Search

Purpose: Financial toxicity (FT) describes financial distress or hardship as an outcome of cancer and its treatment. Minimising the impact of FT requires early assessment and intervention. General practice plays a significant role in the support of a person with cancer and may have an important role in the management of FT. The purpose of this study was to understand perspectives of general practitioners (GP) on addressing FT in the primary care setting, which may then help inform strategies to further support collaborative efforts to address FT. Methods: A qualitative interpretive approach was utilised for this study. GPs were recruited through a GP conference and other professional networks using purposive, snowballing sampling techniques. Data collection continued until sufficient rich data had been obtained. Interviews were recorded and transcribed verbatim. The data were analysed using inductive analysis techniques. Results: Twenty (n = 20) GPs participated in semi-structured in-depth telephone interviews. GPs identified that their role positions them well to provide some FT support, but there are limitations. Perceptions and philosophies about cancer management were drivers of referrals and financial conversations. Priorities for care of FT by GPs included improved cost information provision and accessible support. Conclusion: GPs can play an important role in helping to address FT associated with cancer and its treatments if supported with the right information.

Background: The term financial toxicity (FT) is used to describe financial distress or hardship as an outcome of cancer and its treatment. Financial burden can negatively affect quality of life in cancer survivors, especially emotional and physical well-being. General practice plays a significant role in the support of a person with cancer and may have an important role in management of FT. However, little is known about the potential role of General Practitioners (GPs) in addressing FT in cancer patients. Aims: The aim of this study was to understand perspectives of GPs on addressing FT in the primary care setting, which may then help inform strategies to further support collaborative efforts to address FT. Methods: A qualitative interpretive approach was utilised for this study. GPs were recruited through a GP conference, PC4 and other professional networks, using purposive, snowballing sampling techniques. Twenty (n=20) GPs from across Queensland, New South Wales and Victoria participated in semi-structured in-depth telephone interviews. The data were analysed using inductive thematic analysis techniques. Results: Responses were diverse and often dependent on GP practice setting, patient population and the GPs’ experience caring for people with cancer. GPs identified that their role positions them well to provide some FT support but there are limitations to this role. Perceptions and philosophies about cancer management were drivers of referrals and financial conversations. Priorities for care of FT by GPs included improved cost information provision and cost-health literacy, increased collaboration with specialist teams, and accessible support. Conclusion: While solutions to manage FT associated with a cancer require a multidisciplinary approach GPs can play an important role in helping to address FT associated with cancer and its treatments if supported with the right information.

Background: The term financial toxicity (FT) is used to describe financial distress or hardship as an outcome of cancer and its treatment. Financial toxicity can negatively affect quality of life and other outcomes. There is a potential for FT to be alleviated in the primary care setting. However, little is known about the role General Practitioners (GPs) can play, as well as the support and tools they may require in addressing FT in people with cancer. Aims: The aim of this study was to understand GPs’ perspectives on addressing FT amongst cancer patients, as well as support that may be required to facilitate delivery of care in the primary care setting. Methods: GPs were recruited through the Primary Care Collaborative Cancer Clinical Trials Group and other professional networks. Semi-structured telephone interviews were used to collect data. Data were analysed using inductive thematic analysis techniques. Results: A total of 20 GPs from across Queensland, New South Wales and Victoria participated in the study. Responses were diverse and often dependent on practice setting, patient population and the GPs’ experience in caring for people with cancer. Most GPs felt they should play a role in supporting FT in cancer patients if they are equipped with the right information. Many identified that improved cost and service resources would assist pathway facilitation. More knowledge about the services available from cancer organisations and education on psychosocial toxicities was also recognised as a priority. Furthermore, improved collaboration and communication with the specialist and multidisciplinary teams was essential. Telehealth was identified as an innovative option to support this. Finally, policy review around Medicare support is imperative to address FT in primary care. Conclusion: If supported with information and collaboration from cancer providers, GPs can play an important role in helping to address FT associated with

