How short is too short? A randomised controlled trial evaluating short-term existential behavioural therapy for informal caregivers of palliative patients

BACKGROUND

Informal caregivers of palliative patients show higher levels of depression and distress compared with the general population. Fegg's (2013) existential behavioural therapy was shortened to two individual 1-h sessions (short-term existential behavioural therapy).

AIM

Testing the effectiveness of sEBT on psychological symptoms of informal caregivers in comparison with active control.

DESIGN

Randomised controlled trial.

SETTING/PARTICIPANTS

Informal caregivers of palliative in-patients.

METHODS

The primary outcome was depression; secondary outcomes were anxiety, subjective distress and minor mental disorders, positive and negative affect, satisfaction with life, quality of life and direct health care costs. General linear mixed models allow several measurements per participant and change over time. Reasons for declining the intervention were investigated by Rosenstock's Health Belief Model.

RESULTS

Overall inclusion rate was 41.0%. Data of 157 caregivers were available (63.1% females; mean age: 54.6 years, standard deviation (SD): 14.1); 127 participants were included in the main analysis. Participation in sEBT or active control was not significantly associated with post-treatment depression. Outcomes showed prevailingly significant association with time of investigation. Self-efficacy, scepticism of benefit of the intervention, belief of better coping alone and support by family and friends were significant factors in declining participation in the randomised controlled trial.

CONCLUSION

Inclusion rate was tripled compared with a previously evaluated longer EBT group intervention. By shortening the intervention, inclusion rate was traded for effectiveness and the intervention could not impact caregivers' psychological state. Early integration of sEBT and combination of individual and group setting and further study of the optimal length for caregiver interventions are suggested.

Off-label drugs in palliative care: a Group Delphi treatment recommendation process

OBJECTIVES

The use of drugs beyond their marketing authorisation, that is, off-label use, is common practice in palliative care with over 70% of off-label use having little or no scientific support. The lack of evidence makes recommendations for off-label use essential, in order to increase the safety of drug therapy and thus patient safety. The aim of this study was to develop a guide for preparing and consenting drug-specific recommendations for off-label use in palliative care.

METHODS

Group Delphi Study with three rounds and a prior online survey to identify topics of dissent. Participants represented professional groups working in palliative care involved in direct patient care and/or drug management and various care settings. Furthermore, representatives of relevant professional associations, experts with academic, non-clinical background and experts with international expertise were invited.

RESULTS

18/20 invited professionals participated in the prior online-survey. 15 experts participated in the Group Delphi process. Six domains, including identification of drugs, drug uses, assessment of evidence, formulation, consensus and updating of recommendations were generated and respective statements were included in the Group Delphi process. The consensus process resulted in 28 statements forming the guide for recommendations.

CONCLUSIONS

The resultant systematic approach for preparing and consenting drug-specific recommendations for off-label use will allow the development of recommendations with transparent and reproducible monographs. This will help to increase treatment quality and patient safety as well as security of decision-making in palliative care. The developed guide is part of a larger project aiming to provide therapy recommendations for areas that have little or no scientific evidence.

The Palliative Care of Patients With Incurable Cancer

BACKGROUND

The purpose of palliative medicine is to optimize the quality of life of patients with incurable, progressive diseases. The care delivered in actual clinical practice is not uniform and often takes insufficient account of the currently available scientific evidence.

METHODS

In accordance with the methodological directives on systematic literature reviews and consensus-finding that have been issued by the German Oncology Guideline Program (Leitlinienprogramm Onkologie), a nationwide, representative group of experts updated the previously published seven chapters of the S3 (evidence-based and consensus-based) guideline and formulated new recommen- dations on a further eight topics in palliative care.

RESULTS

Non-drug options for the treatment of fatigue include aerobic exercise and psycho-educative methods, particularly cognitive behavioral therapy. Sleep distur- bances can be treated with improved sleep hygiene and relaxation techniques, as well as with drugs: Z substances for short-term and sedating antidepressants for intermediate-term treatment. For nausea and vomiting, the first line of treatment consists of antidopaminergic drugs, such as haloperidol, or drugs with an antido- paminergic effect combined with a further receptor affinity, such as metoclopramide. For patients suffering from malignant intestinal obstruction (MIO), an important con- sideration for further treatment is whether the obstruction is complete or incomplete. Psychotherapeutic interventions are indicated for the treatment of anxiety.

