Search

BackgroundFrail and older people are estimated to account for 40% of deaths. Despite conversations about end-of-life care being an important component of the national End of Life Care Strategy, there is a marked disparity between the majority who would like to discuss advance care plans, and the minority who currently have this opportunity.AimTo investigate the attitudes of GPs to advance care planning (ACP) discussions with frail and older individuals.Design and settingFocus group study with GPs in Cambridgeshire between September 2015 and January 2016.MethodFive focus groups with 21 GPs were purposively sampled to maximise diversity. Framework analysis was used to analyse transcripts and develop themes.ResultsAlthough some GPs were concerned it might cause distress, the majority felt that raising ACP was important, especially as preparation for future emergencies. Knowing the individuals, introducing the idea as part of ongoing discussions, and public awareness campaigns were all facilitators identified. Several considered that service limitations made it difficult to fulfil patients’ wishes and risked raising unrealistic patient expectations. Other barriers identified included uncertainty over prognosis and difficulties ensuring that individuals’ wishes were respected.ConclusionMost GPs viewed ACP as important. However, their enthusiasm was tempered by experience. This study highlights the difficulties for GPs of encouraging dialogue and respecting individuals’ wishes within the constraints of the existing health and social care system. National publicity campaigns and encouraging patients to prioritise healthcare outcomes could help GPs raise care preferences without causing a detrimental impact on patients or raising unrealistic expectations. Once patients agree their care preferences, they need to be documented, accessible, and reviewed by all relevant health and social care providers to ensure that their wishes are respected, and plans amended as their circumstances change. more...

Introduction: Advanced care planning (ACP) is a voluntary process of discussion about future care between an individual and their care provider. ACP is a key focus of national policy as a means to improve patient centered care at the end-of-life. Despite wide held belief that ACP is beneficial, uptake is sporadic with considerable variation depending on age, ethnicity, location and disease group. Methods: This study looked to establish the prevalence of ACP on initial presentation to hospital with a medical emergency within The Society of Acute Medicine Benchmarking Audit (SAMBA'18). 123 acute hospitals from across the UK collected data during a day of care survey. The presence of ACP and the presence of 'Do Not Attempt Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation' orders were recorded separately. Results: Among 6072 patients presenting with an acute medical emergency, 290 patients (4.8%) had an ACP that was available for the admitting medical team. The prevalence of ACP was higher at 12.6% for patients over 90 years old. Comparing the effect of location for older patients showed that for patients over 90 years old, 25.3% of patients in institutional care had ACP whereas 8.7% of patients admitted from home had ACP. However, in patients above the age of 90 who were being re-admitted after a hospital admission within the previous 30 days, just 15.3% had evidence of ACP. Conclusion: Very few patients have an ACP that is available to admitting medical teams during an unscheduled hospital admission. Even among patients with advanced age, and who have recently been in hospital, the prevalence of available ACP remains low, in spite of national guidance. Further interventions are needed to ensure that patients' wishes for care are known by providers of acute medical care. Funding Statement: The authors stated that: This study was unfunded." Declaration of Interests: No conflicts of interest declared by the authors. Ethics Approval Statement: The authors declared that ethics committee approval was not required for this study. more...

ObjectiveBetween 2012 and 2017 dementia case finding was routinely carried out on people aged 75 years and over with unplanned admissions to acute hospitals across England. The assumption was that this would lead to better planning of care and treatment for patients with dementia following discharge from hospital. However, little is known about the experiences of patients and carers or the impacts on other health services. This study explored the impact of dementia case finding on older people and their families and on their use of services.DesignThematic content analysis was conducted on qualitative interview data and costs associated with service use were estimated. Measures included the Mini-Mental State Examination, the EuroQol quality of life scale and a modified Client Service Receipt Inventory.SettingFour counties in the East of England.ParticipantsPeople aged ≥75 years who had been identified by case finding during an unplanned hospital admission as warranting further investigation of possible dementia and their family carers.ResultsWe carried out 28 interviews, including 19 joint patient-carer(s), 5 patient only and 4 family carer interviews. Most patients and carers were unaware that memory assessments had taken place, with many families not being informed or involved in the process. Participants had a variety of views on memory testing in hospital and had concerns about how hospitals carried out assessments and communicated results. Overall, case finding did not lead to general practitioner (GP) follow-up after discharge home or lead to referral for further investigation. Few services were initiated because of dementia case finding in hospital.ConclusionsThis study shows that dementia case finding may not lead to increased GP follow-up or service provision for patients after discharge from hospital. There is a need for a more evidence-based approach to the initiation of mandatory initiatives such as case finding that inevitably consume stretched human and financial resources. more...

