Search

Background: Breathlessness frequently becomes severe among people with respiratory disease. Mirtazapine, a widely used antidepressant, has shown promise in the modulation of respiratory sensation and the response to it, as well as reducing feelings of panic, which often accompanies breathlessness. We aimed to determine the effectiveness of mirtazapine to alleviate severe persisting breathlessness., Methods: This international, multicentre, phase 3, parallel-group, double-blind, randomised, placebo-controlled trial across 16 centres in seven countries (Australia, Germany, Ireland, Italy, New Zealand, Poland, and the UK), recruited adults with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), interstitial lung diseases, or both, and grade 3 or 4 of the modified Medical Research Council breathlessness scale. Consenting participants were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive oral mirtazapine or matching placebo for 56 days. Randomisation was by minimisation. The initial mirtazapine dose was 15 mg, escalating to a maximum of 45 mg per day, tapered at treatment end. Participants, caregivers, assessors, and investigators were masked to group assignment. The primary outcome was worst breathlessness in the preceding 24 h measured on a 0-10 numerical rating scale (NRS), at 56 days post-treatment start, with follow-up to 180 days. The primary analysis was performed in the modified intention-to-treat population using multivariable multi-level repeated measures model. This trial was registered with ISRCTN (ISRCTN10487976 and ISRCTN15751764 [Australia and New Zealand]) and EudraCT (2019-002001-21) and is complete., Findings: Between Feb 4, 2021 and March 28, 2023, we enrolled 225 eligible participants (148 men and 77 women, 113 to the mirtazapine group and 112 to the placebo group). The median age was 74 years (IQR 67-78). No evidence of a difference was found in worst breathlessness at day 56 between mirtazapine and placebo (difference in adjusted mean NRS score was 0·105 [95% CI -0·407 to 0·618]; p=0·69). Although the study was underpowered, the primary endpoint effect did not reach the pre-specified treatment effect of 0·55 for worst breathlessness score reduction that the study was powered to detect for the primary analysis. There were 215 adverse reactions in 72 (64%) of 113 participants in the mirtazapine group versus 116 in 44 (40%) of 110 participants in the placebo group; 11 serious adverse events in six (5%) participants in the mirtazapine group versus eight in seven (6%) participants in the placebo group; and one (1%) suspected unexpected serious adverse reaction in the mirtazapine group. At day 56, there were three deaths in the mirtazapine group and two deaths in the placebo group. At day 180, there were seven deaths in the mirtazapine group and 11 deaths in the placebo group., Interpretation: Our findings suggested that mirtazapine of doses 15 to 45 mg daily over 56 days does not improve severe breathlessness among patients with COPD or interstitial lung diseases and might cause adverse reactions. Based on these findings, we do not recommend mirtazapine as a treatment to alleviate severe breathlessness., Funding: EU Horizon 2020 (grant agreement No. 825319); Cicely Saunders International Breathlessness Programme; National Institute for Health and Care Research Applied Research Collaboration South London; Australian National Health and Medical Research Council-EU (application ID: APP1170731)., Competing Interests: Declaration of interests IJH reports grants from EU, Marie Curie Cancer Care, and National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR), and is Scientific Director of Cicely Saunders International, NIHR Emeritus Senior Investigator, and is an Honorary Clinical Consultant in Palliative Medicine for hospitals under Kings College Hospital National Health Service Foundation Trust outside of the submitted work. CEB reports grants from the EU, NIHR, AstraZeneca as well as an industry collaboration and a personal fee from Roche outside of the submitted work. JMBr reports grants from the EU and reports being an uncompensated NIHR Health Technology Assessment Funding Committee Chair outside of the submitted work. DCC reports personal fees from Helsinn Pharmaceuticals, Mayne Pharma International, Nous Group, iCare Dust Disease Board, and an unpaid consultant to Chris O'Brien Lighthouse outside of the submitted work. BF reports grants from the Wellcome Trust and is a member of the Ethics Advisory Board Our Future Health, Assurance Board member Cass Review, EU appointed Ethics Advisor to the River EU project, Advisory Board Member Italian MS ConCure project, Advisory Group for Monash University, and Advisory Panel Member for Economic and Social Research Council outside of the submitted work. SPH reports personal fees from Trevi Therapeutics, Boehringer Ingelheim, Chiesi, and is a Trustee for Action for Pulmonary Fibrosis outside of the submitted work. CB, MJJ, AOO, KR, and STS report grants from the EU. MM reports grants from the EU, UKRI, and NIHR. MK and PJ report grants from the EU and Poland Ministry of Science and Higher Education for participation in Horizon 2020. All other authors declare no competing interests., (Copyright © 2024 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an Open Access article under the CC BY 4.0 license. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)

Background: Severe and refractory chronic breathlessness is a common and burdensome symptom in patients with advanced life-limiting disease. Its clinical management is challenging because of the lack of effective interventions., Aim: To provide practice recommendations on the safe use of pharmacological therapies for severe chronic breathlessness., Design: Scoping review of (inter)national guidelines and systematic reviews. We additionally searched for primary studies where no systematic review could be identified. Consensus on the recommendations was reached by 75% approval within an international expert panel., Data Sources: Searches in MEDLINE, Cochrane Library and Guideline International Network until March 2023. Inclusion of publications on the use of antidepressants, benzodiazepines, opioids or corticosteroids for chronic breathlessness in adults with cancer, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, interstitial lung disease or chronic heart failure., Results: Overall, the evidence from eight guidelines, 14 systematic reviews and 3 randomised controlled trials (RCTs) on antidepressants is limited. There is low quality evidence favouring opioids in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, cancer and interstitial lung disease. For chronic heart failure, evidence is inconclusive. Benzodiazepines should only be considered for anxiety associated with severe breathlessness. Antidepressants and corticosteroids should not be used., Conclusion: Management of breathlessness remains challenging with only few pharmacological options with limited and partially conflicting evidence. Therefore, pharmacological treatment should be reserved for patients with advanced disease under monitoring of side effects, after optimisation of the underlying condition and use of evidence-based non-pharmacological interventions as first-line treatment., Competing Interests: Declaration of conflicting interestsIJH reports grants from EU, Marie Curie Cancer Care, and National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR), and is Scientific Director of Cicely Saunders International, NIHR Emeritus Senior Investigator, and is an Honorary Clinical Consultant in Palliative Medicine for hospitals under Kings College Hospital National Health Service Foundation Trust outside of the submitted work. CB and STS report grants from the EU. AOO reports grants from the Medical Research Foundation. MM reports grants from the EU, UKRI, and NIHR. All other authors declare no competing interests.

Purpose of Review: To explore the contributions of recent qualitative literature in progressing understanding of the experiences of cancer cachexia, and its management, from the perspectives of patients and unpaid/family carers., Recent Findings: Challenges with conducting everyday activities, maintaining independence, and continuing usual roles within the family are sources of distress. Patients and carers value individualization, flexibility, and carer involvement in physical activity/exercise interventions. In psychosocial/educational interventions that were positively perceived, the opportunity to talk about cachexia was appreciated, leading to improved health literacy, awareness about nutrition, and relationships with food. However, the general patient and carer experience around clinical acknowledgement and management of cachexia remains poor., Summary: Eating-related distress and conflicts, lack of understanding about cachexia, and the visibility of weight loss remain recurring themes amongst literature on experiences of cancer cachexia. Studies exploring preferences for, and experiences of, interventions have primarily focused on physical activity or exercise. Psychosocial/educational and physical activity/exercise interventions are valued and perceived to alleviate some of the key quality of life issues amongst patients with cancer cachexia and their unpaid/family carers., (Copyright © 2024 The Author(s). Published by Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc.)

Competing Interests: The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.

Objectives: Congruence between the preferred and actual place of death is recognised as an important quality indicator in end-of-life care. However, there may be complexities about preferences that are ignored in summary congruence measures. This article examined factors associated with preferred place of death, actual place of death, and congruence for a sample of patients who had received specialist palliative care in the last three months of life in Ireland. Methods: This article analysed merged data from two previously published mortality follow-back surveys: Economic Evaluation of Palliative Care in Ireland (EEPCI); Irish component of International Access, Rights and Empowerment (IARE I). Logistic regression models examined factors associated with (a) preferences for home death versus institutional setting, (b) home death versus hospital death, and (c) congruent versus non-congruent death. Setting: Four regions with differing levels of specialist palliative care development in Ireland. Participants: Mean age 77, 50% female/male, 19% living alone, 64% main diagnosis cancer. Data collected 2011-2015, regression model sample sizes: n = 342-351. Results: Congruence between preferred and actual place of death in the raw merged dataset was 51%. Patients living alone were significantly less likely to prefer home versus institution death (OR 0.389, 95%CI 0.157-0.961), less likely to die at home (OR 0.383, 95%CI 0.274-0.536), but had no significant association with congruence. Conclusions: The findings highlight the value in examining place of death preferences as well as congruence, because preferences may be influenced by what is feasible rather than what patients would like. The analyses also underline the importance of well-resourced community-based supports, including homecare, facilitating hospital discharge, and management of complex (eg, non-cancer) conditions, to facilitate patients to die in their preferred place.