CONCLUSION

Multiple studies have confirmed the benefit of the early integration of palliative care for achieving the goals of better symptom control and maintenance of derate quality of evidence supporting the management of certain symptoms in patients with incurable cancers.

Managing the supportive care needs of those affected by COVID-19

Globally, the number of people affected by coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is rapidly increasing. In most (>80%), the illness is relatively mild and can be self-managed out of hospital. However, in about 20% the illness causes respiratory compromise severe enough to require hospital admission [1]. Patients with severe and critical disease need full active treatment. This may include oxygen for hypoxaemia and ventilatory support, along with optimal management of complications, e.g. super-imposed bacterial infection, and any underlying co-morbidities, e.g. chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, congestive heart failure. To date, no antiviral agent has shown to be effective in treating the disease [2].

Standards, Guidelines, and Quality Measures for Successful Specialty Palliative Care Integration Into Oncology: Current Approaches and Future Directions

Although robust evidence demonstrates that specialty palliative care integrated into oncology care improves patient and health system outcomes, few clinicians are familiar with the standards, guidelines, and quality measures related to integration. These types of guidance outline principles of best practice and provide a framework for assessing the fidelity of their implementation. Significant advances in the understanding of effective methods and procedures to guide integration of specialty palliative care into oncology have led to a proliferation of guidance documents around the world, with several areas of commonality but also some key differences. Commonalities originate from a shared vision for integration; differences arise from diverse roles of palliative care specialists within cancer care globally. In this review we discuss three of the most cited standards/guidelines, as well as quality measures related to integrated palliative and oncology care. We also recommend changes to the quality measurement framework for palliative care and a new way to match palliative care services to patients with advanced cancer on the basis of care complexity and patient needs, irrespective of prognosis.

Effect of early palliative care for patients with glioblastoma (EPCOG): a randomised phase III clinical trial protocol

​INTRODUCTION: Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) have shown a positive effect of early integration of palliative care (EIPC) in various advanced cancer entities regarding patients' quality of life (QoL), survival, mood, caregiver burden and reduction of aggressiveness of treatment near the end of life. However, RCTs investigating the positive effect of EIPC for patients suffering from glioblastoma multiforme (GBM) are lacking. After modelling work identifying the specific needs of GBM patients and their caregivers, the aim of this study is to investigate the impact of EIPC in this particular patient group. ​METHODS AND ANALYSIS: The recruitment period of this multicenter RCT started in May 2019. GBM patients (n=214) and their caregivers will be randomly assigned to either the intervention group (receiving proactive EIPC on a monthly basis) or the control group (receiving treatment according to international standards and additional, regular assessment of QoL ('optimised' standard care)).The primary outcome is QoL assessed by subscales of the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy for brain tumour (FACT-Br) from baseline to 6 months of treatment. Secondary outcomes are changes in QoL after 12 (end of intervention), 18 and 24 months (end of follow-up), the full FACT-Br scale, patients' palliative care needs, depression/anxiety, cognitive impairment, caregiver burden, healthcare use, cost-effectiveness and overall survival. ​ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The study will be conducted in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki and has been approved by the local ethics committees of the University Clinics of Cologne, Aachen, Bonn, Freiburg and Munich (LMU). Results of the trial will be submitted for publication in a peer-reviewed, open access journal and disseminated through presentations at conferences. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: German Register for Clinical Studies (DRKS) (DRKS00016066); Pre-results.

Sedatives and sedation at the end of life: a nursing home retrospective cohort study

Objectives

Sedatives are frequently used at the end of life in specialist palliative care. There is scarce information about their use in nursing homes. Therefore, we aimed to assess the use of (1) sedatives generally and (2) ‘sedatives with continuous effect’, based on objective operational criteria, within the last week of life in a nursing home.

Methods

This was a retrospective cohort study of residents who died in a German nursing home between 1/2015 and 12/2017, using the nursing home’s medical records, which contained drug sheets and nurses’ notes. Sedatives analysed were those recommended by guidelines for ‘palliative sedation’: benzodiazepines, levomepromazine, haloperidol (≥5 mg/day) and propofol. Exploratory statistical analysis was conducted using R V.3.6.1.

