Search

Background Given the globally ageing population, care homes have an important role in delivering palliative and end-of-life care. Advance care planning (ACP) is promoted to improve the quality of end-of-life care in this setting. While many professionals can be involved in ACP, little is known about what influences multi-professional involvement and how multi-professional working impacts the ACP process in the UK. This study investigated multi-professional practice in relation to ACP in nursing homes. Design and methods An ethnography was undertaken in two UK nursing homes using multiple methods of data collection: observations, interviews and document review. Participants included the following: nursing home residents (n  = 6), relatives (n  = 4), nursing home staff (n  = 19), and visiting health and social care professionals (n  = 7). Analysis integrated thematic analysis, mapping of resident ACP trajectories and documentary analysis. Findings This paper suggests that multi-professional and relatives' involvement in ACP was disjointed. Continuity and coordination were disrupted by misalignment of visiting professional and nursing home organisational structures. Findings show a 'knotworking' approach to teamwork and power imbalance between nursing home staff and visiting professionals, such as general practitioners. While residents wished their relatives to be involved in their ACP, this was not formally recognised, and limited support existed to facilitate their involvement. Conclusion The structure and organisation of multi-professional and relatives' involvement in ACP led to fragmentation of the process. This marginalised the voice of both the resident and nursing home staff, thereby limiting ACP as a tool to enhance quality of end-of-life care. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background Alcohol increases cancer risk, but less is known about public awareness of this link. This scoping review summarizes recent findings on the public awareness of alcohol as a cancer risk factor in European Union and UK. Methods Four databases (Web of Science, MEDLINE, PsycInfo, CINAHL) were searched for papers containing data on awareness of alcohol as cancer risk factor in EU or UK published between January 2017 and December 2022, and complemented with grey literature searches. Results In total, 45 studies were included covering 18 EU countries (Austria, Belgium, Cyprus, Czechia, Denmark, Finland, France, Germany, Hungary, Ireland, Italy, Netherlands, Poland, Romania, Slovakia, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden) and UK, presenting data collected between 2009 and 2022. Studies covered general population (17 studied a nationally representative sample), women, health professionals, patients and young people. Awareness of alcohol causing cancer in general was higher and studied more often than awareness of alcohol's impact on specific cancers. Among the EU general population, awareness of the link between alcohol and breast cancer ranged between 10% and 20%, head and neck cancer 15–25%, colorectal and oesophagus cancer 15–45% and liver cancer 40%. Awareness was higher among young people and specialized health professions and lower among women (the latter specifically for the breast cancer). Conclusions While awareness rates varied depending on the exact question wording, many studies showed low awareness of the alcohol-cancer link, especially for specific types such as breast and colon cancer. Public should be better informed about alcohol consumption-related cancer risk. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Although health education programmes have been implemented in higher music education (HME) and their evaluations published in peer-reviewed journals, guidelines as to what ought to be included in these programmes are still missing. This study aimed to document expert discussions on the content of an ideal health education curriculum for HME students in the UK, integrating critical thinking. Four interdisciplinary workshops were conducted, where 67 experts in relevant fields took part, and were asked to discuss four lists of topics and concepts created based on literature reviews (cognitive biases, logical fallacies, critical appraisal tools and health topics). Only the list on health topics is relevant here. Notes taken by the participants and ourselves were thematically analysed. Four themes were identified, two of which are reported in this paper: (i) The health education curriculum and (ii) A settings-based approach to health. Part I of this project (published elsewhere) is focussed on the critical thinking content of health education for conservatoire students. The present paper focusses on the ideal health education curriculum and its implications for the wider context of health promotion. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background COVID-19 brought additional challenges to Do Not Attempt Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation (DNACPR) decision-making, which was already a contentious issue. In the UK, reports of poor DNACPR decision-making and communication emerged in 2020, including from the regulator, the Care Quality Commission. This paper explores the experiences of people who discussed DNACPR with a healthcare professional on behalf of a relative during the coronavirus pandemic, with the aim of identifying areas of good practice and what needs to be improved. Methods a total of 39 people participated in semi-structured interviews via video conferencing software or telephone. Data were evaluated using Framework Analysis. Findings results are presented around three main themes: understanding, communication and impact. Participants' understanding about DNACPR was important, as those with better understanding tended to reflect more positively on their discussions with clinicians. The role of relatives in the decision-making process was a frequent source of misunderstanding. Healthcare professionals' communication skills were important. Where discussions went well, relatives were given clear explanations and the opportunity to ask questions. However many relatives felt that conversations were rushed. DNACPR discussions can have a lasting impact—relatives reported them to be significant moments in care journeys. Many relatives perceived that they were asked to decide whether their relative should receive CPR and described enduring emotional consequences, including guilt. Conclusion the pandemic has illuminated deficiencies in current practice around DNACPR discussion, which can have difficult to anticipate and lasting negative consequences for relatives. This research raises questions about the current approach to DNACPR decision-making. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]