The Court of Appeal judgment that Janet Tracey9s human rights had been breached when a ‘do not attempt cardiopulmonary resuscitation’ (DNACPR) form was written about her without her knowledge has far-reaching implications for clinical practice. The ‘duty to consult’ extends to all patients apart from those in whom it is likely that discussion would cause ‘physical or psychological harm’. The ethical basis for this judgment is strong: if a patient is unaware that a resuscitation decision has been made, he or she cannot ask questions, plan the future or ask for second opinions. Clinicians have, however, expressed concerns about the logistic implications of this judgment in terms of time and resource allocation, and the possibility that doctors will refrain from making resuscitation decisions at all, rather than risk uncomfortable discussions or litigation. Problems with DNACPR decisions predate the Tracey case, and a coordinated alternative approach is needed: patients should be given information so that they can anticipate, initiate and participate in discussions; resuscitation decisions should be considered early in treatment, in a community setting or at predictable junctures; resuscitation should not be considered in isolation but within the context of other goals of care. Models addressing these issues have been developed. more...

ObjectiveTo determine whether discussion and documentation of decisions about future care was improved following the introduction of a new approach to recording treatment decisions: the Universal Form of Treatment Options (UFTO).MethodsRetrospective review of the medical records of patients who died within 90 days of admission to oncology or respiratory medicine wards over two 3-month periods, preimplementation and postimplementation of the UFTO. A sample size of 70 per group was required to provide 80% power to observe a change from 15% to 35% in discussion or documentation of advance care planning (ACP), using a two-sided test at the 5% significance level.ResultsOn the oncology ward, introduction of the UFTO was associated with a statistically significant increase in cardiopulmonary resuscitation decisions documented for patients (pre-UFTO 52% to post-UFTO 77%, p=0.01) and an increase in discussions regarding ACP (pre-UFTO 27%, post-UFTO 49%, p=0.03). There were no demonstrable changes in practice on the respiratory ward. Only one patient came into hospital with a formal ACP document.ConclusionsDespite patients’ proximity to the end-of-life, there was limited documentation of ACP and almost no evidence of formalised ACP. The introduction of the UFTO was associated with a change in practice on the oncology ward but this was not observed for respiratory patients. A new approach to recording treatment decisions may contribute to improving discussion and documentation about future care but further work is needed to ensure that all patients’ preferences for treatment and care at the end-of-life are known. more...

Aims To determine whether the introduction of the Universal Form of Treatment Options (the UFTO), as an alternative approach to Do Not Attempt Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation (DNACPR) orders, reduces harms in patients in whom a decision not to attempt cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) was made, and to understand the mechanism for any observed change. Methods A mixed-methods before-and-after study with contemporaneous case controls was conducted in an acute hospital. We examined DNACPR (103 patients with DNACPR orders in 530 admissions) and UFTO (118 decisions not to attempt resuscitation in 560 admissions) practice. The Global Trigger Tool was used to quantify harms. Qualitative interviews and observations were used to understand mechanisms and effects. Results Rate of harms in patients for whom there was a documented decision not to attempt CPR was reduced: Rate difference per 1000 patient-days was 12.9 (95% CI: 2.6–23.2, p-value = 0.01). There was a difference in the proportion of harms contributing to patient death in the two periods (23/71 in the DNACPR period to 4/44 in the UFTO period (95% CI 7.8–36.1, p-value = 0.006). Significant differences were maintained after adjustment for known confounders. No significant change was seen on contemporaneous case control wards. Interviews with clinicians and observation of ward practice revealed the UFTO helped provide clarity of goals of care and reduced negative associations with resuscitation decisions. Conclusions Introducing the UFTO was associated with a significant reduction in harmful events in patients in whom a decision not to attempt CPR had been made. Coupled with supportive qualitative evidence, this indicates the UFTO improved care for this vulnerable group. Trial Registration Controlled-Trials.com ISRCTN85474986 UK Comprehensive Research Network Portfolio 7932 more...

Background Around 78% of individuals are admitted to hospital at least once (average 2.1 admissions) in their last year of life. Aim To examine the incidence of documentation of advance care planning (ACP) in the hospital medical records of patients approaching the end-of-life. To explore the impact of a new approach to recording treatment decisions, the Universal Form of Treatment Options (UFTO), on the incidence of ACP. Methods Retrospective review of hospital medical records of patients who died within 90 days of admission to the oncology or respiratory wards in a UK University Hospital. Data collected over three-month periods on incidence of documentation of advance care discussions or decisions before and after the introduction of the UFTO. Results Of the 81 patients who died within 90 days of admission in the pre-UFTO group, only 23 had an ACP discussion documented. 44 had decisions about cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) recorded. Introduction of the UFTO was associated with a statistically significant increase (p = 0.01) in decisions regarding CPR in oncology but not respiratory patients. There was no significant impact on the documentation of other decisions about future care. Only one patient had a recognised ACP document. Discussion Despite patients’ proximity to the end-of-life, there was limited documentation of treatment preferences and almost no evidence of formalised ACP in hospital medical records. Conclusion Further work is needed to improve discussion and documentation of ACP to ensure patients’ preferences for treatment are known and respected if they are admitted to hospital near to the end-of-life. more...