Results

46/165 (28%) deceased residents received a sedative during the last week of life, all without use of the term ‘sedation’. 26/165 residents (16%) received ‘sedatives with continuous effect’, for median 4 days (range 1–7). Oral lorazepam was used most frequently, mainly for agitation, anxiety and dyspnoea, but also due to palliative status and patients wish. The median total daily dose of lorazepam within the last week of life was 1.5 mg (range 0.5–7.5). The term ‘palliative’ was significantly more often used for residents receiving sedatives (p=0.001).

Conclusions

Compared with published data on continuous deep sedation, moderate or deep sedation was less frequent in this nursing home and never labelled as ‘sedation’. Multicentre mixed-methods research is needed to gain representative and more detailed data on sedation practices at the end of life in nursing homes.

Outcomes of clinical ethics support near the end of life: A systematic review

BACKGROUND

Clinical ethics support services have been advocated in recent decades. In clinical practice, clinical ethics support services are often requested for difficult decisions near the end of life. However, their contribution to improving healthcare has been questioned and demands for evaluation have been put forward. Research indicates that there are considerable challenges associated with defining adequate outcomes for clinical ethics support services. In this systematic review, we report findings of qualitative studies and surveys, which have been conducted to evaluate clinical ethics support services near the end of life.

METHODS

Electronic databases and other sources were queried from 1970 to May 2018. Two authors screened studies independently. Methodological quality of studies was assessed. For each arm of the review, an individual synthesis was performed. Prospero ID: CRD42016036241.

ETHICAL CONSIDERATIONS

Ethical approval is not needed as it is a systematic review of published literature.

RESULTS

In all, 2088 hits on surveys and 2786 on qualitative studies were found. After screening, nine surveys and four qualitative studies were included. Survey studies report overall positive findings using a very wide and heterogeneous range of outcomes. Negative results were reported only occasionally. However, methodological quality and conceptual justification of used outcomes was often weak and limits generalizability of results.

CONCLUSION

Evidence points to positive outcomes of clinical ethics support services. However, methodological quality needs to be improved. Further qualitative or mixed-method research on evaluating clinical ethics support services may contribute to the development of evaluating outcomes of clinical ethics support services by means of broaden the range of appropriate (process-oriented) outcomes of (different types of) clinical ethics support services.

A brief, patient- and proxy-reported outcome measure in advanced illness: Validity, reliability and responsiveness of the Integrated Palliative care Outcome Scale (IPOS)

BACKGROUND

Few measures capture the complex symptoms and concerns of those receiving palliative care.

AIM

To validate the Integrated Palliative care Outcome Scale, a measure underpinned by extensive psychometric development, by evaluating its validity, reliability and responsiveness to change.

DESIGN

Concurrent, cross-cultural validation study of the Integrated Palliative care Outcome Scale - both (1) patient self-report and (2) staff proxy-report versions. We tested construct validity (factor analysis, known-group comparisons, and correlational analysis), reliability (internal consistency, agreement, and test-retest reliability), and responsiveness (through longitudinal evaluation of change).

SETTING/PARTICIPANTS

In all, 376 adults receiving palliative care, and 161 clinicians, from a range of settings in the United Kingdom and Germany.

RESULTS

We confirm a three-factor structure (Physical Symptoms, Emotional Symptoms and Communication/Practical Issues). Integrated Palliative care Outcome Scale shows strong ability to distinguish between clinically relevant groups; total Integrated Palliative care Outcome Scale and Integrated Palliative care Outcome Scale subscale scores were higher - reflecting more problems - in those patients with 'unstable' or 'deteriorating' versus 'stable' Phase of Illness (F = 15.1, p < 0.001). Good convergent and discriminant validity to hypothesised items and subscales of the Edmonton Symptom Assessment System and Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-General is demonstrated. The Integrated Palliative care Outcome Scale shows good internal consistency (α = 0.77) and acceptable to good test-retest reliability (60% of items k_w > 0.60). Longitudinal validity in form of responsiveness to change is good.