Background: People with palliative care needs and their carers often rely on out-of-hours services to remain at home. Policymakers have recommended implementing telephone advice lines to ensure 24/7 access to support. However, the impact of these services on patient and carer outcomes, as well as the health care system, remains poorly understood., Aim: To evaluate the clinical- and cost-effectiveness of out-of-hours palliative care telephone advice lines, and to identify service characteristics associated with effectiveness., Design: Rapid systematic review (PROSPERO ID: CRD42023400370) with narrative synthesis., Data Sources: Three databases (Medline, EMBASE and CINAHL) were searched in February 2023 for studies of any design reporting on telephone advice lines with at least partial out-of-hours availability. Study quality was assessed using the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool, and quantitative and qualitative data were synthesised narratively., Results: Twenty-one studies, published 2000-2022, were included. Most studies were observational, none were experimental. While some evidence suggested that telephone advice lines offer guidance and reassurance, supporting care at home and potentially reducing avoidable emergency care use in the last months of life, variability in reporting and poor methodological quality across studies limit our understanding of patient/carer and health care system outcomes., Conclusion: Despite their increasing use, evidence for the clinical- and cost-effectiveness of palliative care telephone advice lines remains limited, primarily due to the lack of robust comparative studies. There is a need for more rigorous evaluations incorporating experimental or quasi-experimental methods and longer follow-up, and standardised reporting of telephone advice line models and outcomes, to guide policy and practice., Competing Interests: Declaration of conflicting interestsThe author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Background: Telephone advice lines have been recommended internationally to support around-the-clock care for people living at home with advanced illness. While they undoubtedly support care, there is little evidence about what elements are needed for success. A national picture is needed to understand, improve and standardise service delivery/care., Aim: To explore telephone advice lines for people living at home with advanced illness across the four UK nations, and to construct a practical framework to improve services., Design: A cross-national evaluation of telephone advice lines using structured qualitative interviews. A patient and public involvement workshop was conducted to refine the framework., Setting/participants: Professionals with responsibilities for how palliative care services are delivered and/or funded at a local or regional level, were purposively sampled., Results: Seventy-one interviews were conducted, covering 60 geographical areas. Five themes were identified. Availability : Ten advice line models were described. Variation led to confusion about who to call and when. Accessibility, awareness and promotion : It was assumed that patients/carers know who to call out-of-hours, but often they did not. Practicalities : Call handlers skills/expertise varied, which influenced how calls were managed. Possible responses ranged from signposting to organising home visits. Integration/continuity of care : Integration between care providers was limited by electronic medical records access/information sharing. Service structure/commissioning : Sustained funding was often an issue for charitably funded organisations., Conclusions: Our novel evidence-based practical framework could be transformative for service design/delivery, as it presents key considerations relating to the various elements of advice lines that may impact on the patient/carer experience., Competing Interests: Declaration of conflicting interestsThe author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Background: Understanding the complexity and multidimensional nature of chronic breathlessness is key to its successful management. The aim of this study was to explore illness perceptions, cognitive and behavioural responses to chronic breathlessness in individuals living with advanced respiratory disease., Methods: This was a cross-sectional secondary analysis of data from a feasibility randomised control trial (SELF-BREATHE) for individuals living with chronic breathlessness due to advanced disease. All participants completed the following questionnaires: numerical rating scale (NRS) breathlessness severity, NRS distress due to breathlessness, NRS self-efficacy for managing breathlessness, Dyspnea-12 (D-12), Chronic Respiratory Disease Questionnaire (CRQ), Brief Illness Perception Questionnaire (Brief IPQ) and the Cognitive and Behavioural Responses Questionnaire, short version (CBRQ-S). The associations between the Brief IPQ and CBRQ-S with NRS breathlessness severity, distress and self-efficacy, D-12 and CRQ were examined using Spearman's rho correlation coefficient r s . A Spearman's r s of ≥0.50 was predefined as the threshold to denote important associations between variables. A p-value of <0.008 was considered statistically significant, to account for the number of comparisons performed., Results: The illness perception items consequences, identity, concern and emotional response were associated with increased breathlessness severity, increased distress, reduced breathlessness self-management ability and lower health-related quality of life. Symptom focusing and embarrassment avoidance were identified as important cognitive responses to chronic breathlessness., Conclusion: Interventions that directly target illness perceptions, cognitive and behavioural responses to chronic breathlessness may improve symptom burden, self-efficacy and health-related quality of life., Competing Interests: Conflict of interest: C.C. Reilly reports support for the present manuscript from NIHR Clinical Lectureship (ICA-CL-2018-04-ST2-001), which funds all aspects of this research; and grants or contracts from King's Together multi and interdisciplinary research scheme, and Royal Brompton Hospital–King's Health Partnership Transformation funding, outside the submitted work. Conflict of interest: I.J. Higginson reports grants or contracts from the NIHR, UKRI, Cicely Saunders International and Marie Curie, outside the submitted work. Conflict of interest: T. Chalder reports support for the present manuscript by receiving salary support from the NIHR Mental Health Biomedical Research Centre at South London and Maudsley NHS Foundation Trust and King's College London. The views expressed in this article are those of the authors and not necessarily those of the NIHR or the NHS., (Copyright ©The authors 2024.)

Background: The number and proportion of home deaths in the UK increased during the Covid-19 pandemic. It is not known whether these changes were experienced disproportionately by people from different socioeconomic groups., Aim: To examine the association between home death and socioeconomic position during the Covid-19 pandemic, and how this changed between 2019 and 2020., Design: Retrospective cohort study using population-based individual-level mortality data., Setting/participants: All registered deaths in England, Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland. The proportion of home deaths between 28th March and 31st December 2020 was compared with the same period in 2019. We used Poisson regression models to evaluate the association between decedent's area-based level of deprivation and risk of home death, as well as the interaction between deprivation and year of death, for each nation separately., Results: Between the 28th March and 31st December 2020, 409,718 deaths were recorded in England, 46,372 in Scotland, 26,410 in Wales and 13,404 in Northern Ireland. All four nations showed an increase in the adjusted proportion of home deaths between 2019 and 2020, ranging from 21 to 28%. This increase was lowest for people living in the most deprived areas in all nations, with evidence of a deprivation gradient in England., Conclusions: The Covid-19 pandemic exacerbated a previously described socioeconomic inequality in place of death in the UK. Further research to understand the reasons for this change and if this inequality has been sustained is needed.

The effect of meditative movement, which includes yoga, tai chi and qi gong, on breathlessness in advanced disease is unknown. This systematic review aims to comprehensively assess the evidence on the effect of meditative movement on breathlessness (primary outcome), health-related quality of life, exercise capacity, functional performance and psychological symptoms (secondary outcomes) in advanced disease. 11 English and Chinese language databases were searched for relevant trials. Risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane tool. Standardised mean differences (SMDs) with 95% confidence intervals were computed. 17 trials with 1125 participants (n=815 COPD, n=310 cancer), all with unclear or high risk of bias, were included. Pooled estimates (14 studies, n=671) showed no statistically significant difference in breathlessness between meditative movement and control interventions (SMD (95% CI) 0.10 (-0.15-0.34); Chi 2 =30.11; I 2 =57%; p=0.45), irrespective of comparator, intervention or disease category. Similar results were observed for health-related quality of life and exercise capacity. It was not possible to perform a meta-analysis for functional performance and psychological symptoms. In conclusion, in people with advanced COPD or cancer, meditative movement does not improve breathlessness, health-related quality of life or exercise capacity. Methodological limitations lead to low levels of certainty in the results., Competing Interests: Conflict of interest: C.M. Nolan reports personal fees from Novartis, consultancy work (not reimbursed) with Vicore Pharma and grants from the National Institute for Health and Care Research outside the submitted work. W.D-C. Man reports grants from the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR), outside the submitted work. M. Maddocks reports grants from NIHR, outside the submitted work. The remaining authors have nothing to disclose., (Copyright ©The authors 2023.)

Background: In advanced disease, breathlessness becomes severe, increasing health services use. Breathlessness triggered services demonstrate effectiveness in trials and meta-analyses but lack health economic assessment., Methods: Our economic study included a discrete choice experiment (DCE), followed by a cost-effectiveness analysis modelling. The DCE comprised face-to-face interviews with older patients with chronic breathlessness and their carers across nine UK centres. Conditional logistic regression analysis of DCE data determined the preferences (or not, indicated by negative β coefficients) for service attributes. Economic modelling estimated the costs and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) over 5 years., Findings: The DCE recruited 190 patients and 68 carers. Offering breathlessness services in person from general practitioner (GP) surgeries was not preferred (β=-0.30, 95% CI -0.40 to -0.21); hospital outpatient clinics (0.16, 0.06 to 0.25) or via home visits (0.15, 0.06 to 0.24) were preferred. Inperson services with comprehensive treatment review (0.15, 0.07 to 0.21) and holistic support (0.19, 0.07 to 0.31) were preferred to those without. Cost-effectiveness analysis found the most and the least preferred models of breathlessness services were cost-effective compared with usual care. The most preferred service had £5719 lower costs (95% CI -6043 to 5395), with 0.004 (95% CI -0.003 to 0.011) QALY benefits per patient. Uptake was higher when attributes were tailored to individual preferences (86% vs 40%)., Conclusion: Breathlessness services are cost-effective compared with usual care for health and social care, giving cost savings and better quality of life. Uptake of breathlessness services is higher when service attributes are individually tailored., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2023. Re-use permitted under CC BY. Published by BMJ.)

