Search

Background: Promoting options for aging in place (AIP) has broad appeal to policymakers and professionals providing services to persons living with dementia (PWD). However, the benefits or burdens of AIP likely vary among individuals and families. We sought to describe factors influencing decision‐making to age in place versus seek a higher level of residential care for PWD. Methods: A qualitative study was undertaken as part of a larger mixed‐methods study utilizing semi‐structured interviews with PWD, family care partners, and dementia clinicians. Interview transcripts were analyzed using qualitative content analysis with constant comparison. Sample size was determined by thematic saturation within subgroups. Results: We conducted 74 interviews among 14 PWD, 36 care partners, and 24 clinicians. Preferences for AIP were driven by (1) desire to preserve independence, (2) a sense that the "best care" is delivered by loved ones and in a familiar environment, (3) distrust and fear of care facilities, and (4) caregiver guilt. PWD and care partners frequently considered moving from home as a "last resort" and wanted to avoid planning for future care needs. Many decisions to move were reactive and triggered by patient safety events, physical dependency, or the loss of caregiver. Proactive decision‐making was facilitated by (1) prior experience witnessing the challenges of caring for a person with advanced dementia in the home; and (2) having substantial financial resources such that participants could seek major home adaptations or avoid "lower quality" institutions. Conclusions: Decisions regarding care setting for PWD frequently do not feel like a choice and are made under imperfect conditions. Programs using AIP as an outcome measure should recognize the various patient‐centered and non‐patient‐centered factors that influence such choices, and interventions should be designed to promote more informed and equitable decision‐making for care setting in dementia. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Among patients with serious illness, palliative care before hospice enrollment is associated with improved quality of life, reduced symptom burden, and earlier transitions to hospice. However, fewer than half of eligible patients receive specialty palliative care referrals. As most hospice clinicians and administrators have experience in specialty palliative care, several emerging programs propose engaging hospice clinicians to provide early palliative care. Objective: We sought to identify barriers and facilitators to upstream palliative care. Design: We conducted a key informant qualitative study among hospice administrators and clinicians. Setting/Subjects: We conducted semi-structured interviews with 23 hospice administrators and clinicians in eight states from March to August 2022. We identified participants using snowball and purposive sampling using states that participate in Medicare Advantage's value-based insurance design Model. Results: Respondents indicated that barriers to early palliative care included inadequate staffing and reimbursement. Hospice clinicians providing community-based palliative care can address access barriers and improve transitions to hospice. Respondents expressed desire for payer guidance in identifying eligible patients but were cautious about payers acting as direct palliative care providers. However, payers could facilitate uptake by broadening and specifying coverage of services to include goals of care conversations and symptom management. Routine referrals initiated by objective measures could potentially increase access. Conclusions: Utilizing hospice providers to provide upstream palliative care can increase access, improve outcomes, and ease the transition to hospice. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The COVID-19 pandemic produced stress for people around the world. The perception that tobacco can be a coping tool for stress relief suggests that the conditions during the COVID-19 pandemic can provide insight into the relationship between stress and tobacco use patterns, particularly among those most at risk for severe COVID-19 disease. The goal was to identify the impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic on tobacco use and preparedness for smoking cessation among individuals who smoke and are older and medically underserved. We conducted in-depth interviews with 39 patients to learn about individuals' smoking behavior during the COVID-19 pandemic. We used a modified grounded theory approach to code and analyze all qualitative data. We conducted thematic analysis to identify key factors associated with smoking behaviors during COVID-19. Our results indicated that increases in perceived stress and social isolation may have been associated with increased tobacco use during the COVID-19 pandemic. Pandemic-related social isolation contributed to increases in smoking, despite respondents being concerned about the severity of COVID-19. While many respondents felt that smoking relieved their stress from the pandemic, they appeared unaware of the stress-inducing properties of tobacco use. Our findings indicate that pandemic-related stress impacted smoking behavior among older, medically underserved smokers. Results may assist clinicians in addressing the role of tobacco use in response to highly stressful events. Smoking cessation strategies should consider the implications of stress on smoking behavior, including smoking relapse in response to highly stressful events–particularly for medically underserved populations. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The Haredi (ultraorthodox Jewish) community in Israel presents distinct views on disability and prenatal testing compared to the pro-testing attitudes of the Israeli general public. Based on qualitative analysis of semi-structured interviews with Haredi parents of children with Down syndrome, this study explores the interplay between their personal experiences and community norms in the creation of views on disability and pregnancy management. The experiences of life with disability carry varied positive and negative aspects, for both secular and religious parents. However, while this variability sometimes led to re-consideration (for better or worse) of views on disability and prenatal testing among secular parents, we demonstrate that parenting a child with disability did not change the views of Haredi parents regarding the futility of prenatal testing and the value of disability. For them, the Haredi model of disability remained the dominant framework through which life is experienced. While the Israeli general public is supportive of tests performed during pregnancy with the aim of selective terminations of pregnancies when anomalies in the fetus are detected, the most religious Jewish (Haredi) community tends to avoid such testing. The study demonstrates the interplay between cultural norms and personal experiences in forming attitudes toward disability. For Haredi parents, life with a child with Down syndrome did not essentially change their positive perceptions of disability and their rejection of testing the fetus in future pregnancies. Haredi parents' critical view of testing during pregnancy reflects their religious perspective, rather than the perspective of people with disabilities and their empowerment. Haredi parents view children with Down syndrome as 'higher souls' sent by God as a test of faith and a mission, thus constructing testing the fetus for Down syndrome as futile. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The 2009 H1N1 vaccination campaign was the largest in US history. State health departments received vaccines from the federal government and sent them to local health departments (LHDs) who were responsible for getting vaccines to the public. Many LHD's used school-based clinics to ensure children were the first to receive limited vaccine supplies, but the success of school-based distribution strategies varied in different locations. The goal of this project was to identify and learn from high-performing school-based vaccination clinics in order to share successes and improve performance in future school-based vaccination campaigns. Methods: We used a combination of process mapping and comparative analysis to identify and derive lessons from positive outlier cases observed during 2009 H1N1 school-based vaccination clinic implementation. We created process maps to identify the activities of LHDs conducting school-based vaccinations and used them as the basis for in-depth interviews of LHD staff. We asked interviewees to describe their activities during the 2009 H1N1 pandemic (pH1N1) school-based vaccination campaign with a focus on successful processes. Results: We identified positive deviants, that is, those that performed better than expected, and categorized qualitative data from in-depth interviews with 13 successful LHDs according to the process maps. Key mechanisms for school-based vaccination success included having a relationship with local school authorities, communicating effectively with parents, and ensuring clinic logistics allowed for an easy flow of students through the vaccination process. Conclusions: Utilizing rigorous methodology, we defined and learned lessons from successful LHDs when conducting school-based vaccination clinics, which can be applied to future school-based vaccination campaigns.

Opioid misuse represents a major public health issue in the United States. One driver is overprescription for acute pain, with the size of initial prescription associated with subsequent long-term use. However, little work has been done to elicit clinician feedback about interventions to reduce opioid prescribing. To address this knowledge gap, qualitative analyses were conducted with clinicians who participated in a randomized controlled trial in which clinicians received monthly emailed feedback notifications about their opioid prescribing behaviors. Semistructured telephone interviews were conducted (N = 12) with urgent care (N = 7) and emergency department (N = 5) clinicians who participated in the trial between November 2020 and April 2021. Clinicians appreciated feedback about their prescribing behavior and found comparative data with peer clinicians to be most useful. Sharing opioid prescribing feedback data with clinicians can be an acceptable way to address opioid prescribing among emergency and urgent care clinicians. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]