Effectiveness of Meaning-Centered Coaching on the Job of Oncology Nurses on Spiritual Care Competences: A Participatory Action Research Approach

BACKGROUND

Nurses' competences in providing spiritual care can increase quality of care for and quality of life of patients with cancer and job satisfaction but are often suboptimal. Training to improve this mostly takes place off-site, although implementation in daily care practice is key.

OBJECTIVES

The aims of this study were to implement a meaning-centered coaching on the job intervention and to measure its effects on oncology nurses' spiritual care competences and job satisfaction, and factors influencing this.

METHODS

A participatory action research approach was adopted. Mixed methods were used to assess intervention effects in which nurses of an oncology ward in a Dutch academic hospital participated. Spiritual care competences and job satisfaction were quantitatively measured and complemented with content analysis of qualitative data.

RESULTS

Thirty nurses participated. A significant increase in spiritual care competences was found, particularly regarding communication, personal support, and professionalization. More self-reported awareness of personal experiences in caring for patients, and an increase in mutual communication and involvement around meaning-centered care provision as a team were found. Mediating factors were related to nurses' attitudes, support structures, and professional relations. No significant impact was found on job satisfaction.

CONCLUSION

Meaning-centered coaching on the job increased oncology nurses' spiritual care competences. Nurses developed a more exploratory attitude in their communication with patients-instead of acting based on their own assumptions about what is of meaning.

IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE

Attention to and improving spiritual care competences should be integrated into existing work structures, and terminology used should match existing understandings and sentiments.

Identifying, exploring and integrating the spiritual dimension in proactive care planning: A mixed methods evaluation of a communication training intervention for multidisciplinary palliative care teams

BACKGROUND

Patients receiving palliative care value attention given to their spiritual needs. However, these needs often remain unexplored as healthcare professionals lack the skills to identify and explore them and to integrate this information into care plans.

AIM

To evaluate the effects of an interactive communication training intervention for palliative care teams in order to identify and explore the spiritual dimension and integrate it in patients' care plans.

DESIGN

A mixed methods pre-post study, including self-assessment questionnaires, evaluation of videos with simulated consultations (applied competence) and medical record review (implementation).

SETTING/PARTICIPANTS

Three palliative care teams including nurses (N = 21), physicians (N = 14) and spiritual caregivers (N = 3).

RESULTS

The questionnaires showed an improvement on 'Patient and family-centred communication' of the End-of-life professional caregiver survey (+0.37, p < 0.01; the 8-item S-EOLC (+0.54, p < 0.01) and regarding the Spiritual Care Competence Scale, on the three subscales used (+0.27, p < 0.01, +0.29, p < 0.01 and +0.32, p < 0.01). Video evaluations showed increased attention being paid to patient's aims and needs. The medical record review showed an increase in anticipation on the non-somatic dimension (OR: 2.2, 95% CI: 1.2-4.3, p < 0.05) and, using the Mount Vernon Cancer Network assessment tool, addressing spiritual issues (OR: 10.9, 95% CI: 3.7-39.5, p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Our training intervention resulted in increased palliative care professionals' competence in identifying and exploring patients' spiritual issues, and their integration in multidimensional proactive palliative care plans. The intervention directly addresses patients' spiritual concerns and adds value to their palliative care plans.

Making complex decisions in uncertain times: experiences of Dutch GPs as gatekeepers regarding hospital referrals during COVID-19-a qualitative study

BACKGROUND

General practitioners often act as gatekeeper, authorizing patients' access to hospital care. This gatekeeping role became even more important during the current COVID-19 crisis as uncertainties regarding COVID-19 made estimating the desirability of hospital referrals (for outpatient or inpatient hospitalization) complex, both for COVID and non-COVID suspected patients. This study explored Dutch general practitioners' experiences and ethical dilemmas faced in decision making about hospital referrals in times of the COVID-19 pandemic.

METHODS

Semi-structured interviews with Dutch general practitioners working in the Netherlands were conducted. Participants were recruited via purposive sampling. Thematic analysis was conducted using content coding.

RESULTS

Fifteen interviews were conducted, identifying four themes: one overarching regarding (1) COVID-19 uncertainties, and three themes about experienced ethical dilemmas: (2) the patients' self-determination vs. the general practitioners' paternalism, (3) the general practitioners' duty of care vs. the general practitioners' autonomy rights, (4) the general practitioners' duty of care vs. adequate care provision.

CONCLUSIONS

Lack of knowledge about COVID-19, risks to infect loved ones, scarcity of hospital beds and loneliness of patients during hospital admission were central in dilemmas experienced. When developing guidelines for future crises, this should be taken into account.

The COVID-19 pandemic: A tipping point for advance care planning? Experiences of general practitioners

BACKGROUND

In 2020, the COVID-19 pandemic caused an acute risk of deterioration and dying for many, and an urgent need to start advance care planning.