Introduction: SELF-BREATHE is a complex, transdiagnostic, supportive, digital breathlessness intervention co-developed with patients. SELF-BREATHE seeks to build capacity and resilience within health services by improving the lives of people with chronic breathlessness using nonpharmacological, self-management approaches. This study aimed to determine whether SELF-BREATHE is feasible to deliver and acceptable to patients living with chronic breathlessness., Methods: A parallel, two-arm, single-blind, single-centre, randomised controlled, mixed-methods feasibility trial with participants allocated to 1) intervention group (SELF-BREATHE) or 2) control group (usual National Health Service (NHS) care). The setting was a large multisite NHS foundation trust in south-east London, UK. The participants were patients living with chronic breathlessness due to advanced malignant or nonmalignant disease(s). Participants were randomly allocated (1:1) to an online, self-guided, breathlessness supportive intervention (SELF-BREATHE) and usual care or usual care alone, over 6 weeks. The a priori progression criteria were ≥30% of eligible patients given an information sheet consented to participate; ≥60% of participants logged on and accessed SELF-BREATHE within 2 weeks; and ≥70% of patients reported the methodology and intervention as acceptable., Results: Between January 2021 and January 2022, 52 (47%) out of 110 eligible patients consented and were randomised. Of those randomised to SELF-BREATHE, 19 (73%) out of 26 logged on and used SELF-BREATHE for a mean±sd (range) 9±8 (1-33) times over 6 weeks. 36 (70%) of the 52 randomised participants completed and returned the end-of-study postal questionnaires. SELF-BREATHE users reported it to be acceptable. Post-intervention qualitative interviews demonstrated that SELF-BREATHE was acceptable and valued by users, improving breathlessness during daily life and at points of breathlessness crisis., Conclusion: These data support the feasibility of moving to a fully powered, randomised controlled efficacy trial with minor modifications to minimise missing data ( i.e. multiple methods of data collection: face-to-face, telephone, video assessment and by post)., Competing Interests: Conflict of interest: C.C. Reilly received support for the present manuscript from the NIHR; and declares funding received from King's Together and Royal Brompton Hospital – King's Health Partnership Transformation, outside the submitted work. Conflict of interest: M. Maddocks has received grants or contracts from National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Career Development Fellowship (CDF-2017–10-009) and NIHR Applied Research Collaboration South London (NIHR ARC South London) at King's College Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, outside the submitted work. Conflict of interest: T. Chalder receives salary support from the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Mental Health Biomedical Research Centre at South London and Maudsley NHS Foundation Trust and King's College London. The views expressed in this article are those of the authors and not necessarily those of the NIHR or the NHS. Conflict of interest: K. Bristowe has received grants or contracts from the National Institute for Health Research, Medical Research Council, Health Education England, European Commission, and Marie Curie, outside the submitted work. Conflict of interest: I.J. Higginson has received grants or contracts from the NIHR, UKRI, Cicely Saunders International and Marie Curie, outside the submitted work., (Copyright ©The authors 2023.)

Background: Patient-centred measures to capture symptoms and concerns have rarely been reported in severe COVID. We adapted and tested the measurement properties of the proxy version of the Integrated Palliative care Outcome Scale-IPOS-COV for severe COVID using psychometric approach., Methods: We consulted experts and followed consensus-based standards for the selection of health status measurement instruments and United States Food and Drug Administration guidance for adaptation and analysis. Exploratory Factor Analysis and clinical perspective informed subscales. We tested the internal consistency reliability, calculated item total correlations, examined re-test reliability in stable patients, and also evaluated inter-rater reproducibility. We examined convergent and divergent validity of IPOS-COV with the Australia-modified Karnofsky Performance Scale and evaluated known-groups validity. Ability to detect change was examined., Results: In the adaptation phase, 6 new items were added, 7 items were removed from the original measure. The recall period was revised to be the last 12-24 h to capture fast deterioration in COVID. General format and response options of the original Integrated Palliative care Outcome Scale were preserved. Data from 572 patients with COVID from across England and Wales seen by palliative care services were included. Four subscales were supported by the 4-factor solution explaining 53.5% of total variance. Breathlessness-Agitation and Gastro-intestinal subscales demonstrated good reliability with high to moderate (a = 0.70 and a = 0.67) internal consistency, and item-total correlations (0.62-0.21). All except the Flu subscale discriminated well between patients with differing disease severity. Inter-rater reliability was fair with ICC of 0.40 (0.3-0.5, 95% CI, n = 324). Correlations between the subscales and AKPS as predicted were weak (r = 0.13-0.26) but significant (p < 0.01). Breathlessness-Agitation and Drowsiness-Delirium subscales demonstrated good divergent validity. Patients with low oxygen saturation had higher mean Breathlessness-Agitation scores (M = 5.3) than those with normal levels (M = 3.4), t = 6.4 (186), p < 0.001. Change in Drowsiness-Delirium subscale correctly classified patients who died., Conclusions: IPOS-COV is the first patient-centred measure adapted for severe COVID to support timely management. Future studies could further evaluate its responsiveness and clinical utility with clinimetric approaches., (© 2023. The Author(s).)

Introduction: Little consideration has been given to how the provision of palliative and end-of-life care in care homes was affected by COVID-19. The aims of this study were to: (i) investigate the response of UK care homes in meeting the rapidly increasing need for palliative and end-of-life care during the COVID-19 pandemic and (ii) propose policy recommendations for strengthening the provision of palliative and end-of-life care within care homes., Materials and Methods: A mixed methods observational study was conducted, which incorporated (i) an online cross-sectional survey of UK care homes and (ii) qualitative interviews with care home practitioners. Participants for the survey were recruited between April and September 2021. Survey participants indicating availability to participate in an interview were recruited using a purposive sampling approach between June and October 2021. Data were integrated through analytic triangulation in which we sought areas of convergence, divergence, and complementarity., Results: There were 107 responses to the survey and 27 interviews. We found that (i) relationship-centered care is crucial to high-quality palliative and end-of-life care within care homes, but this was disrupted during the pandemic. (ii) Care homes' ability to maintain high-quality relationship-centered care required key "pillars" being in place: integration with external healthcare systems, digital inclusion, and a supported workforce. Inequities within the care home sector meant that in some services these pillars were compromised, and relationship-centered care suffered. (iii) The provision of relationship-centered care was undermined by care home staff feeling that their efforts and expertise in delivering palliative and end-of-life care often went unrecognized/undervalued., Conclusion: Relationship-centered care is a key component of high-quality palliative and end-of-life care in care homes, but this was disrupted during the COVID-19 pandemic. We identify key policy priorities to equip care homes with the resources, capacity, and expertise needed to deliver palliative and end-of-life care: (i) integration within health and social care systems, (ii) digital inclusivity, (iii) workforce development, (iv) support for care home managers, and (v) addressing (dis)parities of esteem. These policy recommendations inform, extend, and align with policies and initiatives within the UK and internationally., Competing Interests: KS is funded by a National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Clinician Scientist Fellowship (CS-2015-15-005) and is the Laing Galazka Chair in Palliative Care at King's College London, funded by an endowment from Cicely Saunders International and the Kirby Laing Foundation. CE is funded by a Health Education England/NIHR Senior Clinical Lectureship (ICA-SCL-2015-01-001). CG is an NIHR Senior Investigator. SB is part-funded by the NIHR Applied Research Collaboration East of England (ARC EoE). IH is an NIHR Emeritus Senior Investigator, is supported by the NIHR ARC South London (SL) at King's College Hospital National Health Service Foundation Trust, and leads the Palliative and End-of-Life Care theme of the NIHR ARC South London and co-leads the national theme in this with SB. The remaining authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest., (Copyright © 2023 Bradshaw, Ostler, Goodman, Batkovskyte, Ellis-Smith, Tunnard, Bone, Barclay, Vernon, Higginson, Evans and Sleeman.)

Background: Culturally relevant patient-centered outcomes tools are needed to identify the needs of patients and to assess their palliative care concerns., Aim: To translate and culturally adapt the Integrated Palliative Care Outcome Scale (IPOS) into Hindi., Design: The study applied a standardized methodology entailing six phases for translation and content validation: equivalence setting through a three-step process; forward translation; blind backward translation; expert review by a panel of the POS team; cognitive de-briefing with patients; and proof-reading of the final tool. All interviews and focus groups were audio-recorded, transcribed and analyzed using content analysis., Setting/participants: ( 1) Healthcare professionals including doctors, nurses, psychologists, counselors, and volunteers working in Indian palliative care settings with expertise in both English and Hindi languages; (2) Hindi speaking patients diagnosed with cancer who were receiving palliative care in community settings. Caregivers, palliative care experts, and language translators contributed to the translation procedure., Results: Phrases like nausea, poor appetite, drowsiness, and depression were difficult to translate into Hindi. Response categories "occasional" and "sometimes" were overlapping. All items, instructions and response categories were simple to understand. A visual thermometer is a unique feature of Hindi IPOS to facilitate responses from less educated patients., Conclusion: Hindi IPOS has face and content validity for use in clinical practice and research. The Hindi IPOS has implications beyond Indian palliative care settings. Millions of Hindi speakers can now respond to IPOS, and have a tool for communicating their palliative care needs in their mother tongue to inform patient-centered care.

Background: In England, Integrated Care Systems have been established to improve integration of care, as part of the NHS Long Term Plan. For people near the end of life, palliative care can improve integration of care. We aimed to understand whether and how palliative and end of life care was included in Integrated Care System strategies, and to consider priorities for strengthening this., Methods: Documentary analysis of Integrated Care System (ICS) strategies, using summative content analysis, was performed. Google searches were used to identify NHS Trust, Clinical Commissioning Group or ICS websites. We searched these websites to identify strategies. Key terms were used to identify relevant content. Themes were mapped onto an adapted logic model for integrated care., Results: 23 Integrated Care System strategy documents were identified. Of these, two did not mention any of the key terms, and six highlighted palliative and end of life care as either a priority, area of focus, or an ambition. While most (19/23) strategies included elements that could be mapped onto the adapted logic model for integrated care, the thread from enablers and components, to structures, processes, outcomes, and impact was incomplete., Conclusions: Greater prioritisation of palliative and end of life care within recently established Integrated Care Systems could improve outcomes for people near the end of life, as well as reduce reliance on acute hospital care. Integrated Care Systems should consider involving patients, the public and palliative care stakeholders in the ongoing development of strategies. For strategies to be effective, our adapted logic model can be used to outline how different components of care fit together to achieve defined outcomes and impact., Competing Interests: Competing interests No competing interests were disclosed.

