GPs’ involvement to improve care quality in care homes in the UK: a realist review

Interprofessional team-based collaboration between designated GPs and care home staff: a qualitative study in an urban Danish setting

BACKGROUND

Being a general practitioner for residents in many care homes may challenge communication with residents, relatives, and care home staff, and potentially lead to lower quality of care. Several countries have therefore introduced different solutions to reduce the number of general practitioners at each care home. In 2017, the designated general practitioner model was introduced at many Danish care homes. This study aimed to evaluate experiences from the interprofessional team-based collaboration between designated general practitioners and care home staff with regular contact with the designated general practitioners in an urban Danish setting.

METHODS

A qualitative design was applied using semi-structured interviews. Eight interviews (three group interviews and five individual interviews) were conducted with four designated general practitioners and seven care home staff members at four care homes in an urban setting of Central Denmark Region, Denmark. The interviews were transcribed verbatim, and data were analysed using content analysis with inspiration from the theory of relational coordination. The study followed the guidelines addressed in the COREQ (Consolidated Criteria for Reporting Qualitative Research) framework.

RESULTS

The initiation of the designated general practitioner model was experienced to contribute to more clear, precise, and timely communication between care homes and the general practitioner. An improved mutual acknowledgement of roles and competencies was experienced between designated general practitioners, care home nurses, and sometimes also social and health care assistants. The more frequent visits by the general practitioners at the care homes, as a result of the designated general practitioner model, resulted in more face-to-face communication between care home staff and designated general practitioners. Professional differences in the interpretation of the patient's needs were still present, which at times caused a frustrating compromise of own professional competencies. An important reason for the overall perception of improved collaboration was attributed to the more frequent dialogue in which the care homes staff and the designated general practitioners exchanged knowledge that could be applied in future patient encounters.

CONCLUSION

The designated general practitioner model implied an improved collaboration between general practitioners and care homes staff. Clear, precise, and timely communication between care homes and the general practitioners, as well as mutual trust and acknowledgement was experienced to be essential for the collaboration. An important reason for the overall perception of an improved collaboration was attributed to the more frequent dialogue (more frequent general practitioner visits at the care homes) in which the care homes staff and the designated general practitioners exchange knowledge which again could be applied in future patient encounters.

The need for education about death in medical practice

Colombia is one of the leading countries in the world regarding regulations and rights at the end of life. Currently, legislation on access to palliative care, limitation of therapeutic effort, euthanasia, euthanasia in children and adolescents, conscientious objection for doctors, and medically assisted suicide is decriminalized. Meanwhile, the remaining Latin American countries are just beginning the discussion about dignified death. Among many reasons for this delay, one of them is that it begins with the most controversial of issues, euthanasia, instead of focusing on humanizing the end of life. Although, etymologically, euthanasia means "good death," a good death does not mean euthanasia. The definition of a good death is complicated because it corresponds to an individual notion affected by culture, religion, society, and medical science. Due to the lack of definition, the tools available to estimate the quality of death and end-of-life care are still unreliable. One of the most recognized criteria to define a good death is the preference of the place to die of the patient, but this depends on factors of the individual, their family environment, the disease, the logistical possibilities of the health system, and the health team that accompanies the process. Some of these determinants can be modified, but not others. Health team care is the one with the greatest potential and, possibly, requires the most investment in education and organization. For physicians, death is transforming from being a natural part of the human experience into a crisis of patient health from which they must be rescued. In addition, technology-based clinical training ensures that they are well qualified to prolong life and poorly prepared to confront death or discuss it with their patients. The problem is bigger than it seems because the conviction about reliance on hospital-based, technologized medicine at the end of life is applicable to them. Research in Canada found that physicians died more in intensive care units and used more palliative care than the general population, but there was no difference in the possibility of dying at home.

From Warkworth House to the 21st century care homes: progress marked by persistent challenges

Long-term care homes play an essential role within health and social care. Successful measures to support older people at home for longer have led to increased prevalence of disability, frailty and cognitive impairment in those who live in care homes over the last two decades. The need for care home places is projected to increase for the next two decades. Modern care homes provide care for people who are predominantly over 80, have multiple long-term conditions, take multiple medicines, are physically dependent and live with cognitive impairment. Residents do better when services recognise the contributions of staff and care home providers rather than treating residents as individual patients living in a communal setting. There is a strong case given residents' frailty, multimorbidity and disability, that care should be structured around Comprehensive Geriatric Assessment (CGA). Care should be designed to allow opportunities for multiprofessional teams to come together for CGA, particularly if healthcare professionals are based outside care homes. Good data about care homes and residents are central to efforts to deliver high quality care-in some countries, these data are collected but not collated. Collating such data is a priority. Care home staff are under-recognised and underpaid-parity of pay and opportunity with NHS staff is the bare minimum to ensure that the best are recruited and retained in the sector. During the COVID-19 pandemic, residents and relatives have frequently been left out of decisions about policies that affect them, and better consultation is needed to deliver high quality care.