Background: General practitioners (GPS) and general practice nurses (GPNs) face increasing demands to provide palliative care (PC) or end-of-life care (EoLC) as the population ages. To enhance primary EoLC, the facilitators and barriers to their provision need to be understood. Objective: To provide a comprehensive description of the facilitators and barriers to GP and GPN provision of PC or EoLC. Method: Systematic literature review. Data included papers (2000 to 2017) sought from Medline, PsycInfo, Embase, Joanna Briggs Institute and Cochrane databases. Results: From 6209 journal articles, 62 reviewed papers reported the GP's and GPN's role in EoLC or PC practice. Six themes emerged: Patient factors; personal GP factors; general practice factors; relational factors; co-ordination of care; availability of services. Four specific settings were identified: Aged care facilities, out-of-hours care and resource-constrained settings (rural, and low-income and middle-income countries). Most GPS provide EoLC to some extent, with greater professional experience leading to increased comfort in performing this form of care. The organisation of primary care at practice, local and national level impose numerous structural barriers that impede more significant involvement. There are potential gaps in service provision where GPNs may provide significant input, but there is a paucity of studies describing GPN routine involvement in EoLC. Conclusions: While primary care practitioners have a natural role to play in EoLC, significant barriers exist to improved GP and GPN involvement in PC. More work is required on the role of GPNs.

BACKGROUND: General practitioners (GPs) and general practice nurses (GPNs) face increasing demands to provide palliative care (PC) or end-of-life care (EoLC) as the population ages. In order to maximise the impact of GPs and GPNs, the impact of different models of care that have been developed to support their practice of EoLC needs to be understood.OBJECTIVE: To examine published models of EoLC that incorporate or support GP and GPN practice, and their impact on patients, families and the health system.METHOD: Systematic literature review. Data included papers (2000 to 2017) sought from Medline, Psychinfo, Embase, Joanna Briggs Institute and Cochrane databases.RESULTS: From 6209 journal articles, 13 papers reported models of care supporting the GP and GPN's role in EoLC or PC practice. Services and guidelines for clinical issues have mixed impact on improving symptoms, but improved adherence to clinical guidelines. National Frameworks facilitated patients being able to die in their preferred place. A single specialist PC-GP case conference reduced hospitalisations, better maintained functional capacity and improved quality of life parameters in both patients with cancer and without cancer. No studies examined models of care aimed at supporting GPNs.CONCLUSIONS: Primary care practitioners have a natural role to play in EoLC, and most patient and health system outcomes are substantially improved with their involvement. Successful integrative models need to be tested, particularly in non-malignant diseases. Such models need to be explored further. More work is required on the role of GPNs and how to support them in this role.

© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2020. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ. BACKGROUND: General practitioners (GPs) and general practice nurses (GPNs) face increasing demands to provide palliative care (PC) or end-of-life care (EoLC) as the population ages. To enhance primary EoLC, the facilitators and barriers to their provision need to be understood. OBJECTIVE: To provide a comprehensive description of the facilitators and barriers to GP and GPN provision of PC or EoLC. METHOD: Systematic literature review. Data included papers (2000 to 2017) sought from Medline, PsycInfo, Embase, Joanna Briggs Institute and Cochrane databases. RESULTS: From 6209 journal articles, 62 reviewed papers reported the GP's and GPN's role in EoLC or PC practice. Six themes emerged: patient factors; personal GP factors; general practice factors; relational factors; co-ordination of care; availability of services. Four specific settings were identified: aged care facilities, out-of-hours care and resource-constrained settings (rural, and low-income and middle-income countries). Most GPs provide EoLC to some extent, with greater professional experience leading to increased comfort in performing this form of care. The organisation of primary care at practice, local and national level impose numerous structural barriers that impede more significant involvement. There are potential gaps in service provision where GPNs may provide significant input, but there is a paucity of studies describing GPN routine involvement in EoLC. CONCLUSIONS: While primary care practitioners have a natural role to play in EoLC, significant barriers exist to improved GP and GPN involvement in PC. More work is required on the role of GPNs.

General practice is arguably the ideal setting to initiate advance care planning (ACP), but there are many barriers. This pilot study was designed to assess the feasibility, acceptability and perceived utility of a nurse-facilitated screening interview to initiate ACP with older patients in general practice. Patients were recruited from four general practices in Sydney, Australia. General practice nurses administered the ACP screening interview during routine health assessments. Patients and nurses completed a follow-up questionnaire consisting of questions with Likert responses, as well as open-ended questions. Descriptive statistics and content analysis were used to analyse the data. Twenty-four patients participated 17 completed the follow-up questionnaire. All patients found the ACP screening interview useful and most felt it would encourage them to discuss their wishes further with their family and general practitioner. Several patients were prompted to consider legally appointing their preferred substitute decision-maker. All six participating nurses found the screening interview tool useful for initiating discussions about ACP and substitute decision-making. This nurse facilitated screening tool provides a simple, acceptable and feasible approach to introducing ACP to older general practice patients during routine health assessments.