AIM

To explore how general practitioners (GPs) experienced discussing values, goals and preferences with patients during COVID-19.

DESIGN AND SETTING

Qualitative research in general practice.

METHODS

Semi-structured interviews for which Dutch GPs were recruited via purposive sampling. Content analysis was used.

RESULTS

Fifteen GPs were interviewed. Six themes were identified: (i) urge of advance care planning, (ii) the GP's perceived role in it, (iii) preparations for it, (iv) (proactively) discussing it, (v) essentials for good communication and (vi) advance care planning in the (near) future. Calls for proactively discussing advance care planning in the media and in COVID-guidelines caused awareness of it's importance. GPs envisaged an important role for themselves in initiating it, especially with patients at risk to deteriorate or die from COVID-19. Timing advance care planning appeared difficult but crucial. The recommended digital way of communication was considered problematic due to missing nonverbal communication and difficulties in involving relatives. It was noted that admission to the ICU, which was hardly discussed before the COVID-19 pandemic, should remain a topic during advance care planning.

CONCLUSION

The COVID-19 pandemic brought advance care planning into a new light, GPs were more experienced with discussing it and patients were more aware of their frailty. Because of the nearing 'grey wave', advance care planning should remain top priority. Therefore, it should be central in GP and post-academic training.

Effects of an Integrated Palliative Care Pathway: More Proactive GPs, Well Timed, and Less Acute Care: A Clustered, Partially Controlled Before-After Study

OBJECTIVES

This study presents the design of an integrated, proactive palliative care pathway covering the full care cycle and evaluates its effects using 3 types of outcomes: (1) physician-reported outcomes, (2) outcomes reported by family, and (3) (utilization of) health care outcomes.

DESIGN

A clustered, partially controlled before-after study with a multidisciplinary integrated palliative care pathway as its main intervention.

SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS

after assessment in hospital departments of oncology, and geriatrics, and in 13 primary care facilities, terminally ill patients were proactively included into the pathway. Patients' relatives and patients' general practitioners (GPs) participated in a before/after survey and in interviews and focus groups.

INTERVENTION

A multidisciplinary, integrated palliative care pathway encompassing (among others) early identification of the palliative phase, multidisciplinary consultation and coordination, and continuous monitoring of outcomes.

MEASURES

Measures included GP questionnaire: perceived quality of palliative care; questionnaires by family members: FAMCARE, QOD-LTC, EDIZ; and 3 types of health care outcomes: (1) utilization of primary care: consultations, intensive care, communication, palliative home visits, consultations and home visits during weekends and out-of-office-hours, ambulance, admission to hospital; (2) utilization of hospital care: outpatient ward consultations, day care, emergency room visits, inpatient care, (radio) diagnostics, surgical procedures, other therapeutic activities, intensive care unit activities; (3) pharmaceutical care utilization.

RESULTS

GPs reported that palliative patients die more often at their preferred place of death, and that they now act more proactively toward palliative patients. Relatives of included, deceased patients reported clinically relevant improved quality of dying, and more timely palliative care. Patients in the pathway received more (intensive) primary care, less unexpected care during out-of-office hours, and more often received hospital care in the form of day care.

CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS

An integrated palliative care pathway improves a variety of clinical outcomes important to patients, their families, physicians, and the health care system. The integration of palliative care into multidisciplinary, proactive palliative care pathways, is therefore a desirable future development.

Decreased costs and retained QoL due to the 'PACE Steps to Success' intervention in LTCFs: cost-effectiveness analysis of a randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

The number of residents in long-term care facilities (LTCFs) in need of palliative care is growing in the Western world. Therefore, it is foreseen that significantly higher percentages of budgets will be spent on palliative care. However, cost-effectiveness analyses of palliative care interventions in these settings are lacking. Therefore, the objective of this paper was to assess the cost-effectiveness of the 'PACE Steps to Success' intervention. PACE (Palliative Care for Older People) is a 1-year palliative care programme aiming at integrating general palliative care into day-to-day routines in LTCFs, throughout seven EU countries.

METHODS

A cluster RCT was conducted. LTCFs were randomly assigned to intervention or usual care. LTCFs reported deaths of residents, about whom questionnaires were filled in retrospectively about resource use and quality of the last month of life. A health care perspective was adopted. Direct medical costs, QALYs based on the EQ-5D-5L and costs per quality increase measured with the QOD-LTC were outcome measures.

RESULTS

Although outcomes on the EQ-5D-5L remained the same, a significant increase on the QOD-LTC (3.19 points, p value 0.00) and significant cost-savings were achieved in the intervention group (€983.28, p value 0.020). The cost reduction mainly resulted from decreased hospitalization-related costs (€919.51, p value 0.018).