Objectives: To describe multinational prescribing practices by palliative care services for symptom management in patients dying with COVID-19 and the perceived effectiveness of medicines., Methods: We surveyed specialist palliative care services, contacted via relevant organisations between April and July 2020. Descriptive statistics for categorical variables were expressed as counts and percentages. Content analysis explored free text responses about symptom management in COVID-19. Medicines were classified using British National Formulary categories. Perceptions on effectiveness of medicines were grouped into five categories; effective, some, limited or unclear effectiveness, no effect., Results: 458 services responded; 277 UK, 85 rest of Europe, 95 rest of the world, 1 missing country. 358 services had managed patients with confirmed or suspected COVID-19. 289 services had protocols for symptom management in COVID-19. Services tended to prescribe medicines for symptom control comparable to medicines used in people without COVID-19; mainly opioids and benzodiazepines for breathlessness, benzodiazepines and antipsychotics for agitation, opioids and cough linctus for cough, paracetamol and non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs for fever, and opioids and paracetamol for pain. Medicines were considered to be mostly effective but varied by patient's condition, route of administration and dose., Conclusions: Services were largely consistent in prescribing for symptom management in people dying with COVID-19. Medicines used prior to COVID-19 were mostly considered effective in controlling common symptoms., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2022. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Objectives: To explore formal and informal care costs in the last 3 months of life for people with dementia, and to evaluate the association between transitions to hospital and usual place of care with costs., Design: Cross-sectional study using pooled data from 3 mortality follow-back surveys., Setting and Participants: People who died with dementia., Methods: The Client Service Receipt Inventory survey was used to derive formal (health, social) and informal care costs in the last 3 months of life. Generalized linear models were used to explore the association between transitions to hospital and usual place of care with formal and informal care costs., Results: A total of 146 people who died with dementia were included. The mean age was 88.1 years (SD 6.0), and 98 (67.1%) were female. The usual place of care was care home for 85 (58.2%). Sixty-five individuals (44.5%) died in a care home, and 85 (58.2%) experienced a transition to hospital in the last 3 months. The mean total costs of care in the last 3 months of life were £31,224.7 (SD 23,536.6). People with a transition to hospital had higher total costs (£33,239.2, 95% CI 28,301.8-39,037.8) than people without transition (£21,522.0, 95% CI 17,784.0-26,045.8), mainly explained by hospital costs. People whose usual place of care was care homes had lower total costs (£23,801.3, 95% CI 20,172.0-28,083.6) compared to home (£34,331.4, 95% CI 27,824.7-42,359.5), mainly explained by lower informal care costs., Conclusions and Implications: Total care costs are high among people dying with dementia, and informal care costs represent an important component of end-of-life care costs. Transitions to hospital have a large impact on total costs; preventing these transitions might reduce costs from the health care perspective, but not from patients' and families' perspectives. Access to care homes could help reduce transitions to hospital as well as reduce formal and informal care costs., (Copyright © 2022 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Volunteers are common within palliative care services, and provide support that enhances care quality. The support they provided, and any role changes, during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic are unknown. The aim of this study is to understand volunteer deployment and activities within palliative care services, and to identify what may affect any changes in volunteer service provision, during the COVID-19 pandemic., Methods: Multi-national online survey disseminated via key stakeholders to specialist palliative care services, completed by lead clinicians. Data collected on volunteer roles, deployment, and changes in volunteer engagement. Analysis included descriptive statistics, a multivariable logistic regression, and analysis of free-text comments using a content analysis approach., Results: 458 respondents: 277 UK, 85 rest of Europe, and 95 rest of the world. 68.5% indicated volunteer use pre-COVID-19 across a number of roles (from 458): direct patient facing support (58.7%), indirect support (52.0%), back office (48.5%) and fundraising (45.6%). 11% had volunteers with COVID-19. Of those responding to a question on change in volunteer deployment (328 of 458) most (256/328, 78%) indicated less or much less use of volunteers. Less use of volunteers was associated with being an in-patient hospice, (odds ratio [OR]=0.15, 95% CI=0.07-0.3, P <.001). This reduction in volunteers was felt to protect potentially vulnerable volunteers, with policy changes preventing volunteer support. However, adapting was also seen where new roles were created, or existing roles pivoted to provide virtual support., Conclusion: Volunteers were mostly prevented from supporting many forms of palliative care which may have quality and safety implications given their previously central roles. Volunteer re-deployment plans are needed that take a more considered approach, using volunteers more flexibly to enhance care while ensuring safe working practices. Consideration needs to be given to widening the volunteer base away from those who may be considered to be most vulnerable to COVID-19., (© 2022 The Author(s); Published by Kerman University of Medical Sciences This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.)

Background: Independent charitably funded hospices have been an important element of the UK healthcare response to the COVID-19 pandemic. Hospices usually have different funding streams, procurement processes, and governance arrangements compared to NHS provision, which may affect their experiences during the COVID-19 pandemic. The aim of this study is to understand the challenges faced by charitably funded hospices during the COVID-19 pandemic., Methods: Eligible Organisations providing specialist palliative or hospice care completed the online CovPall survey (2020) which explored their response to the COVID-19 pandemic. Eligible organisations were then purposively selected to participate in interviews as part of qualitative case studies (2020-21) to understand challenges in more depth. Free-text responses from the survey were analysed using content analysis and were categorised accordingly. These categorisations were used a priori for a reflexive thematic analysis of interview data., Results: 143 UK independent charitably funded hospices completed the online CovPall survey. Five hospices subsequently participated in qualitative case studies (n = 24 staff interviews). Key themes include: vulnerabilities of funding; infection control during patient care; and bereavement support provision. Interviewees discussed the fragility of income due to fundraising events stopping; the difficulties of providing care to COVID-19 and non-COVID-19 patients within relatively small organisations; and challenges with maintaining the quality of bereavement services., Conclusion: Some unique care and provision challenges during the COVID-19 pandemic were highlighted by charitably funded hospices. Funding core services charitably and independently may affect their ability to respond to pandemics, or scenarios where resources are unexpectedly insufficient., (© 2022. The Author(s).)

Context: Evidence of symptom control outcomes in severe COVID is scant., Objectives: To determine changes in symptoms among people severely ill or dying with COVID supported by palliative care, and associations with treatments and survival., Methods: Multicentre cohort study of people with COVID across England and Wales supported by palliative care services, during the pandemic in 2020 and 2021. We analysed clinical, demographic and survival data, symptom severity at baseline (referral to palliative care, first COVID assessment) and at three follow-up assessments using the Integrated Palliative care Outcome Scale - COVID version., Results: We included 572 patients from 25 services, mostly hospital support teams; 496 (87%) were newly referred to palliative care with COVID, 75 (13%) were already supported by palliative care when they contracted COVID. At baseline, patients had a mean of 2.4 co-morbidities, mean age 77 years, a mean of five symptoms, and were often bedfast or semiconscious. The most prevalent symptoms were: breathlessness, weakness/lack of energy, drowsiness, anxiety, agitation, confusion/delirium, and pain. Median time in palliative care was 46 hours; 77% of patients died. During palliative care, breathlessness, agitation, anxiety, delirium, cough, fever, pain, sore/dry mouth and nausea improved; drowsiness became worse. Common treatments were low dose morphine and midazolam. Having moderate to severe breathlessness, agitation and multimorbidity were associated with shorter survival., Conclusion: Symptoms of COVID quickly improved during palliative care. Breathlessness, agitation and multimorbidity could be used as triggers for timelier referral, and symptom guidance for wider specialities should build on treatments identified in this study., (Copyright © 2022 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Introduction: The burden of chronic breathlessness on individuals, family, society and health systems is significant and set to increase exponentially with an ageing population with complex multimorbidity, yet there is a lack of services. This has been further amplified by the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic. Online breathlessness interventions have been proposed to fill this gap, but need development and evaluation based on patient preferences and choices. This study aimed to explore the preferences and choices of patients regarding the content of an online self-guided chronic breathlessness supportive intervention (SELF-BREATHE)., Methods: Semi-structured telephone interviews were conducted with adults living with advanced malignant and nonmalignant disease and chronic breathlessness (July to November 2020). Interviews were analysed using conventional and summative content analysis., Results: 25 patients with advanced disease and chronic breathlessness (COPD n=13, lung cancer n=8, interstitial lung disease n=3, bronchiectasis n=1; 17 male; median (range) age 70 (47-86) years; median (range) Medical Research Council dyspnoea score 3 (2-5)) were interviewed. Individuals highlighted strong preferences for focused education, methods to increase self-motivation and engagement, interventions targeting breathing and physical function, software capability to personalise the content of SELF-BREATHE to make it more meaningful to the user, and aesthetically designed content using various communication methods including written, video and audio content. Furthermore, they identified the need to address motivation as a key potential determinant of the success of SELF-BREATHE., Conclusion: Our findings provide an essential foundation for future digital intervention development (SELF-BREATHE) and scaled research., Competing Interests: Conflict of interest: C.C. Reilly reports receiving support for the present manuscript from NIHR Clinical Lectureship ICA-CL-2018-04-ST2-001, which funds all aspects of this research; grants or contracts from King's Together: Multi and Interdisciplinary research scheme and Royal Brompton Hospital – King's Health Partnership Transformation funding, outside the submitted work. Conflict of interest: K. Bristowe reports receiving grants or contracts from National Institute for Health Research, Medical Research Council, Health Education England, European Commission and Marie Curie, outside the submitted work. Conflict of interest: A. Roach has nothing to disclose. Conflict of interest: T. Chalder reports receiving support for the present manuscript via salary support from the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Mental Health Biomedical Research Centre at South London and Maudsley NHS Foundation Trust and King's College London (KCL). The views expressed in this article are those of the authors and not necessarily those of the NIHR or the NHS. Conflict of interest: M. Maddocks reports receiving grants or contracts from National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Career Development Fellowship (CDF-2017–10-009), and NIHR Applied Research Collaboration South London (NIHR ARC South London) at King's College Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, outside the submitted work. Conflict of interest: I.J. Higginson reports receiving grants or contracts from NIHR, UKRI, Cicely Saunders International and Marie Curie, outside the submitted work., (Copyright ©The authors 2022.)