CONCLUSION

The Integrated Palliative care Outcome Scale is a valid and reliable outcome measure, both in patient self-report and staff proxy-report versions. It can assess and monitor symptoms and concerns in advanced illness, determine the impact of healthcare interventions, and demonstrate quality of care. This represents a major step forward internationally for palliative care outcome measurement.

Ethical case interventions for adult patients

BACKGROUND

Decisions in clinical medicine can be associated with ethical challenges. Ethical case interventions (e.g. ethics committee, moral case deliberation) identify and analyse ethical conflicts which occur within the context of care for patients. Ethical case interventions involve ethical experts, different health professionals as well as the patient and his/her family. The aim is to support decision-making in clinical practice. This systematic review gathered and critically appraised the available evidence of controlled studies on the effectiveness of ethical case interventions.

OBJECTIVES

To determine whether ethical case interventions result in reduced decisional conflict or moral distress of those affected by an ethical conflict in clinical practice; improved patient involvement in decision-making and a higher quality of life in adult patients. To determine the most effective models of ethical case interventions and to analyse the use and appropriateness of the outcomes in experimental studies.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the following electronic databases for primary studies to September 2018: CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL and PsycINFO. We also searched CDSR and DARE for related reviews. Furthermore, we searched Clinicaltrials.gov, International Clinical Trials Registry Platform Search Portal and conducted a cited reference search for all included studies in ISI WEB of Science. We also searched the references of the included studies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised trials, non-randomised trials, controlled before-after studies and interrupted time series studies which compared ethical case interventions with usual care or an active control in any language. The included population were adult patients. However, studies with mixed populations consisting of adults and children were included, if a subgroup or sensitivity analysis (or both) was performed for the adult population.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane and the Effective Practice and Organisation of Care review group. We used meta-analysis based on a random-effects model for treatment costs and structured analysis for the remaining outcomes, because these were heterogeneously reported. We used the GRADE approach to assess the certainty of the evidence.

MAIN RESULTS

We included four randomised trials published in six articles. The publication dates ranged from 2000 to 2014. Three studies were conducted in the USA, and one study in Taiwan. All studies were conducted on intensive care units and included 1165 patients. We judged the included studies to be of moderate or high risk of bias. It was not possible to compare different models of the intervention regarding effectiveness due to the diverse character of the interventions and the small number of studies. Included studies did not directly measure the main outcomes. All studies received public funding and one received additional funding from private sources.We identified two models of ethical case interventions: proactive and request-based ethics consultation. Three studies evaluated proactive ethics consultation (n = 1103) of which one study reported findings on one key outcome criterion. The studies did not report data on decisional conflict, moral distress of participants of ethical case interventions, patient involvement in decision-making, quality of life or ethical competency for proactive ethics consultation. One study assessed satisfaction with care on a 5-point Likert scale (1 = lowest rating, 5 = highest rating). The healthcare providers (nurses and physicians, n = 365) scored a value of 4 or 5 for 81.4% in the control group and 86.1% in the intervention group (P > 0.05). The patients or their surrogates (n = 275) scored a value of 4 or 5 for 83.6% in the control group and for 74.8% in the intervention group (P > 0.05). It was uncertain whether proactive ethics consultation led to high satisfaction with care, because the certainty of evidence was very low.One study evaluated request-based ethics consultation (n = 62). The study indirectly measured decisional conflict by assessing consensus regarding patient care. The risk (increase in consensus, reduction in decisional conflict) increased by 80% as a result of the intervention. The risk ratio was 0.20 (95% confidence interval 0.09 to 0.46; P < 0.01). It was uncertain whether request-based ethics consultation reduced decisional conflict, because the certainty of evidence was very low. The study did not report data on moral distress of participants of ethical case interventions, patient involvement in decision-making, quality of life, or ethical competency or satisfaction with care for request-based ethics consultation.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

It is not possible to determine the effectiveness of ethical case interventions with certainty due to the low certainty of the evidence of included studies in this review. The effectiveness of ethical case interventions should be investigated in light of the outcomes reported in this systematic review. In addition, there is need for further research to identify and measure outcomes which reflect the goals of different types of ethical case intervention.

