Search

ObjectiveSickle cell disease (SCD) is a highly morbid condition notable for recurrent hospitalisations due to vaso-occlusive crises and complications of end organ damage. Little is known about the use of inpatient palliative care services in adult patients with SCD. This study aims to evaluate inpatient palliative care use during SCD-related hospitalisations overall and during terminal hospitalisations. We hypothesise that use of palliative care is low in SCD hospitalisations.DesignA retrospective cross-sectional study using data from the National Inpatient Sample from 2008 to 2017 was conducted.SettingUS hospitals from 47 states and the District of Columbia.ParticipantsPatients >18 years old hospitalised with a primary or secondary International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision, Clinical Modification (ICD-9-CM) or ICD-10-CM diagnosis of SCD were included.Primary and secondary outcome measuresPalliative care service use (documented by ICD-9-CM and ICD-10-CM diagnosis codes V66.7 and Z51.5).Results987 555 SCD-related hospitalisations were identified, of which 4442 (0.45%) received palliative care service. Palliative care service use increased at a rate of 9.2% per year (95% CI 5.6 to 12.9). NH-black and Hispanic patients were 33% and 53% less likely to have palliative care services compared with NH-white patients (OR 0.67; 95% CI 0.45 to 0.99 and OR 0.47; 95% CI 0.26 to 0.84). Female patients (OR 0.40; 95% CI 0.21 to 0.76), Medicaid use (OR 0.40; 95% CI 0.21 to 0.78), rural (OR 0.47; 95% CI 0.28 to 0.79) and urban non-teaching hospitals (OR 0.61; 95% CI 0.47 to 0.80) each had a lower likelihood of palliative care services use.ConclusionUse of palliative care during SCD-related hospitalisations is increasing but remains low. Disparities associated with race and gender exist for use of palliative care services during SCD-related hospitalisation. Further studies are needed to guide evidence-based palliative care interventions for more comprehensive and equitable care of adult patients with SCD.

ObjectivesThe purpose of this paper is to present two divergent mental models of integrated advanced liver disease (AdvLD) care among 26 providers who treat patients with AdvLD.Setting3 geographically dispersed United States Veterans Health Administration health systems.Participants26 professionals (20 women and 6 men) participated, including 9 (34.6%) gastroenterology, hepatology, and transplant physicians, 2 (7.7%) physician assistants, 7 (27%) nurses and nurse practitioners, 3 (11.5%) social workers and psychologists, 4 (15.4%) palliative care providers and 1 (3.8%) pharmacist.Main outcome measuresWe conducted qualitative in-depth interviews of providers caring for patients with AdvLD. We used framework analysis to identify two divergent mental models of integrated AdvLD care. These models vary in timing of initiating various constituents of care, philosophy of integration, and supports and resources needed to achieve each model.ResultsClinicians described integrated care as an approach that incorporates elements of curative care, symptom and supportive care, advance care planning and end-of-life services from a multidisciplinary team. Analysis revealed two mental models that varied in how and when these constituents are delivered. One mental model involves sequential transitions between constituents of care, and the second mental model involves synchronous application of the various constituents. Participants described elements of teamwork and coordination supports necessary to achieve integrated AdvLD care. Many discussed the importance of having a multidisciplinary team integrating supportive care, symptom management and palliative care with liver disease care.ConclusionsHealth professionals agree on the constituents of integrated AdvLD care but describe two competing mental models of how these constituents are integrated. Health systems can promote integrated care by assembling multidisciplinary teams, and providing teamwork and coordination supports, and training that facilitates patient-centred AdvLD care.

Objective Conduct a formative evaluation to inform the implementation of ‘Empowering Patients in Chronic Care’ (EPIC), an evidence-based interdisciplinary group medical appointment intervention to improve collaborative goal-setting in patients with treated but uncontrolled diabetes. Design The formative evaluation involved qualitative, in-depth interviews with clinicians, structured according to the Promoting Action on Research in Health Services framework. Interviews elicited (1) participants’ knowledge regarding interdisciplinary group self-management and goal-setting programmes and how well clinicians embrace these interventions (evidence), (2) physical and social climate at each target facility and how the intervention can best be embedded into routine primary care (context) and (3) site-specific needs to be addressed by our implementation team and clinicians’ preparedness and intentions to participate in the intervention (facilitation). Setting Clinicians were part of a primary care setting at one of five participating medical facilities within one Veterans Health Administration Veterans Affairs regional network. Participants We interviewed a snowball sample of 35 interdisciplinary clinicians engaged in diabetes management, practising leadership and administrators at target sites. Results Most participants had previous experience with diabetes group self-management programmes and viewed group appointments as an effective approach to enhancing care. Discussions about existing group appointments provided a context for evaluating potential barriers and facilitators to implementing EPIC into target sites. Interviews revealed clinicians’ expectations about the roles they would play in the intervention, their assessments of the roles and strategies to facilitate their performance in those roles. Conclusions Successful implementation of evidence-based practices into routine care requires a partnered approach with engaged local staff. The intervention should address local goals and research objectives to encourage bidirectional engagement. Robust partnerships are nurtured further by sustained, open communication and must consider the context, target population and local experience to address barriers and facilitators to implementation.

Objectives We examined the role of discharge instructions in postoperative recovery for patients undergoing colorectal surgery and report themes related to patient perceptions of discharge instructions and postdischarge experience. Design Semistructured interviews were conducted as part of a formative evaluation of a Project Re-Engineered Discharge intervention adapted for surgical patients. Setting Michael E. DeBakey VA Medical Center, a tertiary referral centre in Houston, Texas. Participants Twelve patients undergoing elective colorectal surgery. Interviews were conducted at the two-week postoperative appointment. Results Participants demonstrated understanding of the content in the discharge instructions. During the interviews, participants reported several positive roles for discharge instructions in their postdischarge care: a sense of security, a reminder of inhospital education, a living document and a source of empowerment. Despite these positive associations, participants reported that the instructions provided insufficient information to promote access to care that effectively addressed acute issues following discharge. Participants noted difficulty reaching providers after discharge, which resulted in the adoption of workarounds to overcome system barriers. Conclusions Despite concerted efforts to provide patient-centred instructions, the discharge instructions did not provide enough context to effectively guide postdischarge interactions with the healthcare system. Insufficient information on how to access and communicate with the most appropriate personnel in the healthcare system is an important barrier to patients receiving high-quality postdischarge care. Tools and strategies from team training programmes, such as team strategies and tools to enhance performance and patient safety, could be adapted to include patients and provide them with structured methods for communicating with healthcare providers post discharge.