Background: The Children's Palliative Care Outcome Scale (C-POS) is the first measure developed for children with life-limiting and -threatening illness. It is essential to determine whether the measure addresses what matters to children, and if they can comprehend and respond to its items., Aim: To determine the face and content validity, comprehensiveness, comprehensibility, acceptability and feasibility, and implementability of the C-POS., Design: Mixed methods (1) Content validation : mapping C-POS items onto an evidence-based framework from prior evidence; (2) Comprehensiveness, comprehensibility, acceptability feasibility, and implementability : qualitative in-depth and cognitive interviews with a purposive sample of children and young people ( n  = 6), family caregivers ( n  = 16), and health workers ( n  = 12) recruited from tertiary facilities in Kenya, South Africa, and Uganda., Results: (1) C-POS content mapped on to palliative care domains for (a) children (i.e. physical (e.g. symptoms), social (e.g. play/socialize), psychological (e.g. happy)) and (b) families (i.e. psychological (e.g. worry), social (e.g. information), and help and advice ). (2) C-POS items were well understood by children and their caregivers, acceptable, and relevant. Completion time was a median of 10 min, patients/caregivers and health workers reported that using the C-POS improved their communication with children and young people. Methodological and content issues included: (i) conceptual gap in the spiritual/existential domain; (ii) further consideration of developmental, age-appropriate items in the social and psychological domains, and (iii) linguistic complexity and difficulty in proxy rating., Conclusion: C-POS items capture the core symptoms and concerns that matter to children and their families. C-POS is feasible, comprehensible, and acceptable for use in clinical settings; areas for further development and improvement are identified.

Objective: To explore the experiences of, and impact on, staff working in palliative care during the COVID-19 pandemic., Design: Qualitative multiple case study using semi-structured interviews between November 2020 and April 2021 as part of the CovPall study. Data were analysed using thematic framework analysis., Setting: Organisations providing specialist palliative services in any setting., Participants: Staff working in specialist palliative care, purposefully sampled by the criteria of role, care setting and COVID-19 experience., Main Outcome Measures: Experiences of working in palliative care during the COVID-19 pandemic., Results: Five cases and 24 participants were recruited (n = 12 nurses, 4 clinical managers, 4 doctors, 2 senior managers, 1 healthcare assistant, 1 allied healthcare professional). Central themes demonstrate how infection control constraints prohibited and diluted participants' ability to provide care that reflected their core values, resulting in experiences of moral distress. Despite organisational, team and individual support strategies, continually managing these constraints led to a 'crescendo effect' in which the impacts of moral distress accumulated over time, sometimes leading to burnout. Solidarity with colleagues and making a valued contribution provided 'moral comfort' for some., Conclusions: This study provides a unique insight into why and how healthcare staff have experienced moral distress during the pandemic, and how organisations have responded. Despite their experience of dealing with death and dying, the mental health and well-being of palliative care staff was affected by the pandemic. Organisational, structural and policy changes are urgently required to mitigate and manage these impacts.

Context: The growth of patient reported outcome measures data in palliative care provides an opportunity for machine learning to identify patterns in patient responses signifying different phases of illness., Objectives: The study will explore if machine learning and network analysis can identify phases in patient palliative status through symptoms reported on the Integrated Palliative Care Outcome Scale (IPOS)., Methods: A partly cross-sectional and partially longitudinal observational study was undertaken using the Australasian Karnofsky Performance Scale (AKPS); Integrated Palliative Care Outcome Scale (IPOS); Phase of Illness (POI). Patient palliative records (n = 1507, 65% stable, 20% unstable, 9% deteriorating, 2% terminal) from 804 adult patients enrolled in a New Zealand palliative care service were analysed using a combination of statistical, machine learning and network analysis techniques., Results: Data from IPOS showed considerable variation with phase. Also, network analysis showed clear associations between items by phase. Six machine learning techniques identified the most important variables for predicting possible transition between phases of illness. Network analysis for all patients showed that Poor Appetite and Loss of Energy were central IPOS items, with Loss of Energy linked to Drowsiness, Shortness of Breath and Lack of Mobility on the one hand, and Poor Appetite linked to Nausea, Vomiting, Constipation and Sore and Dry Mouth on the other., Conclusion: These preliminary results, when coupled with the latest technological developments in mobile apps and wearable technology, could point the way to increased use of digital therapeutics in continuous palliative care monitoring., (Copyright © 2021 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Introduction: Advanced cancer and/or respiratory disease threaten a person's independence in activities of daily living (ADL). Understanding how disability develops can help direct appropriate and timely interventions., Aim: To identify different trajectories and associations of disability in ADL and appraise its measurement., Methods: Medline, Embase, PsychINFO, and CINAHL databases were searched for cohort studies with measures of disability in ADL in advanced cancer or respiratory disease at three or more timepoints. Data were narratively synthesized to produce a typology of disability trajectories and a model of factors and outcomes associated with increasing disability., Results: Of 5702 publications screened, 11 were included. Seventy-four disability trajectories were categorized into typologies of unchanging ( n  = 20), fluctuating ( n  = 21), and increasing disability ( n  = 33). Respiratory disease did not predict any particular disability trajectory. Advanced cancer frequently followed trajectories of increasing disability. Factors associated with increasing disability included: frailty, multi-morbidity, cognitive impairment, and infection. Increased disability led to recurrent hospital admissions, long-term care, and/or death. Methodological limitations included use of non-validated measures., Conclusions: Increasing disability trajectories in advanced cancer and/or respiratory disease is related to potentially modifiable personal and environmental factors. We recommend future studies using validated disability instruments.Implications for rehabilitationDisability in activities of daily living (ADL) is a common unmet need in advanced cancer or respiratory disease and represents an important outcome for patients, caregivers and health and social care services.Trajectories of ADL disability can be categorized into increasing, fluctuating, and unchanging disability, which could help planning of rehabilitation services in advanced cancer or respiratory disease.Increasing disability in advanced cancer or respiratory disease relates to personal and environmental factors as well as bodily impairments, which can all be modifiable by intervention.This review highlights implications for the measurement of ADL disability in advanced cancer or respiratory disease and recommends use of validated measures of ADL to understand what factors can be modified through rehabilitation interventions.

Background: Reducing hospital admissions among people dying with dementia is a policy priority., Aim: To explore associations between primary care contacts, continuity of primary care, identification of palliative care needs, and unplanned hospital admissions among people dying with dementia., Design and Setting: This was a retrospective cohort study using the Clinical Practice Research Datalink linked with hospital records and Office for National Statistics data. Adults (>18 years) who died between 2009 and 2018 with a diagnosis of dementia were included in the study., Method: The association between GP contacts, Herfindahl-Hirschman Index continuity of care score, palliative care needs identification before the last 90 days of life, and multiple unplanned hospital admissions in the last 90 days was evaluated using random-effects Poisson regression., Results: In total, 33 714 decedents with dementia were identified: 64.1% ( n = 21 623) female, mean age 86.6 years (SD 8.1), mean comorbidities 2.2 (SD 1.6). Of these, 1894 (5.6%) had multiple hospital admissions in the last 90 days of life (increase from 4.9%, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 4.2 to 5.6 in 2009 to 7.1%, 95% CI = 5.7 to 8.4 in 2018). Participants with more GP contacts had higher risk of multiple hospital admissions (incidence risk ratio [IRR] 1.08, 95% CI = 1.05 to 1.11). Higher continuity of care scores (IRR 0.79, 95% CI = 0.68 to 0.92) and identification of palliative care needs (IRR 0.66, 95% CI = 0.56 to 0.78) were associated with lower frequency of these admissions., Conclusion: Multiple hospital admissions among people dying with dementia are increasing. Higher continuity of care and identification of palliative care needs are associated with a lower risk of multiple hospital admissions in this population, and might help prevent these admissions at the end of life., (© The Authors.)

Objectives: To identify factors associated with palliative care services being busier during Covid-19. Methods: Cross-sectional online survey of UK palliative care services (April to July 2020) (CovPall). Ethical approval was received from King's College London Research Ethics committee (LRS-19/20-18541). The primary outcome was change in busyness (five-point ordinal scale). Ordinal logistic regression investigated factors associated with the primary outcome. Results: Of 277 responses, 71 (26%) reported being a lot more busy, 62 (22%) slightly more, 53 (19%) about the same, 50 (18%) slightly less, and 28 (10%) much less busy. Increased business was associated with homecare services (odds ratio [OR] 1.93, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.15-3.25), nursing care at home (OR 3.24, 95% CI 1.70-6.19), publicly managed services (OR 2.20, 95% CI 1.11-4.34), Covid-19 cases (OR 1.01, 95% CI 1.00-1.01), and staff shortages (OR 2.71, 95% CI 1.64-4.48). Conclusion: Services providing community care, and publicly managed services, may have been better able to respond to escalating needs during Covid-19. This has potential implications for both service delivery and funding models.

Objective: To examine the association between primary and community care use and measures of acute hospital use in people with cancer at the end of life., Design: Retrospective cohort study., Setting: We used Discover, a linked administrative and clinical data set from general practices, community and hospital records in North West London (UK)., Participants: People registered in general practices, with a diagnosis of cancer who died between 2016 and 2019., Primary and Secondary Outcome Measures: ≥3 hospital admissions during the last 90 days, ≥1 admissions in the last 30 days and ≥1 emergency department (ED) visit in the last 2 weeks of life., Results: Of 3581 people, 490 (13.7%) had ≥3 admissions in last 90 days, 1640 (45.8%) had ≥1 admission in the last 30 days, 1042 (28.6%) had ≥1 ED visits in the last 2 weeks; 1069 (29.9%) had more than one of these indicators. Contacts with community nurses in the last 3 months (≥13 vs <4) were associated with fewer admissions in the last 30 days (risk ratio (RR) 0.88, 95% CI 0.90 to 0.98) and ED visits in the last 2 weeks of life (RR 0.79, 95% CI 0.68 to 0.92). Contacts with general practitioners in the last 3 months (≥11 vs <4) was associated with higher risk of ≥3 admissions in the last 90 days (RR 1.63, 95% CI 1.33 to 1.99) and ED visits in the last 2 weeks of life (RR 1.27, 95% CI 1.10 to 1.47)., Conclusions: Expanding community nursing could reduce acute hospital use at the end of life and improve quality of care., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2022. Re-use permitted under CC BY. Published by BMJ.)