Do we understand the intervention? What complex intervention research can teach us for the evaluation of clinical ethics support services (CESS)

BACKGROUND

Evaluating clinical ethics support services (CESS) has been hailed as important research task. At the same time, there is considerable debate about how to evaluate CESS appropriately. The criticism, which has been aired, refers to normative as well as empirical aspects of evaluating CESS.

MAIN BODY

In this paper, we argue that a first necessary step for progress is to better understand the intervention(s) in CESS. Tools of complex intervention research methodology may provide relevant means in this respect. In a first step, we introduce principles of "complex intervention research" and show how CESS fulfil the criteria of "complex interventions". In a second step, we develop a generic "conceptual framework" for "ethics consultation on request" as standard for many forms of ethics consultation in clinical ethics practice. We apply this conceptual framework to the model of "bioethics mediation" to make explicit the specific structural and procedural elements of this form of ethics consultation on request. In a final step we conduct a comparative analysis of two different types of CESS, which have been subject to evaluation research: "proactive ethics consultation" and "moral case deliberation" and discuss implications for evaluating both types of CESS.

CONCLUSION

To make explicit different premises of implemented CESS interventions by means of conceptual frameworks can inform the search for sound empirical evaluation of CESS. In addition, such work provides a starting point for further reflection about what it means to offer "good" CESS.

Which Reimbursement System Fits Inpatient Palliative Care? A Qualitative Interview Study on Clinicians' and Financing Experts' Experiences and Views

Context: Internationally, a variety of reimbursement systems exists for palliative care (PC). In Germany, PC units (PCUs) may choose between per-diem rates and diagnosis-related groups (DRGs). Both systems are controversially discussed. Objectives: To explore the experiences and views of German PCU clinicians and experts for PCU financing regarding per-diem rates and DRGs as reimbursement systems with a focus on (1) cost coverage, (2) strengths and weaknesses of both financing systems, and (3) options for further development of funding PCUs. Design: Qualitative semistructured interviews with PCU clinicians and experts for PCU financing, analyzed by thematic analysis using the Framework approach. Setting/Subjects/Measurements: Ten clinicians and 13 experts for financing were interviewed June-October 2015 on both reimbursement systems for PCU. Results: Interviewees had divergent experiences with both reimbursement systems regarding cost coverage. A described strength of per-diem rates was the perceived possibility of individual care without direct financial pressure. The nationwide variation of per-diem rates and the lack of quality standards were named as weaknesses. DRGs were criticized for incentives perceived as perverse and inadequate representation of PC-specific procedures. However, the quality standards for PCUs required within the German DRG system were described as important strength. Suggestions for improvement of the funding system pointed toward a combination of per-diem rates with a grading according to disease severity/complexity of care. Conclusions: Expert opinions suggest that neither current DRGs nor per-diem rates are ideal for funding of PCUs. Suggested improvements regarding adequate funding of PCUs resemble and supplement international developments.

Integrated breathlessness services for people with chronic conditions

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Optimal management of breathlessness requires generally more than one component. Breathlessness services aim to provide specific interventions and support for patients suffering from breathlessness due to any advanced disease and their carers. This review aims to describe recent studies evaluating the effects of breathlessness services for patients with advanced chronic conditions.

RECENT FINDINGS

Various breathlessness services have been tested and vary regarding structure, duration, frequency and professionals involved. Four randomized controlled trials demonstrated a positive and significant effect on distress due to breathlessness or mastery of breathlessness or breathlessness severity. In the fifth randomized controlled trial, quantitative results were NS, but in the qualitative interviews, patients stressed the positive experience with the breathlessness service and the benefits they gained. The caring, holistic, respectful and integrated approaches were valued by patients.

SUMMARY

Breathlessness services combine a variety of evidence-based nonpharmacological interventions and some services also pharmacological interventions when physicians are involved. As the prevalence of breathlessness due to advanced disease is high and increasing, more such services should be provided to support patients throughout the course of their disease.

Drug use beyond the licence in palliative care: A systematic review and narrative synthesis

BACKGROUND

Drug use beyond the licence (off-label use, off-label drug use) is a common practice in palliative care and respective recommendations can often be identified in the literature. It is both risky and offers opportunities at the same time and, therefore, requires special attention in clinical practice.