CONCLUSIONS

Costs decreased and QoL was retained due to the PACE Steps to Success intervention. Significant cost savings and improvement in quality of end of life (care) as measured with the QOD-LTC were achieved. A clinically relevant difference of almost 3 nights shorter hospitalizations in favour of the intervention group was found. This indicates that timely palliative care in the LTCF setting can prevent lengthy hospitalizations while retaining QoL. In line with earlier findings, we conclude that integrating general palliative care into daily routine in LTCFs can be cost-effective.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ISRCTN14741671 .

QALY-time: experts' view on the use of the quality-adjusted LIFE year in COST-effectiveness analysis in palliative care

Background

The Quality-Adjusted Life Year (QALY) is internationally recognized as standard metric of health outcomes in cost-effectiveness analyses (CEAs) in healthcare. The ongoing debate concerning the appropriateness of its use for decision-making in palliative care has been recently mapped in a review. The aim was to report on and draw conclusions from two expert meetings that reflected on earlier mapped issues in order to reach consensus, and to advise on the QALY’s future use in palliative care.

Methods

A nominal group approach was used. In order to facilitate group decision making, three statements regarding the use of the QALY in palliative care were discussed in a structured way. Two groups of international policymakers, healthcare professionals and researchers participated. Data were analysed qualitatively using inductive coding.

Results

1) Most experts agreed that the recommended measurement tool for the QALYs ‘Q’ component, the EuroQol-5D (EQ-5D), is inappropriate for palliative care. A more sensitive tool, which might be based on the capabilities approach, could be used or developed. 2) Valuation of time should be incorporated in the ‘Q’ part, leaving the linear clock time in the ‘LY’ component. 3) Most experts agreed that the QALY, in its current shape, is not suitable for palliative care.

Conclusions

1) Although the EQ-5D does not suffice, a generic tool is needed for the QALY. As long as no suitable alternative is available, other tools can be used besides or serve as basis for the EQ-5D because of issues in conceptual overlap. 2) Future research should further investigate the valuation of time issue, and how best to integrate it in the ‘Q’ component. 3) A generic outcome measure of effectiveness is essential to justly allocate healthcare resources. However, experts emphasized, the QALY is and should be one of multiple criteria for choices in the healthcare insurance package.

Advance care planning conversations with palliative patients: looking through the GP's eyes

Background

Although it is often recommended that general practitioners (GPs) initiate advance care planning (ACP), little is known about their experiences with ACP. This study aimed to identify GP experiences when conducting ACP conversations with palliative patients, and what factors influence these experiences.

Methods

Dutch GPs (N = 17) who had participated in a training on timely ACP were interviewed. Data from these interviews were analysed using direct content analysis.

Results

Four themes were identified: ACP and society, the GP’s perceived role in ACP, initiating ACP and tailor-made ACP. ACP was regarded as a ‘hot topic’. At the same time, a tendency towards a society in which death is not a natural part of life was recognized, making it difficult to start ACP discussions. Interviewees perceived having ACP discussions as a typical GP task. They found initiating and timing ACP easier with proactive patients, e.g. who are anxious of losing capacity, and much more challenging when it concerned patients with COPD or heart failure. Patients still being treated in hospital posed another difficulty, because they often times are not open to discussion. Furthermore, interviewees emphasized that taking into account changing wishes and the fact that not everything can be anticipated, is of the utmost importance. Moreover, when patients are not open to ACP, at a certain point it should be granted that choosing not to know, for example about where things are going or what possible ways of care planning might be, is also a form of autonomy.

Conclusions

ACP currently is a hot topic, which has favourable as well as unfavourable effects. As GPs experience difficulties in initiating ACP if patients are being treated in the hospital, future research could focus on a multidisciplinary ACP approach and the role of medical specialists in ACP. Furthermore, when starting ACP with palliative patients, we recommend starting with current issues. In doing so, a start can be made with future issues kept in view. Although the tension between ACP’s focus on the patient’s direction and the right not to know can be difficult, ACP has to be tailored to each individual patient.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1186/s12875-018-0868-5) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Technical-efficiency analysis of end-of-life care in long-term care facilities within Europe: A cross-sectional study of deceased residents in 6 EU countries (PACE)

Background

An ageing population in the EU leads to a higher need of long-term institutional care at the end of life. At the same time, healthcare costs rise while resources remain limited. Consequently, an urgency to extend our knowledge on factors affecting efficiency of long-term care facilities (LTCFs) arises. This study aims to investigate and explain variation in technical efficiency of end-of-life care within and between LTCFs of six EU countries: Belgium (Flanders), England, Finland, Italy, the Netherlands and Poland. In this study, technical efficiency reflects the LTCFs’ ability to obtain maximal quality of life (QoL) and quality of dying (QoD) for residents from a given set of resource inputs (personnel and capacity).