Introduction: The burden of chronic breathlessness on individuals, family, society and health systems is significant, and set to increase exponentially with population ageing, complex multimorbidity and coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)-related disability. Breathlessness support services are effective; however, reach and access are limited. Delivering online breathlessness interventions may build capacity and resilience within health systems to tackle chronic breathlessness through supported self-management. The aim of this study was to explore accessibility and willingness of patients with chronic breathlessness to use an internet-based breathlessness self-management intervention (SELF-BREATHE)., Methods: Semi-structured telephone interviews were conducted with adults living with advanced malignant and non-malignant disease and chronic breathlessness (July to November 2020). Interviews were analysed using conventional and summative content analysis., Results: 25 patients (COPD: n=13; lung cancer: n=8; interstitial lung disease (ILD): n=3; bronchiectasis: n=1) were interviewed: 17 male, median (range) age 70 (47-86) years and Medical Research Council dyspnoea score 3 (2-5). 21 patients had internet access. Participants described greater use, acceptance and normalisation of the internet since the advent of the COVID-19 pandemic. They described multifaceted internet use: functional, self-investment (improving health and wellbeing) and social. The concept of SELF-BREATHE was highly valued, and most participants with internet access were willing to use it. In addition to technical limitations, personal choice and perceived value of the internet were important factors that underpinned readiness to use online resources., Conclusion: These findings suggest that patients living with chronic breathlessness that have access to the internet would have the potential to benefit from the online SELF-BREATHE intervention, if given the opportunity., Competing Interests: Provenance: Submitted article, peer reviewed. Conflict of interest: An NIHR Clinical Lectureship (ICA-CL-2018-04-ST2-001) supports C.C. Reilly, which funds all aspects of this research. In addition, and unrelated to the present research, they declare funding to their institution from “King's Together: Multi and Interdisciplinary research scheme” (GBP 19 000) and from Royal Brompton Hospital–King's Health Partnership Transformation (GBP 75 000). K. Bristowe declares research grants to their institution from the National Institute for Health Research, Medical Research Council, Health Education England, European Commission and Marie Curie, in the 36 months prior to manuscript submission. A. Roach declares no competing interests. M. Maddocks declares a National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Career Development Fellowship (CDF-2017–10-009), and an infrastructure grant from the NIHR Applied Research Collaboration South London (NIHR ARC South London) at King's College Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, in the 36 months prior to manuscript submission. I.J. Higginson declares research grants from the National Institute for Health Research, UK Research & Innovation, Cicely Saunders International and Marie Curie, in the 36 months prior to manuscript submission., (Copyright ©The authors 2022.)

Background: Palliative rehabilitation involves multi-professional processes and interventions aimed at optimising patients' symptom self-management, independence and social participation throughout advanced illness. Rehabilitation services were highly disrupted during the Covid-19 pandemic., Aim: To understand rehabilitation provision in palliative care services during the Covid-19 pandemic, identifying and reflecting on adaptative and innovative practice to inform ongoing provision., Design: Cross-sectional national online survey., Setting/participants: Rehabilitation leads for specialist palliative care services across hospice, hospital, or community settings, conducted from 30/07/20 to 21/09/2020., Findings: 61 completed responses (England, n  = 55; Scotland, n  = 4; Wales, n  = 1; and Northern Ireland, n  = 1) most frequently from services based in hospices (56/61, 92%) providing adult rehabilitation. Most services (55/61, 90%) reported rehabilitation provision becoming remote during Covid-19 and half reported reduced caseloads. Rehabilitation teams frequently had staff members on sick-leave with suspected/confirmed Covid-19 (27/61, 44%), redeployed to other services/organisations (25/61, 41%) or furloughed (15/61, 26%). Free text responses were constructed into four themes: (i) fluctuating shared spaces; (ii) remote and digitised rehabilitation offer; (iii) capacity to provide and participate in rehabilitation; (iv) Covid-19 as a springboard for positive change. These represent how rehabilitation services contracted, reconfigured, and were redirected to more remote modes of delivery, and how this affected the capacity of clinicians and patients to participate in rehabilitation., Conclusion: This study demonstrates how changes in provision of rehabilitation during the pandemic could act as a springboard for positive changes. Hybrid models of rehabilitation have the potential to expand the equity of access and reach of rehabilitation within specialist palliative care.

Introduction: Evidence shows most patients are not recognised by their attending healthcare professionals as having palliative needs. This feasibility study aimed to aid healthcare professionals identify hospital patients with palliative needs., Material and Methods: Mixed-methods, cross-sectional, observational study. The patient inclusion criteria comprised: age over 18 years old, being mentally capable to give consent judged as such by participating healthcare professionals, and if unable, having a legal substitute to consent, having a diagnosis of an incurable, potentially life-threatening illness. Field notes were taken for reflexive purposes. Outcome measures included: Integrated Palliative Care Outcome scale, surprise question, phase of illness, referral request status, The Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Performance Status and social needs assessment. An interim data collection period meeting assessed implementation outcomes in each context. A web-based survey was sent to all participating healthcare professionals at the end of data collection period to explore overall experiences of participation and implementation outcomes., Results: Forty-two departments in four hospitals were contacted. The study was presented in nine departments. The field notes were vital to understand the recruitment process and difficulties experienced: time constraints, fear of additional work, department dynamics and organisation, relationships between departments and need of training in palliative care and research. One department agreed to participate. There were six participating healthcare professionals and only 45 patients included. Three participating healthcare professionals responded to the web-based survey., Discussion: The response rate was very low. Legislating palliative care is not enough, and an integrated palliative care plan needs to be implemented at country and institution level., Conclusion: There is an urgent need to provide generalist palliative care training to clinicians.

Background: Heart failure (HF) is increasingly prevalent in the growing elderly population and commonly associated with cognitive impairment. We compared trends in place of death (PoD) of HF patients with/without comorbid dementia around the implementation period of the Mental Capacity Act (MCA) in October 2007, this legislation supporting patient-centred decision making for those with reduced agency., Methods: Analyses of death certification data for England between January 2001 and December 2018, describing the PoD and sociodemographic characteristics of all people ≥ 65 years registered with HF as the underlying cause of death, with/without a mention of comorbid dementia. We used modified Poisson regression with robust error variance to determine the prevalence ratio (PR) of the outcome in dying at home, in care homes or hospices compared to dying in hospital. Covariates included year of death, age, gender, marital status, comorbidity burden, index of multiple deprivation and urban/rural settings., Results: One hundred twenty thousand sixty-eight HF-related death records were included of which 8199 mentioned dementia as a contributory cause. The overall prevalence proportion of dementia was 6.8%, the trend significantly increasing from 5.6 to 8.0% pre- and post-MCA (Cochran-Armitage trend test p < 0.0001). Dementia was coded as unspecified (78.2%), Alzheimer's disease (13.5%) and vascular (8.3%). Demented decedents were commonly older, female, and with more comorbidities. Pre-MCA, PoD for non-demented HF patients was hospital 68.2%, care homes 20.2% and 10.7% dying at home. Corresponding figures for those with comorbid dementia were 47.6%, 48.0% and 4.2%, respectively. Following MCA enforcement, PoD for those without dementia shifted from hospital to home, 62.5% and 17.2%, respectively; PR: 1.026 [95%CI: 1.024-1.029]. While home deaths also rose to 10.0% for those with dementia, with hospital deaths increasing to 50.4%, this trend was insignificant, PR: 1.001 [0.988-1.015]. Care home deaths reduced for all, with/without dementia, PR: 0.959 [0.949-0.969] and PR: 0.996 [0.993-0.998], respectively. Hospice as PoD was rare for both groups with no appreciable change over the study period., Conclusions: Our analyses suggest the MCA did not materially affect the PoD of HF decedents with comorbid dementia, likely reflecting difficulties implementing this legislation in real-life clinical practice., (© 2022. The Author(s).)

Background: Respiratory medicine (RM) and palliative care (PC) physicians' management of chronic breathlessness in advanced chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), fibrotic interstitial lung disease (fILD) and lung cancer (LC), and the influence of practice guidelines was explored via an online survey., Methods: A voluntary, online survey was distributed to RM and PC physicians via society newsletter mailing lists., Results: 450 evaluable questionnaires (348 (77%) RM and 102 (23%) PC) were analysed. Significantly more PC physicians indicated routine use (often/always) of opioids across conditions (COPD: 92% vs. 39%, fILD: 83% vs. 36%, LC: 95% vs. 76%; all p < 0.001) and significantly more PC physicians indicated routine use of benzodiazepines for COPD (33% vs. 10%) and fILD (25% vs. 12%) (both p < 0.001). Significantly more RM physicians reported routine use of a breathlessness score (62% vs. 13%, p < 0.001) and prioritised exercise training/rehabilitation for COPD (49% vs. 7%) and fILD (30% vs. 18%) (both p < 0.001). Overall, 40% of all respondents reported reading non-cancer palliative care guidelines (either carefully or looked at them briefly). Respondents who reported reading these guidelines were more likely to: routinely use a breathlessness score (χ 2  = 13.8; p < 0.001), use opioids (χ 2  = 12.58, p < 0.001) and refer to pulmonary rehabilitation (χ 2  = 6.41, p = 0.011) in COPD; use antidepressants (χ 2  = 6.25; p = 0.044) and refer to PC (χ 2  = 5.83; p = 0.016) in fILD; and use a handheld fan in COPD (χ 2  = 8.75, p = 0.003), fILD (χ 2  = 4.85, p = 0.028) and LC (χ 2  = 5.63; p = 0.018)., Conclusions: These findings suggest a need for improved dissemination and uptake of jointly developed breathlessness management guidelines in order to encourage appropriate use of existing, evidence-based therapies. The lack of opioid use by RM, and continued benzodiazepine use in PC, suggest that a wider range of acceptable therapies need to be developed and trialled., (© 2022. The Author(s).)

Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest The authors declare no competing interests.