AIM

To determine the prevalence of off-label drug use in palliative care and to identify, evaluate and critically appraise studies describing the clinical practice, healthcare professionals' awareness, knowledge and attitudes towards off-label-use and management strategies.

DESIGN

Systematic literature review following the guidance of the Centre for Reviews and Dissemination.

DATA SOURCES

Medline, Embase, Web of Science and Current Contents Connect were searched in July 2018 as well as hand searches. The reference lists of pertinent studies were screened for further relevant publications, and citation tracking was performed.

RESULTS

Eight studies met the inclusion criteria. Due to the variety in study designs and settings, no meta-analysis or meaningful statistical analysis was possible and a narrative synthesis of the data was performed. Frequency of off-label drug use ranged from 14.5% to 35%. Up to 97% of palliative care units did not have any policy or guidance on handling off-label drug use. About 20% of prescribers never obtain consent in the context of off-label use.

CONCLUSION

Off-label use is common in palliative care with up to one-third of prescriptions affected. Challenges are often related to obtaining informed consent. Little is known about the decision-making process. More information and guidance for the prescribers are needed to enable safe handling of drugs outside their licence in palliative care.

Airflow relieves chronic breathlessness in people with advanced disease: An exploratory systematic review and meta-analyses

BACKGROUND

Chronic breathlessness is a neglected symptom of advanced diseases.

AIM

To examine the effect of airflow for chronic breathlessness relief.

DESIGN

Exploratory systematic review and meta-analysis.

DATA SOURCES

Medline, CINAHL, AMED and Cochrane databases were searched (1985-2018) for observational studies or randomised controlled trials of airflow as intervention or comparator. Selection against predefined inclusion criteria, quality appraisal and data extraction was conducted by two independent reviewers with access to a third for unresolved differences. 'Before and after' breathlessness measures from airflow arms were analysed. Meta-analysis was carried out where possible.

RESULTS

In all, 16 of 78 studies (n = 929) were included: 11 randomised controlled trials of oxygen versus medical air, 4 randomised controlled trials and 1 fan cohort study. Three meta-analyses were possible: (1) Fan at rest in three studies (n = 111) offered significant benefit for breathlessness intensity (0-100 mm visual analogue scale and 0-10 numerical rating scale), mean difference -11.17 (95% confidence intervals (CI) -16.60 to -5.74), p = 0.06 I² 64%. (2) Medical air via nasal cannulae at rest in two studies (n = 89) improved breathlessness intensity (visual analogue scale), mean difference -12.0 mm, 95% CI -7.4 to -16.6, p < 0.0001 I² = 0%. (3) Medical airflow during a constant load exercise test before and after rehabilitation (n = 29) in two studies improved breathlessness intensity (modified Borg scale, 0-10), mean difference -2.9, 95% CI -3.2 to -2.7, p < 0.0001 I² = 0%.

CONCLUSION

Airflow appears to offer meaningful relief of chronic breathlessness and should be considered as an adjunct treatment in the management of breathlessness.

Understanding complexity - the palliative care situation as a complex adaptive system

Background

The concept of complexity is used in palliative care (PC) to describe the nature of patients’ situations and the extent of resulting needs and care demands. However, the term or concept is not clearly defined and operationalised with respect to its particular application in PC. As a complex problem, a care situation in PC is characterized by reciprocal, nonlinear relations and uncertainties. Dealing with complex problems necessitates problem-solving methods tailored to specific situations. The theory of complex adaptive systems (CAS) provides a framework for locating problems and solutions.

This study aims to describe criteria contributing to complexity of PC situations from the professionals’ view and to develop a conceptual framework to improve understanding of the concept of “complexity” and related elements of a PC situation by locating the complex problem “PC situation” in a CAS.

Methods

Qualitative interview study with 42 semi-structured expert (clinical/economical/political) interviews. Data was analysed using the framework method. The thematic framework was developed inductively. Categories were reviewed, subsumed and connected considering CAS theory.