Background Cancer of unknown primary (CUP) is a late-stage malignancy with poor prognosis, but we know little about what diagnostic tests and procedures people with CUP receive prior to diagnosis. The purpose of this study was to determine how health service utilisation prior to diagnosis for people with cancer-registry notified CUP differs from those notified with metastatic cancer of known primary. Methods We identified people with a cancer registry notification of CUP (n = 327) from the 45 and Up Study, a prospective cohort of 266,724 people 45 years in New South Wales, Australia, matched with up to three controls with a diagnosis of metastatic cancer of known primary (n = 977). Baseline questionnaire data were linked to population health data to identify all health service use, diagnostic tests, and procedures in the month of diagnosis and 3 months prior. We used conditional logistic regression to estimate adjusted odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Results After adjusting for age and educational attainment, people with a cancer-registry notified CUP diagnosis were more likely to be an aged care resident (OR = 2.78, 95%CI 1.37-5.63), have an emergency department visit (OR = 1.65, 95%CI 1.23-2.21), serum tumor marker tests (OR = 1.51, 95%CI 1.12-2.04), or a cytology test without immunohistochemistry (OR = 2.01, 95%CI 1.47-2.76), and less likely to have a histopathology test without immunohistochemistry (OR = 0.43, 95%CI 0.31-0.59). Neither general practitioner, specialist, allied health practitioner or nurse consultations, hospitalisations, nor imaging procedures were associated with a CUP diagnosis. Conclusions The health service and diagnostic pathway to diagnosis differs markedly for people notified with CUP compared to those with metastatic cancer of known primary. While these differences may indicate missed opportunities for earlier detection and appropriate management, for some patients they may be clinically appropriate.

BACKGROUND: General practitioners (GPs) and general practice nurses (GPNs) face increasing demands to provide end-of-life care (EoLC) as the population ages. To enhance primary palliative care (PC), the care they provide needs to be understood to inform best practice models of care.OBJECTIVE: To provide a comprehensive description of the self-reported role and performance of GPs and GPNs in (1) specific medical/nursing roles, (2) communication, (3) care co-ordination, (4) access and out-of-hours care, and (5) multidisciplinary care.METHOD: Systematic literature review. Data included papers (2000 to 2017) sought from Medline, Psychinfo, Embase, Joanna Briggs Institute and Cochrane databases.RESULTS: From 6209 journal articles, 29 reviewed papers reported the GPs' and GPNs' role in EoLC or PC practice. GPs report a central role in symptom management, treatment withdrawal, non-malignant disease management and terminal sedation. Information provision included breaking bad news, prognosis and place of death. Psychosocial concerns were often addressed. Quality of communication depended on GP-patient relationships and GP skills. Challenges were unrealistic patient and family expectations, family conflict and lack of advance care planning. GPs often delayed end-of-life discussions until 3 months before death. Home visits were common, but less so for urban, female and part-time GPs. GPs co-ordinated care with secondary care, but in some cases parallel care occurred. Trust in, and availability of, the GP was critical for shared care. There was minimal reference to GPNs' roles.CONCLUSIONS: GPs play a critical role in palliative care. More work is required on the role of GPNs, case finding and models to promote shared care, home visits and out-of-hours services.

Objective This study examined advance care planning as delivered by general practice registrars and recently fellowed GPs in New South Wales rural settings. The facilitators and barriers to advance care planning uptake in these areas were investigated, as well as the state of general practice training on advance care planning. Design Qualitative descriptive methodology, involving semi‐structured face‐to‐face and telephone interviews. Setting Primary care. Participants General practice registrars and recently fellowed GPs in New South Wales rural settings. Definition of rural using the Australian Standard Geographical Classification ‐ Remoteness Area. Thirteen participants were included in the study. Main outcome measures Thematic analysis of interview transcripts elucidated key issues emerging from participants' accounts. Results Key barriers included doctor‐dependent uptake, demands on doctor's time and the limited relevant resources available. Facilitators recognised were patient control in end‐of‐life care and long‐standing relationships between GPs and their patients. Uptake among patients was low, and minimal training on advance care planning reported. Conclusion The lack of training opportunities in advance care planning during vocational training, especially when combined with the essential role played by rural GPs in initiating advance care planning and providing end‐of‐life care, appears to be a major problem that might contribute to poor uptake among patients in rural areas. This study demonstrated, however, the significant benefits that advance care planning could bring in patients living in rural communities if delivered effectively. Given that rural GPs face a number of barriers to providing routine health care, these results highlight an important need to provide GPs and rural communities with support, education, incentive, better administrative tools, options and greater awareness of advance care planning.