Background: Few studies have investigated the content of interventions provided in early specialised palliative care (SPC)., Objectives: To characterise the content of interventions delivered in early SPC in the Danish Palliative Care Trial (DanPaCT), a multicentre trial with six participating sites., Methods: A retrospective qualitative and quantitative study coding all new interventions initiated by the palliative teams and documented in the medical records during the 8-week study period of DanPaCT. Interventions were categorised according to (a) symptom/problem prompting the intervention, (b) type of intervention and (c) professional(s) providing the intervention., Results: In total, 145 patients were randomised to the SPC teams. According to the medical records, patients received a median of 3.5 (range 0-22) new interventions in the 8-week intervention-period from the palliative teams. For 24 (18%) of the patients there was no documented interventions in the medical records. The most frequent symptom/problems treated were pain, (100 interventions; 20% of interventions given) and impaired physical function (62; 13% of interventions given). The most frequent type of intervention was pharmacological (232; 42% of interventions given)., Conclusions: This is one of the first studies to meticulously investigate the content of interventions documented in the medical records for patients receiving early SPC. Diverse symptoms were treated with many different interventions. However, a relatively low number of interventions were documented. This may explain the lack of effect in DanPaCT but also questions whether all interventions were adequately documented TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT01348048., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2021. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Introduction: Health and social care services worldwide need to support ageing populations to live well with advanced progressive conditions while adapting to functional decline and finitude. We aimed to identify and map common elements of effective geriatric and palliative care services and consider their scalability and generalisability to high, middle and low-income countries., Methods: Tertiary systematic review (Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, CINAHL, Embase, January 2000-October 2019) of studies in geriatric or palliative care that demonstrated improved quality of life and/or health service use outcomes among older people with advanced progressive conditions. Using frameworks for health system analysis, service elements were identified. We used a staged, iterative process to develop a 'common components' logic model and consulted experts in geriatric or palliative care from high, middle and low-income countries on its scalability., Results: 78 studies (59 geriatric and 19 palliative) spanning all WHO regions were included. Data were available from 17 739 participants. Nearly half the studies recruited patients with heart failure (n=36) and one-third recruited patients with mixed diagnoses (n=26). Common service elements (≥80% of studies) included collaborative working, ongoing assessment, active patient participation, patient/family education and patient self-management. Effective services incorporated patient engagement, patient goal-driven care and the centrality of patient needs. Stakeholders (n=20) emphasised that wider implementation of such services would require access to skilled, multidisciplinary teams with sufficient resource to meet patients' needs. Identified barriers to scalability included the political and societal will to invest in and prioritise palliative and geriatric care for older people, alongside geographical and socioeconomic factors., Conclusion: Our logic model combines elements of effective services to achieve optimal quality of life and health service use among older people with advanced progressive conditions. The model transcends current best practice in geriatric and palliative care and applies across the care continuum, from prevention of functional decline to end-of-life care., Prospero Registration Number: CRD42020150252., Competing Interests: Competing interests: PO reported that he was an employee of the funding sponsor, the WHO, and was involved in the extraction, analysis and interpretation of data. All other authors have no competing interests., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2021. Re-use permitted under CC BY. Published by BMJ.)

Background: Understanding patterns of mortality and place of death during the COVID-19 pandemic is important to help provide appropriate services and resources., Aims: To analyse patterns of mortality including place of death in the United Kingdom (UK) (England, Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland) during the COVID-19 pandemic to date., Design: Descriptive analysis of UK mortality data between March 2020 and March 2021. Weekly number of deaths was described by place of death, using the following definitions: (1) expected deaths: average expected deaths estimated using historical data (2015-19); (2) COVID-19 deaths: where COVID-19 is mentioned on the death certificate; (3) additional non-COVID-19 deaths: above expected but not attributed to COVID-19; (4) baseline deaths: up to and including expected deaths but excluding COVID-19 deaths., Results: During the analysis period, 798,643 deaths were registered in the UK, of which 147,282 were COVID-19 deaths and 17,672 were additional non-COVID-19 deaths. While numbers of people who died in care homes and hospitals increased above expected only during the pandemic waves, the numbers of people who died at home remained above expected both during and between the pandemic waves, with an overall increase of 41%., Conclusions: Where people died changed during the COVID-19 pandemic, with an increase in deaths at home during and between pandemic waves. This has implications for planning and organisation of palliative care and community services. The extent to which these changes will persist longer term remains unclear. Further research could investigate whether this is reflected in other countries with high COVID-19 mortality.

Background: Older people with multi-morbidities commonly experience an uncertain illness trajectory. Clinical uncertainty is challenging to manage, with risk of poor outcomes. Person-centred care is essential to align care and treatment with patient priorities and wishes. Use of evidence-based tools may support person-centred management of clinical uncertainty. We aimed to develop a logic model of person-centred evidence-based tools to manage clinical uncertainty in older people., Methods: A systematic mixed-methods review with a results-based convergent synthesis design: a process-based iterative logic model was used, starting with a conceptual framework of clinical uncertainty in older people towards the end of life. This underpinned the methods. Medline, PsycINFO, CINAHL and ASSIA were searched from 2000 to December 2019, using a combination of terms: "uncertainty" AND "palliative care" AND "assessment" OR "care planning". Studies were included if they developed or evaluated a person-centred tool to manage clinical uncertainty in people aged ≥65 years approaching the end of life and quality appraised using QualSyst. Quantitative and qualitative data were narratively synthesised and thematically analysed respectively and integrated into the logic model., Results: Of the 17,095 articles identified, 44 were included, involving 63 tools. There was strong evidence that tools used in clinical care could improve identification of patient priorities and needs (n = 14 studies); that tools support partnership working between patients and practitioners (n = 8) and that tools support integrated care within and across teams and with patients and families (n = 14), improving patient outcomes such as quality of death and dying and satisfaction with care. Communication of clinical uncertainty to patients and families had the least evidence and is challenging to do well., Conclusion: The identified logic model moves current knowledge from conceptualising clinical uncertainty to applying evidence-based tools to optimise person-centred management and improve patient outcomes. Key causal pathways are identification of individual priorities and needs, individual care and treatment and integrated care. Communication of clinical uncertainty to patients is challenging and requires training and skill and the use of tools to support practice., (© 2021. The Author(s).)

Background: Clinical uncertainty is inherent for people with frailty and multimorbidity. Depleted physiological reserves increase vulnerability to a decline in health and adverse outcomes from a stressor event. Evidence-based tools can improve care processes and outcomes, but little is known about priorities to deliver care for older people with frailty and multimorbidity. This study aimed to explore the preferences and priorities for patients, family carers and healthcare practitioners to enhance care processes of comprehensive assessment, communication and continuity of care in managing clinical uncertainty using evidence-based tools., Methods: A parallel mixed method observational study in four inpatient intermediate care units (community hospitals) for patients in transition between hospital and home. We used a discrete choice experiment (DCE) to examine patient and family preferences and priorities on the attributes of enhanced services; and stakeholder consultations with practitioners to discuss and generate recommendations on using tools to augment care processes. Data analysis used logit modelling in the DCE, and framework analysis for consultation data., Results: Thirty-three patients participated in the DCE (mean age 84 years, SD 7.76). Patients preferred a service where family were contacted on admission and discharge (β 0.36, 95% CI 0.10 to 0.61), care received closer to home (β - 0.04, 95% CI - 0.06 to - 0.02) and the GP is fully informed about care (β 0.29, 95% CI 0.05-0.52). Four stakeholder consultations (n = 48 participants) generated 20 recommendations centred around three main themes: tailoring care processes to manage multiple care needs for an ageing population with frailty and multimorbidity; the importance of ongoing communication with patient and family; and clear and concise evidence-based tools to enhance communication between clinical teams and continuity of care on discharge., Conclusion: Family engagement is vital to manage clinical uncertainty. Both patients and practitioners prioritise engaging the family to support person-centred care and continuity of care within and across care settings. Patients wished to maximise family involvement by enabling their support with a preference for care close to home. Evidence-based tools used across disciplines and services can provide a shared succinct language to facilitate communication and continuity of care at points of transition in care settings., (© 2021. The Author(s).)

Background: Hospital admissions among people dying with dementia are common. It is not known whether identification of palliative care needs could help prevent unnecessary admissions., Aim: To examine the proportion of people with dementia identified as having palliative care needs in their last year of life, and the association between identification of needs and primary, community and hospital services in the last 90 days., Design: Retrospective cohort study using Discover, an administrative and clinical dataset from 365 primary care practices in London with deterministic individual-level data linkage to community and hospital records., Setting/participants: People diagnosed with dementia and registered with a general practitioner in North West London (UK) who died between 2016 and 2019. The primary outcome was multiple non-elective hospital admissions in the last 90 days of life. Secondary outcomes included contacts with primary and community care providers. We examined the association between identification of palliative care needs with outcomes., Results: Among 5804 decedents with dementia, 1953 (33.6%) were identified as having palliative care needs, including 1141 (19.7%) identified before the last 90 days of life. Identification of palliative care needs before the last 90 days was associated with a lower risk of multiple hospital admissions (Relative Risk 0.70, 95% CI 0.58-0.85) and more contacts with the primary care practice, community nurses and palliative care teams in the last 90 days., Conclusions: Further investigation of the mechanisms underlying the association between identification of palliative care needs and reduced hospital admissions could help reduce reliance on acute care for this population.

