Factors influencing survival after discharge from an Australian palliative care unit to residential aged care facilities: a retrospective audit

The difficulties of discharging hospice patients to care homes at the end of life: A focus group study

BACKGROUND

Discharge from inpatient palliative care units to long-term care can be challenging. In the United Kingdom, hospice inpatients move to a care home if they no longer require specialist palliative care and cannot be discharged home. There is evidence to suggest that patients and families find the prospect of such a move distressing.

AIM

To investigate the issues that arise when patients are transferred from hospice to care home at the end of life, from the perspective of the hospice multidisciplinary team.

DESIGN

A qualitative study, using thematic analysis to formulate themes from focus group discussions with hospice staff.

SETTING/PARTICIPANTS

Five focus groups were conducted with staff at five UK hospices. Participants included multidisciplinary team members involved in discharge decisions. All groups had representation from a senior nurse and doctor at the hospice, with group size between three and eight participants. All but one group included physiotherapists, occupational therapists and family support workers.

RESULTS

A major focus of group discussions concerned dilemmas around discharge. These included (1) ethical concerns (dilemmas around the decision, lack of patient autonomy and allocation of resources); (2) communication challenges; and (3) discrepancies between the ideals and realities of hospice palliative care.

CONCLUSION

Hospice palliative care unit staff find discharging patients to care homes necessary, but often unsatisfactory for themselves and distressing for patients and relatives. Further research is needed to understand patients' experiences concerning moving to care homes for end of life care, in order that interventions can be implemented to mitigate this distress.

The Alice Springs Hospital Readmission Prevention Project (ASHRAPP): a randomised control trial

Background

Hospitals are frequently faced with high levels of emergency department presentations and demand for inpatient care. An important contributing factor is the subset of patients with complex chronic diseases who have frequent and preventable exacerbations of their chronic diseases. Evidence suggests that some of these hospital readmissions can be prevented with appropriate transitional care. Whilst there is a growing body of evidence for transitional care processes in urban, non-indigenous settings, there is a paucity of information regarding rural and remote settings and, specifically, the indigenous context.

Methods

This randomised control trial compares a tailored, multidimensional transitional care package to usual care. The objective is to evaluate the efficacy of the transitional care package for Indigenous and non-Indigenous Australian patients with chronic diseases at risk of recurrent readmission with the aim of reducing readmission rates and improving transition to primary care in a remote setting. Patients will be recruited from medical and surgical admissions to Alice Springs Hospital and will be followed for 12 months. The primary outcome measure will be number of admissions to hospital with secondary outcomes including number of emergency department presentations, number of ICU admissions, days alive and out of hospital, time to primary care review post discharge and cost-effectiveness.

Discussion

Successful transition from hospital to home is important for patients with complex chronic diseases. Evidence suggests that a coordinated transitional care plan can result in a reduction in length of hospital stay and readmission rates for adults with complex medical needs. This will be the first study to evaluate a tailored multidimensional transitional care intervention to prevent readmission in Indigenous and non-Indigenous Australian residents of remote Australia who are frequently admitted to hospital. If demonstrated to be effective it will have implications for the care and management of Indigenous Australians throughout regional and remote Australia and in other remote, culturally and linguistically diverse populations and settings.

Trial registration

Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry, ACTRN12615000808549- Retrospectively registered on 4/8/15.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12913-017-2077-7) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Assessing palliative care unit inpatients for residential aged care placement: is it worth it?

BACKGROUND

Increasing demand for palliative care unit (PCU) admissions has led to a stronger focus on discharge planning. This has resulted in shorter inpatient length of stays (LOS), and stable patients not requiring specialist palliative care services being referred for placement in residential aged care facilities (RACFs). The process of placement is time-consuming and can be distressing to patients and families, so RACF placement should only be proposed in patients whose prognosis is relatively good (i.e., weeks to months).

OBJECTIVE

Our aim was to identify the outcomes of palliative care inpatients referred for residential aged care placement.

METHODS

A retrospective chart audit was conducted. The patients' outcomes (discharge or death and survival time) were recorded and analyzed using SPSS statistical software. Subjects were 100 consecutive inpatients from a 30-bed PCU who had been referred for RACF placement.

RESULTS

Of the 100 patients referred for RACF placement 73 of 100 (73%) patients had a malignant diagnosis, whereas 27 (27%) had a noncancer diagnosis. Thirty-eight (38%) patients died before discharge, including 33 of 73 (45%) patients with cancer and 5 of 27 (13%) patients with nonmalignant conditions. In particular, 12 of 17 (71%) patients with metastatic non-small cell lung (NCSLC) cancer died before or soon after discharge.

CONCLUSION

Over one-third of all patients died before discharge to an RACF could take place. The rate of death before discharge was higher among patients who had cancer. Patients suffering from NCSLC need to be more carefully selected for placement as only one-third of these patients survived to discharge.