Published evidence for the role of participatory art in supporting health and well‐being is growing. The Arts on Prescription model is one vehicle by which participatory art can be delivered. Much of the focus of Arts on Prescription has been on the provision of creative activities for people with mental health needs. This Arts on Prescription program, however, targeted community‐dwelling older people with a wide range of health and wellness needs. Older people were referred to the program by their healthcare practitioner. Professional artists led courses in visual arts, photography, dance and movement, drama, singing, or music. Classes were held weekly for 8-10 weeks, with six to eight participants per class, and culminated with a showing of work or a performance. Program evaluation involved pre‐ and postcourse questionnaires, and focus groups and individual interviews. Evaluation data on 127 participants aged 65 years and older were available for analysis. We found that Arts on Prescription had a positive impact on participants. Quantitative findings revealed a statistically significant improvement in the Warwick-Edinburgh Mental Well‐being Scale (WEMWBS) as well as a statistically significant increase in the level of self‐reported creativity and frequency of creative activities. Qualitative findings indicated that the program provided challenging artistic activities which created a sense of purpose and direction, enabled personal growth and achievement, and empowered participants, in a setting which fostered the development of meaningful relationships with others. This evaluation adds to the evidence base in support of Arts on Prescription by expanding the application of the model to older people with a diverse range of health and wellness needs.

Objectives How advance care planning (ACP) is conceptualised in Australia including when, where and how ACP is best initiated, is unclear. It has been suggested that healthcare delivered in general practice provides an optimal setting for initiation of ACP discussions but uptake remains low. This systematic review and critical interpretive synthesis sought to answer two questions: (1) What are the barriers and enablers to uptake of ACP in general practice? (2) What initiatives have been used to increase uptake of ACP in general practice? Design A systematic review and critical interpretive synthesis of the peer-reviewed literature was undertaken. A socioecological framework was used to interpret and map the literature across four contextual levels of influence including individual, interpersonal, provider and system levels within a general practice setting. Setting Primary care general practice settings Data sources Searches were undertaken from inception to July 2019 across Ovid Medline, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, Scopus, ProQuest and Cochrane Library of systematic reviews. Results The search yielded 4883 non-duplicate studies which were reduced to 54 studies for synthesis. Year of publication ranged from 1991 to 2019 and represented research from nine countries. Review findings identified a diverse and disaggregated body of ACP literature describing barriers and enablers to ACP in general practice, and interventions testing single or multiple mechanisms to improve ACP generally without explicit consideration for level of influence. There was a lack of cohesive guidance in shaping effective ACP interventions and some early indications of structured approaches emerging. Conclusion Findings from this review present an opportunity to strategically apply the ACP research evidence across targeted levels of influence, and with an understanding of mediators and moderators to inform the design of new and enhanced ACP models of care in general

Background: The relationship between comorbid disease and health service use and risk of cancer of unknown primary site (CUP)is uncertain. Methods: A prospective cohort of 266,724 people aged 45 years and over in New South Wales, Australia. Baseline questionnaire data were linked to cancer registration, health service records 4-27 months prior to diagnosis, and mortality data. We compared individuals with incident registry-notified CUP (n = 327; 90% C80)to two sets of randomly selected controls (3:1): (i)incident metastatic cancer of known primary site (n = 977)and (ii)general cohort population (n = 981). We used conditional logistic regression to estimate adjusted odds ratios (ORs)and 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Results: In fully adjusted models incorporating sociodemographic and lifestyle factors, people with cancer registry-notified CUP were more likely to have fair compared with excellent self-rated overall health (OR 1.78, 95% CI 1.01-3.14)and less likely to self-report anxiety (OR 0.48, 95% CI 0.24−0.97)than those registered with metastatic cancer of known primary. Compared to general cohort population controls, people registered with CUP were more likely to have poor rather than excellent self-rated overall health (OR 6.22, 95% CI 1.35-28.6), less likely to self-report anxiety (OR 0.28, 95% CI 0.12−0.63), and more likely to have a history of diabetes (OR 1.89, 95% CI 1.15-3.10)or cancer (OR 1.62, 95% CI 1.03-2.57). Neither tertiary nor community-based health service use independently predicted CUP risk. Conclusion: Low self-rated health may be a flag for undiagnosed cancer, and an investigation of its clinical utility in primary care appears warranted.

