Cargando…

Identifying patients who could benefit from palliative care by making use of the general practice information system: the Surprise Question versus the SPICT

OBJECTIVE: We compared the performance of two tools to help general practitioners (GPs) identify patients in need of palliative care: the Surprise Question (SQ) and the Supportive and Palliative Care Indicators Tool (SPICT). METHODS: Prospective cohort study in two general practices in the Netherlan...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: van Wijmen, Matthijs P S, Schweitzer, Bart P M, Pasman, H R, Onwuteaka-Philipsen, Bregje D
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Oxford University Press 2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7571774/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32424418
http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/fampra/cmaa049
_version_ 1783597216461488128
author van Wijmen, Matthijs P S
Schweitzer, Bart P M
Pasman, H R
Onwuteaka-Philipsen, Bregje D
author_facet van Wijmen, Matthijs P S
Schweitzer, Bart P M
Pasman, H R
Onwuteaka-Philipsen, Bregje D
author_sort van Wijmen, Matthijs P S
collection PubMed
description OBJECTIVE: We compared the performance of two tools to help general practitioners (GPs) identify patients in need of palliative care: the Surprise Question (SQ) and the Supportive and Palliative Care Indicators Tool (SPICT). METHODS: Prospective cohort study in two general practices in the Netherlands with a size of 3640 patients. At the start of the study the GPs selected patients by heart using the SQ. The SPICT was translated into a digital search in electronic patient records. The GPs then selected patients from the list thus created. Afterwards the GPs were interviewed about their experiences. The following year a record was kept of all the patients deceased in both practices. We analysed the characteristics of the patients selected and the deceased. We calculated the performance characteristics concerning predicting 1-year mortality. RESULTS: The sensitivity of the SQ was 50%, of the SPICT 57%; the specificity 99% and 98%. When analysing the deceased (n = 36), 10 died relatively suddenly and arguably could not be identified. Leaving out these 10, the sensitivity of the SQ became 69%, of the SPICT 81%. The GPs found the performance of the digital search quite time consuming. CONCLUSION: The SPICT seems to be better in identifying patients in need of palliative care than the SQ. It is also more time consuming than the SQ. However, as the digital search can be performed more easily after it has been done for the first time, initial investments can repay themselves.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7571774
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2020
publisher Oxford University Press
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-75717742020-10-28 Identifying patients who could benefit from palliative care by making use of the general practice information system: the Surprise Question versus the SPICT van Wijmen, Matthijs P S Schweitzer, Bart P M Pasman, H R Onwuteaka-Philipsen, Bregje D Fam Pract Epidemiology OBJECTIVE: We compared the performance of two tools to help general practitioners (GPs) identify patients in need of palliative care: the Surprise Question (SQ) and the Supportive and Palliative Care Indicators Tool (SPICT). METHODS: Prospective cohort study in two general practices in the Netherlands with a size of 3640 patients. At the start of the study the GPs selected patients by heart using the SQ. The SPICT was translated into a digital search in electronic patient records. The GPs then selected patients from the list thus created. Afterwards the GPs were interviewed about their experiences. The following year a record was kept of all the patients deceased in both practices. We analysed the characteristics of the patients selected and the deceased. We calculated the performance characteristics concerning predicting 1-year mortality. RESULTS: The sensitivity of the SQ was 50%, of the SPICT 57%; the specificity 99% and 98%. When analysing the deceased (n = 36), 10 died relatively suddenly and arguably could not be identified. Leaving out these 10, the sensitivity of the SQ became 69%, of the SPICT 81%. The GPs found the performance of the digital search quite time consuming. CONCLUSION: The SPICT seems to be better in identifying patients in need of palliative care than the SQ. It is also more time consuming than the SQ. However, as the digital search can be performed more easily after it has been done for the first time, initial investments can repay themselves. Oxford University Press 2020-05-19 /pmc/articles/PMC7571774/ /pubmed/32424418 http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/fampra/cmaa049 Text en © The Author(s) 2020. Published by Oxford University Press. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/ This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/), which permits non-commercial re-use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. For commercial re-use, please contact journals.permissions@oup.com
spellingShingle Epidemiology
van Wijmen, Matthijs P S
Schweitzer, Bart P M
Pasman, H R
Onwuteaka-Philipsen, Bregje D
Identifying patients who could benefit from palliative care by making use of the general practice information system: the Surprise Question versus the SPICT
title Identifying patients who could benefit from palliative care by making use of the general practice information system: the Surprise Question versus the SPICT
title_full Identifying patients who could benefit from palliative care by making use of the general practice information system: the Surprise Question versus the SPICT
title_fullStr Identifying patients who could benefit from palliative care by making use of the general practice information system: the Surprise Question versus the SPICT
title_full_unstemmed Identifying patients who could benefit from palliative care by making use of the general practice information system: the Surprise Question versus the SPICT
title_short Identifying patients who could benefit from palliative care by making use of the general practice information system: the Surprise Question versus the SPICT
title_sort identifying patients who could benefit from palliative care by making use of the general practice information system: the surprise question versus the spict
topic Epidemiology
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7571774/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32424418
http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/fampra/cmaa049
work_keys_str_mv AT vanwijmenmatthijsps identifyingpatientswhocouldbenefitfrompalliativecarebymakinguseofthegeneralpracticeinformationsystemthesurprisequestionversusthespict
AT schweitzerbartpm identifyingpatientswhocouldbenefitfrompalliativecarebymakinguseofthegeneralpracticeinformationsystemthesurprisequestionversusthespict
AT pasmanhr identifyingpatientswhocouldbenefitfrompalliativecarebymakinguseofthegeneralpracticeinformationsystemthesurprisequestionversusthespict
AT onwuteakaphilipsenbregjed identifyingpatientswhocouldbenefitfrompalliativecarebymakinguseofthegeneralpracticeinformationsystemthesurprisequestionversusthespict