Palliative and end-of-life care in primary care during the COVID-19 pandemic and beyond

Public Opinions About Palliative and End-of-Life Care During the COVID-19 Pandemic: Twitter-Based Content Analysis

BACKGROUND

Palliative and end-of-life care (PEoLC) played a critical role in relieving distress and providing grief support in response to the heavy toll caused by the COVID-19 pandemic. However, little is known about public opinions concerning PEoLC during the pandemic. Given that social media have the potential to collect real-time public opinions, an analysis of this evidence is vital to guide future policy-making.

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to use social media data to investigate real-time public opinions regarding PEoLC during the COVID-19 crisis and explore the impact of vaccination programs on public opinions about PEoLC.

METHODS

This Twitter-based study explored tweets across 3 English-speaking countries: the United States, the United Kingdom, and Canada. From October 2020 to March 2021, a total of 7951 PEoLC-related tweets with geographic tags were retrieved and identified from a large-scale COVID-19 Twitter data set through the Twitter application programming interface. Topic modeling realized through a pointwise mutual information-based co-occurrence network and Louvain modularity was used to examine latent topics across the 3 countries and across 2 time periods (pre- and postvaccination program periods).

RESULTS

Commonalities and regional differences among PEoLC topics in the United States, the United Kingdom, and Canada were identified specifically: cancer care and care facilities were of common interest to the public across the 3 countries during the pandemic; the public expressed positive attitudes toward the COVID-19 vaccine and highlighted the protection it affords to PEoLC professionals; and although Twitter users shared their personal experiences about PEoLC in the web-based community during the pandemic, this was more prominent in the United States and Canada. The implementation of the vaccination programs raised the profile of the vaccine discussion; however, this did not influence public opinions about PEoLC.

CONCLUSIONS

Public opinions on Twitter reflected a need for enhanced PEoLC services during the COVID-19 pandemic. The insignificant impact of the vaccination program on public discussion on social media indicated that public concerns regarding PEoLC continued to persist even after the vaccination efforts. Insights gleaned from public opinions regarding PEoLC could provide some clues for policy makers on how to ensure high-quality PEoLC during public health emergencies. In this post-COVID-19 era, PEoLC professionals may wish to continue to examine social media and learn from web-based public discussion how to ease the long-lasting trauma caused by this crisis and prepare for public health emergencies in the future. Besides, our results showed social media's potential in acting as an effective tool to reflect public opinions in the context of PEoLC.

Free-text analysis of general practice out-of-hours (GPOOH) use by people with advanced cancer: an analysis of coded and uncoded free-text data

BACKGROUND

People with advanced cancer frequently use the GP out-of-hours (GPOOH) service. Considerable amounts of routine GPOOH data are uncoded. Therefore, these data are omitted from existing healthcare datasets.

AIM

To conduct a free-text analysis of a GPOOH dataset, to identify reasons for attendance and care delivered through GPOOH to people with advanced cancer.

DESIGN AND SETTING

An analysis of a GPOOH healthcare dataset was undertaken. It contained all coded and free- text information for 5749 attendances from a cohort of 2443 people who died from cancer in Tayside, Scotland, from 2013-2015.

METHOD

Random sampling methods selected 575 consultations for free-text analysis. Each consultation was analysed by two independent reviewers to determine the following: assigned presenting complaints; key and additional palliative care symptoms recorded in free text; evidence of anticipatory care planning; and free-text recording of dispensed medications. Inter-rater reliability concordance was established through Kappa testing.

RESULTS

More than half of all coded reasons for attendance (n = 293; 51.0%) were 'other' or 'missing'. Free-text analysis demonstrated that nearly half (n = 284; 49.4%) of GPOOH attendances by people with advanced cancer were for pain or palliative care. More than half of GPOOH attendances (n = 325; 56.5%) recorded at least one key or additional palliative care symptom in free text, with the commonest being breathlessness, vomiting, cough, and nausea. Anticipatory care planning was poorly recorded in both coded and uncoded records. Uncoded medications were dispensed in more than one- quarter of GPOOH consultations.

CONCLUSION

GPOOH delivers a substantial amount of pain management and palliative care, much of which is uncoded. Therefore, it is unrecognised and under-reported in existing large healthcare data analyses.

Impact of Concurrent Hospice Care on Primary Care Visits Among Children in Rural Southern Appalachia

INTRODUCTION

The purpose of the study was to test the effect of receiving pediatric concurrent hospice care on primary care visits.

METHOD

This retrospective study was limited to pediatric decedents younger than 21 years with a hospice service claim from 2011 to 2013. Our outcome of interest concerned whether concurrent hospice care impacted primary care visits.

RESULTS

Of the 460 pediatric decedents in rural Southern Appalachia, 42% continued to visit their primary care provider during hospice enrollment, whereas 51% received concurrent hospice care. Concurrent hospice care was significantly related to pediatric primary care visits (β = 2.31; p < .001).

DISCUSSION

Findings revealed that receipt of concurrent hospice care impacted primary care. Children in concurrent care were twice as likely to continue to receive care from their primary care provider. This finding is consistent with our hypothesis; however, the magnitude of the finding was unexpected given their residence in medically underserved areas.