Background: Little is known about the risk factors for cancer of unknown primary site (CUP). We examined the demographic, social and lifestyle risk factors for CUP in a prospective cohort of 266,724 people aged 45 years and over in New South Wales, Australia. Methods: Baseline questionnaire data were linked to cancer registration, hospitalisation, emergency department admission, and mortality data. We compared individuals with incident cancer registry-notified CUP (n = 327) to two sets of controls randomly selected (3:1) using incidence density sampling with replacement: (i) incident cancer registry-notified metastatic cancer of known primary site (n = 977) and (ii) general cohort population (n = 981). We used conditional logistic regression to estimate adjusted odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Results: In a fully adjusted model incorporating self-rated overall health and comorbidity, people diagnosed with CUP were more likely to be older (OR 1.05, 95% CI 1.04-1.07 per year) and more likely to have low educational attainment (OR 1.77, 95% CI 1.24-2.53) than those diagnosed with metastatic cancer of known primary. Similarly, compared to general cohort population controls, people diagnosed with CUP were older (OR 1.10, 95% CI 1.08-1.12 per year), of low educational attainment (OR 1.69, 95% CI 1.08-2.64), and current (OR 3.42, 95% CI 1.81-6.47) or former (OR 1.95, 95% CI 1.33-2.86) smokers. Conclusion: The consistent association with educational attainment suggests low health literacy may play a role in CUP diagnosis. These findings highlight the need to develop strategies to achieve earlier identification of diagnostically challenging malignancies in people with low health literacy.

Background: Advance care planning (ACP) can offer benefits to patients and their families, especially when delivered in outpatient settings, but uptake remains low. Common barriers for health professionals include a perceived lack of time and adequate training, experience, and confidence in conducting ACP. Patient-reported barriers include a lack of awareness of ACP or discomfort initiating or engaging in discussions about end-of-life. Methods: We aimed to explore patients' perspectives of an ACP intervention designed to address common barriers to uptake in the general practice setting. We provided training and support to doctors and general practice nurses (GPNs) to initiate and lead ACP discussions at their respective practices (2014 to 2015). Following the intervention, we conducted interviews with patients to explore their experience of engaging in ACP in the general practice setting. Thematic analysis was used to inductively code transcripts and identify key themes from semi-structured interviews with patients. Results: Six major themes relating to patient experiences of GPN-facilitated ACP were identified: Working through ideas, therapeutic relationship with nurses, significance of making wishes known, protecting family from burden, autonomy in decision-making, and challenges of family communication. The patients valued the opportunity to speak about issues that are important to them with the GPN who they found to be compassionate and caring. The patients felt that ACP would lead to significant benefits not only to themselves but also for their family. Despite encouragement to involve other family members, most patients attended the ACP discussions alone or as a couple; many did not see the relevance of their family being involved in the discussions. Some patients felt uncomfortable or reluctant in communicating the results of their discussion with their family. Conclusions: With adequate training and support, GPNs are able to initiate and facilitate ACP conve

