Cargando…

Comparing two models of outpatient specialised palliative care

BACKGROUND: Ideally, patients with life-threatening illness who are suffering from multiple symptoms and reduced quality of life should receive palliative care that addresses their specific needs. The many well-defined clinical pathways may not always leave room for a person-centred and individual a...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Rosted, Elizabeth, Aabom, Birgit, Hølge-Hazelton, Bibi, Raunkiær, Mette
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7893925/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33602200
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12904-021-00727-0
_version_ 1783653145067388928
author Rosted, Elizabeth
Aabom, Birgit
Hølge-Hazelton, Bibi
Raunkiær, Mette
author_facet Rosted, Elizabeth
Aabom, Birgit
Hølge-Hazelton, Bibi
Raunkiær, Mette
author_sort Rosted, Elizabeth
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Ideally, patients with life-threatening illness who are suffering from multiple symptoms and reduced quality of life should receive palliative care that addresses their specific needs. The many well-defined clinical pathways may not always leave room for a person-centred and individual approach with respect to symptom control, psychosocial and spiritual support, and practical issues. In deciding how to organize outpatient specialist palliative care (SPC), it is relevant to include the perspectives of both patients and families. Thus, the aim of this study was to compare two models for outpatient SPC: first contact between patient, next-of-kin and doctor/nurse in the form of a home visit; and first visit in the hospital setting. METHOD: The study was a comparative mixed methods study with follow-up at one and 3 months. It started with a quantitative strand in the form of a 38-item questionnaire. Data were analysed using linear mixed effects models, with maximum likelihood estimation for each outcome variable. The repeated measurements on patient level were modelled by including random intercepts of patients in the mixed model. RESULTS: In total, 190 participants were enrolled, of whom 102 answered the first questionnaire. No differences were found between the two SPC interventions when development in satisfaction with care, communication or overall quality of life were compared. At baseline, a significantly higher score for satisfaction was found, in favour of first visit taking place in the hospital setting (65.91 vs. 55.83; p = 0.03) measured by FAMCARE-P16, and more patients were satisfied with availability of nurses and their abilities to listen and communicate than of doctors. CONCLUSION: Specialist palliative care is in request for many patients in the late phase of their disease. We found no significant differences in satisfaction with care, communication with health professionals or in overall quality of life between the two models. This may imply that access to SPC is more important than the model that is applied, and that a person-centred approach together with time available may matter more than the context. These two factors should be considered when implementing SPC.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7893925
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-78939252021-02-22 Comparing two models of outpatient specialised palliative care Rosted, Elizabeth Aabom, Birgit Hølge-Hazelton, Bibi Raunkiær, Mette BMC Palliat Care Research Article BACKGROUND: Ideally, patients with life-threatening illness who are suffering from multiple symptoms and reduced quality of life should receive palliative care that addresses their specific needs. The many well-defined clinical pathways may not always leave room for a person-centred and individual approach with respect to symptom control, psychosocial and spiritual support, and practical issues. In deciding how to organize outpatient specialist palliative care (SPC), it is relevant to include the perspectives of both patients and families. Thus, the aim of this study was to compare two models for outpatient SPC: first contact between patient, next-of-kin and doctor/nurse in the form of a home visit; and first visit in the hospital setting. METHOD: The study was a comparative mixed methods study with follow-up at one and 3 months. It started with a quantitative strand in the form of a 38-item questionnaire. Data were analysed using linear mixed effects models, with maximum likelihood estimation for each outcome variable. The repeated measurements on patient level were modelled by including random intercepts of patients in the mixed model. RESULTS: In total, 190 participants were enrolled, of whom 102 answered the first questionnaire. No differences were found between the two SPC interventions when development in satisfaction with care, communication or overall quality of life were compared. At baseline, a significantly higher score for satisfaction was found, in favour of first visit taking place in the hospital setting (65.91 vs. 55.83; p = 0.03) measured by FAMCARE-P16, and more patients were satisfied with availability of nurses and their abilities to listen and communicate than of doctors. CONCLUSION: Specialist palliative care is in request for many patients in the late phase of their disease. We found no significant differences in satisfaction with care, communication with health professionals or in overall quality of life between the two models. This may imply that access to SPC is more important than the model that is applied, and that a person-centred approach together with time available may matter more than the context. These two factors should be considered when implementing SPC. BioMed Central 2021-02-18 /pmc/articles/PMC7893925/ /pubmed/33602200 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12904-021-00727-0 Text en © The Author(s) 2021 Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.
spellingShingle Research Article
Rosted, Elizabeth
Aabom, Birgit
Hølge-Hazelton, Bibi
Raunkiær, Mette
Comparing two models of outpatient specialised palliative care
title Comparing two models of outpatient specialised palliative care
title_full Comparing two models of outpatient specialised palliative care
title_fullStr Comparing two models of outpatient specialised palliative care
title_full_unstemmed Comparing two models of outpatient specialised palliative care
title_short Comparing two models of outpatient specialised palliative care
title_sort comparing two models of outpatient specialised palliative care
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7893925/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33602200
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12904-021-00727-0
work_keys_str_mv AT rostedelizabeth comparingtwomodelsofoutpatientspecialisedpalliativecare
AT aabombirgit comparingtwomodelsofoutpatientspecialisedpalliativecare
AT hølgehazeltonbibi comparingtwomodelsofoutpatientspecialisedpalliativecare
AT raunkiærmette comparingtwomodelsofoutpatientspecialisedpalliativecare