Results

The CAS of a PC situation consists of three subsystems: patient, social system, and team. Agents in the "system patient" are allocated to further subsystems on patient level: physical, psycho-spiritual, and socio-cultural. The "social system" and the "system team" are composed of social agents, who affect the CAS as carriers of characteristics, roles, and relationships. Environmental factors interact with the care situation from outside the system. Agents within subsystems and subsystems themselves interact on all hierarchical system levels and shape the system behaviour of a PC situation.

Conclusions

This paper provides a conceptual framework and comprehensive understanding of complexity in PC. The systemic view can help to understand and shape situations and dynamics of individual care situations; on higher hierarchical level, it can support an understanding and framework for the development of care structures and concepts. The framework provides a foundation for the development of a model to differentiate PC situations by complexity of patients and care needs. To enable an operationalisation and classification of complexity, relevant outcome measures mirroring the identified system elements should be identified and implemented in clinical practice.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1186/s12913-019-3961-0) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

What Constitutes Good Health Care for Patients with Breathlessness? Perspectives of Patients, Caregivers, and Health Care Professionals

Background/Objective: Breathlessness is a highly prevalent and distressing symptom in patients with cancer and advanced chronic diseases. Symptom management is often overlooked. We explored the experiences of patients, caregivers, and health care providers (HCPs) and their expectations for future service developments. Design: This is a multiperspective qualitative study drawing on semistructured interviews. Setting/Subjects: Participants were recruited from palliative, respiratory, and cardiology departments of the Munich University Hospital and from a chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) patient group. Measurements: Interviews were analyzed using qualitative content analysis. Subcategories used the directional views of participants (positive, negative, and indifferent). The coding tree identified three categories: (1) attributes of symptom management, (2) practice pattern gaps, and (3) components of good practice. Results: Ten patients (5 female, 65.2 median age; COPD n = 3, cancer n = 3, chronic heart failure n = 2, and lung fibrosis n = 2), 3 caregivers (2 female, 53.6 median age), and 10 HCPs were interviewed. Patients and caregivers felt stressed and frustrated due to a lack of awareness regarding the symptom burden and little support from HCPs. HCPs pointed to a lack of therapeutic concepts and unclear assumptions of responsibilities. Specialist breathlessness services are perceived as addressing important gaps in professional practice from the viewpoint of all stakeholders. Accessibility and collaboration with other local health care services are important features of such specialist services. Conclusions: Chronic refractory breathlessness in advanced disease is managed insufficiently for most patients, caregivers, and HCPs. Increased knowledge about effective interventions and availability of skills-based training for patients, caregivers, and HCPs would help in breathlessness management.

A pilot study on patient-related costs and factors associated with the cost of specialist palliative care in the hospital: first steps towards a patient classification system in Germany

Background

Specialist palliative care in the hospital addresses a heterogeneous patient population with complex care needs. In Germany, palliative care patients are classified based on their primary diagnosis to determine reimbursement despite findings that other factors describe patient needs better. To facilitate adequate resource allocation in this setting, in Australia and in the UK important steps have been undertaken towards identifying drivers of palliative care resource use and classifying patients accordingly. We aimed to pioneer patient classification based on determinants of resource use relevant to specialist palliative care in Germany first, by calculating the patient-level cost of specialist palliative care from the hospital’s perspective, based on the recorded resource use and, subsequently, by analysing influencing factors.

Methods

Cross-sectional study of consecutive patients who had an episode of specialist palliative care in Munich University Hospital between 20 June and 4 August, 2016. To accurately reflect personnel intensity of specialist palliative care, aside from administrative data, we recorded actual use of all involved health professionals’ labour time at patient level. Factors influencing episode costs were assessed using generalized linear regression and LASSO variable selection.

Results

The study included 144 patients. Mean costs of specialist palliative care per palliative care unit episode were 6542€ (median: 5789€, SE: 715€) and 823€ (median: 702€, SE: 31€) per consultation episode. Based on multivariate models that considered both variables recorded at beginning and at the end of episode, we identified factors explaining episode cost including phase of illness, Karnofsky performance score, and type of discharge.

Conclusions

This study is an important step towards patient classification in specialist palliative care in Germany as it provides a feasible patient-level costing method and identifies possible starting points for classification. Application to a larger sample will allow for meaningful classification of palliative patients.