Methods

Cross-sectional data were collected by means of questionnaires on deceased residents identified by LTCFs over a three-month period. An output-oriented data-envelopment analysis (DEA) was performed, producing efficiency scores, incorporating personnel and capacity as input and QoL and QoD as output. Scenario analysis was conducted. Regression analysis was performed on explanatory (country, LTCF type, ownership, availability of palliative care and opioids) and case mix (disease severity) variables.

Results

133 LTCFs of only one type (onsite nurses and offsite GPs) were considered in order to reduce heterogeneity. Variation in LTCF efficiency was found across as well as within countries. This variation was not explained by country, ownership, availability of palliative care or opioids. However, in the ‘hands-on care at the bedside’ scenario, i.e. only taking into account nursing and care assistants as input, Poland (p = 0.00) and Finland (p = 0.04) seemed to be most efficient.

Conclusions

Efficiency of LTCFs differed extensively across as well as within countries, indicating room for considerable efficiency improvement. Our findings should be interpreted cautiously, as comprehensive comparative EU-wide research is challenging as it is influenced by many factors.

Integrating palliative care in long-term care facilities across Europe (PACE): protocol of a cluster randomized controlled trial of the 'PACE Steps to Success' intervention in seven countries

Background

Several studies have highlighted the need for improvement in palliative care delivered to older people long-term care facilities. However, the available evidence on how to improve palliative care in these settings is weak, especially in Europe. We describe the protocol of the PACE trial aimed to 1) evaluate the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of the ‘PACE Steps to Success’ palliative care intervention for older people in long-term care facilities, and 2) assess the implementation process and identify facilitators and barriers for implementation in different countries.

Methods

We will conduct a multi-facility cluster randomised controlled trial in Belgium, Finland, Italy, the Netherlands, Poland, Switzerland and England. In total, 72 facilities will be randomized to receive the ‘Pace Steps to Success intervention’ or to ‘care as usual’. Primary outcome at resident level: quality of dying (CAD-EOLD); and at staff level: staff knowledge of palliative care (Palliative Care Survey). Secondary outcomes: resident’s quality of end-of-life care, staff self-efficacy, self-perceived educational needs, and opinions on palliative care. Economic outcomes: direct costs and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs).

Measurements are performed at baseline and after the intervention. For the resident-level outcomes, facilities report all deaths of residents in and outside the facilities over a previous four-month period and structured questionnaires are sent to (1) the administrator, (2) staff member most involved in care (3) treating general practitioner, and (4) a relative. For the staff-level outcomes, all staff who are working in the facilities are asked to complete a structured questionnaire. A process evaluation will run alongside the effectiveness evaluation in the intervention group using the RE-AIM framework.

Discussion

The lack of high quality trials in palliative care has been recognized throughout the field of palliative care research. This cross-national cluster RCT designed to evaluate the impact of the palliative care intervention for long-term care facilities ‘PACE Steps to Success’ in seven countries, will provide important evidence concerning the effectiveness as well as the preconditions for optimal implementation of palliative care in nursing homes, and this within different health care systems.

Trial registration

The study is registered at www.isrctn.com – ISRCTN14741671 (FP7-HEALTH-2013-INNOVATION-1 603111) Registration date: July 30, 2015.

The use of Quality-Adjusted Life Years in cost-effectiveness analyses in palliative care: Mapping the debate through an integrative review

BACKGROUND

In cost-effectiveness analyses in healthcare, Quality-Adjusted Life Years are often used as outcome measure of effectiveness. However, there is an ongoing debate concerning the appropriateness of its use for decision-making in palliative care.

AIM

To systematically map pros and cons of using the Quality-Adjusted Life Year to inform decisions on resource allocation among palliative care interventions, as brought forward in the debate, and to discuss the Quality-Adjusted Life Year's value for palliative care.

DESIGN

The integrative review method of Whittemore and Knafl was followed. Theoretical arguments and empirical findings were mapped.

DATA SOURCES

A literature search was conducted in PubMed, EMBASE, and CINAHL, in which MeSH (Medical Subject Headings) terms were Palliative Care, Cost-Benefit Analysis, Quality of Life, and Quality-Adjusted Life Years.

FINDINGS

Three themes regarding the pros and cons were identified: (1) restrictions in life years gained, (2) conceptualization of quality of life and its measurement, including suggestions to adapt this, and (3) valuation and additivity of time, referring to changing valuation of time. The debate is recognized in empirical studies, but alternatives not yet applied.

CONCLUSION

The Quality-Adjusted Life Year might be more valuable for palliative care if specific issues are taken into account. Despite restrictions in life years gained, Quality-Adjusted Life Years can be achieved in palliative care. However, in measuring quality of life, we recommend to-in addition to the EQ-5D- make use of quality of life or capability instruments specifically for palliative care. Also, we suggest exploring the possibility of integrating valuation of time in a non-linear way in the Quality-Adjusted Life Year.