mixed methods MODEL-PC study
IntroductionDelirium is a serious acute neurocognitive condition that is common in palliative care units and yet under-addressed. To improve delirium care in this setting, we will develop and pilot a monitoring system that integrates the Delirium Clinical Care Standard, Palliative Care Outcomes Collaboration (PCOC) methods, and perspectives of patients, carers and staff.MethodsThis paper reports the protocol for a two-stage, exploratory, sequential mixed-methods implementation study. Stage 1 data collection includes Delirium Standard-aligned process mapping and clinical audits, and Critical Incident Technique interviews with patients, carers and staff with a recent experience of delirium. We will present integrated stage 1 findings to stakeholders then collaboratively develop a delirium monitoring system that aligns with the Delirium Standard and PCOC methods. In stage 2, we will pilot the new system and repeat stage 1 data collection and analyses, adding PCOC and adverse event measures. Implementation principles and strategies such as audit and feedback and education will be applied. We developed simplified participants information sheets and consent forms for interview and process mapping participants, who will provide written informed consent; and waiver of consent to collect clinical audit, PCOC and adverse event data from patients’ medical records is approved. At study end, we will report implementation, effectiveness and safety outcomes, including systemic utility of the delirium monitoring system for wider testing and use to meet the Delirium Standard in palliative care units. Quantitative data analyses will include descriptive and inferential statistics and qualitative analyses will incorporate thematic content analysis aligned to the Critical Incident Technique. Mixed methods data integration will be at the end of each stage.DiscussionThis protocol paper describes the mixed methods, systems integration, and innovative measures and study processes of the MODEL-PC study. We also share data collection tools and a simplified information sheet and consent form for patients
An analytical framework for delirium research in palliative care settings: integrated epidemiologic, clinician-researcher, and knowledge user perspectives
peer-reviewedContext. Delirium often presents difficult management challenges in the context of goals of care in palliative care settings. Objectives. The aim was to formulate an analytical framework for further research on delirium in palliative care settings, prioritize the associated research questions, discuss the inherent methodological challenges associated with relevant studies, and outline the next steps in a program of delirium research.Methods. We combined multidisciplinary input from delirium researchers and knowledge users at an international delirium study planning meeting, relevant literature searches, focused input of epidemiologic expertise, and a meeting participant and coauthor survey to formulate a conceptual research framework and prioritize research questions.Results. Our proposed framework incorporates three main groups of research questions: the first was predominantly epidemiologic, such as delirium occurrence rates, risk factor evaluation, screening, and diagnosis; the second covers pragmatic management questions; and the third relates to the development of predictive models for delirium outcomes. Based on aggregated survey responses to each research question or domain, the combined modal ratings of "very'' or "extremely'' important confirmed their priority.Conclusion. Using an analytical framework to represent the full clinical care pathway of delirium in palliative care settings, we identified multiple knowledge gaps in relation to the occurrence rates, assessment, management, and outcome prediction of delirium in this population. The knowledge synthesis generated from adequately powered, multicenter studies to answer the framework's research questions will inform decision making and policy development regarding delirium detection and management and thus help to achieve better outcomes for patients in palliative care settings. (C) 2014 American Academy of Hospice and Palliative Medicine. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.PUBLISHEDpeer-reviewe
- …