Introduction: Understanding costs of care for people dying with dementia is essential to guide service development, but information has not been systematically reviewed. We aimed to understand (1) which cost components have been measured in studies reporting the costs of care in people with dementia approaching the end of life, (2) what the costs are and how they change closer to death, and (3) which factors are associated with these costs., Methods: We searched the electronic databases CINAHL, Medline, Cochrane, Web of Science, EconLit, and Embase and reference lists of included studies. We included any type of study published between 1999 and 2019, in any language, reporting primary data on costs of health care in individuals with dementia approaching the end of life. Two independent reviewers screened all full-text articles. We used the Evers' Consensus on Health Economic Criteria checklist to appraise the risk of bias of included studies., Results: We identified 2843 articles after removing duplicates; 19 studies fulfilled the inclusion criteria, 16 were from the United States. Only two studies measured informal costs including out-of-pocket expenses and informal caregiving. The monthly total direct cost of care rose toward death, from $1787 to $2999 USD in the last 12 months, to $4570 to $11921 USD in the last month of life. Female sex, Black ethnicity, higher educational background, more comorbidities, and greater cognitive impairment were associated with higher costs., Discussion: Costs of dementia care rise closer to death. Informal costs of care are high but infrequently included in analyses. Research exploring the costs of care for people with dementia by proximity to death, including informal care costs and from outside the United States, is urgently needed., Competing Interests: The authors declare that there are no conflicts of interest., (© 2021 The Authors. Alzheimer's & Dementia: Translational Research & Clinical Interventions published by Wiley Periodicals, Inc. on behalf of Alzheimer's Association.)

Objectives: To develop insights into response of palliative care services caring for people from ethnic minority groups during COVID-19., Methods: Cross-sectional online survey of UK palliative care services response to COVID-19. Quantitative data were summarised descriptively and χ 2 tests used to explore relationships between categorical variables. Free text comments were analysed using reflexive thematic analysis., Results: 277 UK services responded. 168 included hospice teams (76% of all UK hospice teams). Services supporting those from ethnic minority groups were more likely to include hospital (p<0.001) and less likely to include hospice (p<0.001) or home care teams (p=0.008). 34% (93/277) of services had cared for patients with COVID-19 or families from ethnic minority groups. 66% (61/93) of these services stated no difference in how they supported or reached these groups during the pandemic.Three themes demonstrated impact of policy introduced during the pandemic, including: disproportionate adverse impact of restricted visiting, compounded communication challenges and unmet religious and faith needs. One theme demonstrated mistrust of services by ethnic minority groups, and the final theme demonstrated a focus on equal and individualised care., Conclusions: Policies introduced during the COVID-19 pandemic may have adversely impacted those from ethnic minority groups making these at-risk populations even more vulnerable. The palliative care response may have been equal but inequitable. During the para-COVID-19 period, systemic steps, including equality impact assessments, are urgently needed., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2021. Re-use permitted under CC BY. Published by BMJ.)

Context: Systematic data on the care of people dying with COVID-19 are scarce., Objectives: To understand the response of and challenges faced by palliative care services during the COVID-19 pandemic, and identify associated factors., Methods: We surveyed palliative care and hospice services, contacted via relevant organizations. Multivariable logistic regression identified associations with challenges. Content analysis explored free text responses., Results: A total of 458 services responded; 277 UK, 85 rest of Europe, 95 rest of the world; 81% cared for patients with suspected or confirmed COVID-19, 77% had staff with suspected or confirmed COVID-19; 48% reported shortages of Personal Protective Equipment (PPE), 40% staff shortages, 24% medicines shortages, 14% shortages of other equipment. Services provided direct care and education in symptom management and communication; 91% changed how they worked. Care often shifted to increased community and hospital care, with fewer admissions to inpatient palliative care units. Factors associated with increased odds of PPE shortages were: charity rather than public management (OR 3.07, 95% CI 1.81-5.20), inpatient palliative care unit rather than other settings (OR 2.34, 95% CI 1.46-3.75). Being outside the UK was associated with lower odds of staff shortages (OR 0.44, 95% CI 0.26-0.76). Staff described increased workload, concerns for their colleagues who were ill, whilst expending time struggling to get essential equipment and medicines, perceiving they were not a front-line service., Conclusion: Palliative care services were often overwhelmed, yet felt ignored in the COVID-19 response. Palliative care needs better integration with health care systems when planning and responding to future epidemics/pandemics., Competing Interests: Conflict of Interest IJH is a National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Emeritus Senior Investigator and is supported by the NIHR Applied Research Collaboration (ARC) South London (SL) at King's College Hospital National Health Service Foundation Trust. IJH leads the Palliative and End of Life Care theme of the NIHR ARC SL and co-leads the national theme in this. MM is funded by a NIHR Career Development Fellowship (CDF-2017-10-009) and NIHR ARC SL. LF is funded by a NIHR Career Development Fellowship (CDF-2018-11-ST2-002). KS is funded by a NIHR Clinician Scientist Fellowship (CS-2015-15-005). RC is funded by Cicely Saunders International. FEM is a NIHR Senior Investigator. MBH is supported by the NIHR ARC SL. The views expressed in this article are those of the authors and not necessarily those of the NIHR, or the Department of Health and Social Care., (Copyright © 2021 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Globally, a rising number of people live into advanced age and die with multimorbidity and frailty. Palliative care is advocated as a person-centred approach to reduce health-related suffering and promote quality of life. However, no evidence-based interventions exist to deliver community-based palliative care for this population., Aim: To evaluate the impact of the short-term integrated palliative and supportive care intervention for older people living with chronic noncancer conditions and frailty on clinical and economic outcomes and perceptions of care., Design: Single-blind trial with random block assignment to usual care or the intervention and usual care. The intervention comprised integrated person-centred palliative care delivered by multidisciplinary palliative care teams working with general practitioners and community nurses. Main outcome was change in five key palliative care symptoms from baseline to 12-weeks. Data analysis used intention to treat and complete cases to examine the mean difference in change scores and effect size between the trial arms. Economic evaluation used cost-effectiveness planes and qualitative interviews explored perceptions of the intervention., Setting/participants: Four National Health Service general practices in England with recruitment of patients aged ≥75 years, with moderate to severe frailty, chronic noncancer condition(s) and ≥2 symptoms or concerns, and family caregivers when available., Results: 50 patients were randomly assigned to receive usual care (n = 26, mean age 86.0 years) or the intervention and usual care (n = 24, mean age 85.3 years), and 26 caregivers (control n = 16, mean age 77.0 years; intervention n = 10, mean age 77.3 years). Participants lived at home (n = 48) or care home (n = 2). Complete case analysis (n = 48) on the main outcome showed reduced symptom distress between the intervention compared with usual care (mean difference -1.20, 95% confidence interval -2.37 to -0.027) and medium effect size (omega squared = 0.071). Symptom distress reduced with decreased costs from the intervention compared with usual care, demonstrating cost-effectiveness. Patient (n = 19) and caregiver (n = 9) interviews generated themes about the intervention of 'Little things make a big difference' with optimal management of symptoms and 'Care beyond medicines' of psychosocial support to accommodate decline and maintain independence., Conclusions: This palliative and supportive care intervention is an effective and cost-effective approach to reduce symptom distress for older people severely affected by chronic noncancer conditions. It is a clinically effective way to integrate specialist palliative care with primary and community care for older people with chronic conditions. Further research is indicated to examine its implementation more widely for people at home and in care homes., Trial Registration: Controlled-Trials.com ISRCTN 45837097 Tweetable abstract: Specialist palliative care integrated with district nurses and GPs is cost-effective to reduce symptom distress for older people severely affected by chronic conditions., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper., (Copyright © 2021. Published by Elsevier Ltd.)

Background: Specialist palliative care services play an important role in conducting advance care planning during COVID-19. Little is known about the challenges to advance care planning in this context, or the changes services made to adapt., Aim: Describe the challenges that UK specialist palliative care services experienced regarding advance care planning during COVID-19 and changes made to support timely conversations., Design: Online survey of UK palliative/hospice services' response to COVID-19. Closed-ended responses are reported descriptively. Open-ended responses were analysed using a thematic Framework approach using the Social Ecological Model to understand challenges., Respondents: Two hundred and seventy-seven services., Results: More direct advance care planning was provided by 38% of services, and 59% provided more support to others. Some challenges to advance care planning pre-dated the pandemic, whilst others were specific to/exacerbated by COVID-19. Challenges are demonstrated through six themes: complex decision making in the face of a new infectious disease; maintaining a personalised approach; COVID-19-specific communication difficulties; workload and pressure; sharing information; and national context of fear and uncertainty. Two themes demonstrate changes made to support: adapting local processes and adapting local structures., Conclusions: Professionals and healthcare providers need to ensure advance care planning is individualised by tailoring it to the values, priorities, and ethnic/cultural/religious context of each person. Policymakers need to consider how high-quality advance care planning can be resourced as a part of standard healthcare ahead of future pandemic waves. In facilitating this, we provide questions to consider at each level of the Social Ecological Model.

Background: Hospice and palliative care services provision for COVID-19 patients is crucial to improve their life quality. There is limited evidence on COVID-19 preparedness of such services in the Asia-Pacific region., Aim: To evaluate the preparedness and capacity of hospice and palliative care services in the Asia-Pacific region to respond to the COVID-19 pandemic., Method: An online cross-sectional survey was developed based on methodology guidance. Asia-Pacific Hospice and Palliative Care Network subscribers (n = 1551) and organizational members (n = 185) were emailed. Descriptive analysis was undertaken., Results: Ninety-seven respondents completed the survey. Around half of services were hospital-based (n = 47, 48%), and public-funded (n = 46, 47%). Half of services reported to have confirmed cases (n = 47, 49%) and the majority of the confirmed cases were patients (n = 28, 61%). Staff perceived moderate risk of being infected by COVID-19 (median: 7/10). > 85% of respondents reported they had up-to-date contact list for staff and patients, one-third revealed challenges to keep record of relatives who visited the services (n = 30, 31%), and of patients visited in communities (n = 29, 30%). Majority of services (60%) obtained adequate resources for infection control except face mask. More than half had no guidance on Do Not Resuscitate orders (n = 59, 66%) or on bereavement care for family members (n = 44, 51%)., Conclusion: Recommendations to strengthen the preparedness of palliative care services include: 1) improving the access to face mask; 2) acquiring stress management protocols for staff when unavailable; 3) reinforcing the contact tracing system for relatives and visits in the community and 4) developing guidance on patient and family care during patient's dying trajectory.