Introduction It is unclear whether advance care planning (ACP) undertaken with patients living in the community can improve patient care and avoid unwanted interventions and hospital admissions. We have designed a randomised controlled trial (RCT) to examine if ACP undertaken with patients with advanced illnesses attending hospital outpatient clinics can reduce unplanned hospital admissions and improve patient and caregiver well-being. Methods and analysis Pragmatic RCT involving patients from subspecialty outpatient clinics at five clinical sites in Sydney, Australia. Participants will be ≥18 years screened as potentially having palliative care needs and at risk of dying in 6-12 months. The patients will be randomised to intervention or control group. Intervention group will undertake ACP discussions facilitated by a trained health professional. The control group will receive written information on ACP, representing the current standard of care. The primary outcome is the number of unplanned hospital admissions at the 6-month follow-up. Secondary outcomes include: (i) patient's health-related quality-of-life and quality of chronic disease care; (ii) caregiver's health-related quality-of-life and caregiver burden and (iii) other health outcomes including ambulance usage, emergency department presentations, hospital admissions, resuscitation attempts, intensive care unit admissions, deaths, documentation of patient wishes in patient records and audit of ACP discussions and documents. The staff's self-reported attitudes and knowledge of ACP will also be measured. The data will be collected using self-report questionnaires, hospital records audit, audit of ACP documentation and data linkage analysis. Semistructured interviews and focus group discussions with patients, caregivers and healthcare professionals will explore the acceptability and feasibility of the intervention. Ethics and dissemination Approved by South-East Sydney Local Health District Human Research Ethi

Background: Most assessments in health professions education consist of knowledge-based examinations as well as practical and clinical examinations. Among the most challenging aspects of clinical assessments is decision making related to borderline grades assigned by examiners. Borderline grades are commonly used by examiners when they do not have sufficient information to make clear pass/fail decisions. The interpretation of these borderline grades is rarely discussed in the literature. This study reports the application of the Objective Borderline Method (version 2, henceforth: OBM2) to a high stakes Objective Structured Clinical Examination undertaken at the end of the final year of a Medicine program in Australia. Methods: The OBM2 uses all examination data to reclassify borderline grades as either pass or fail. Factor analysis was used to estimate the suitability of data for application of OBM2. Student's t-tests, utilising bootstrapping, were used to compare the OBM2 with 'traditional' results. Interclass correlations were used to estimate the association between the grade reclassification and all other grades in this examination. Results: The correlations between scores for each station and pass/fail outcomes increased significantly after the mark reclassification, yet the reclassification did not significantly impact on students' total scores. Examiners, students and program leaders expressed high levels of satisfaction and the Faculty's Curriculum Development Committee has decided that the OBM2 will be used for all future clinical examinations. Implications of the OBM2 are discussed. Conclusions: The OBM2 provides a feasible, defensible and acceptable solution for classification of borderline grades as either pass or fail.

Background: With an increasing ageing population in most countries, the role of general practitioners (GPs) and general practice nurses (GPNs) in providing optimal end of life (EoL) care is increasingly important. Objective: To explore: (1) patient and carer expectations of the role of GPs and GPNs at EoL; (2) GPs' and GPNs' contribution to advance care planning (ACP) and (3) if primary care involvement allows people to die in the place of preference. Method: Systematic literature review. Data sources: Papers from 2000 to 2017 were sought from Medline, Psychinfo, Embase, Joanna Briggs Institute and Cochrane databases. Results: From 6209 journal articles, 51 papers were relevant. Patients and carers expect their GPs to be competent in all aspects of palliative care. They valued easy access to their GP, a multidisciplinary approach to care and well-coordinated and informed care. They also wanted their care team to communicate openly, honestly and empathically, particularly as the patient deteriorated. ACP and the involvement of GPs were important factors which contributed to patients being cared for and dying in their preferred place. There was no reference to GPNs in any paper identified. Conclusions: Patients and carers prefer a holistic approach to care. This review shows that GPs have an important role in ACP and that their involvement facilitates dying in the place of preference. Proactive identification of people approaching EoL is likely to improve all aspects of care, including planning and communicating about EoL. More work outlining the role of GPNs in end of life care is required.

Background Advance care planning (ACP) is an important component of quality care for patients with chronic and advanced diseases. General practititoners are ideally placed to initiate ACP because of their role in care coordination of chronic and advanced diseases, and the longstanding relationship they develop with patients. Objective This paper outlines the key barriers to general practice involvement in ACP and describes useful strategies for incorporating ACP into patient care. Discussion Barriers to ACP are many and involve health professionals, patients and the healthcare system. To successfully incorporate ACP into patient care, there should be: (i) a commitment from the whole practice to incorporate ACP into patient care; (ii) a focus on building capacity for ACP in the practice; and (iii) efforts to implement and optimise the process of ACP. The outcomes of ACP (eg Advance Care Directives) should be disseminated appropriately to enable them to improve patient care.

Objectives: General practitioners (GPs) are well placed to be involved in end-of-life care for patients with life-limiting illnesses. However, differing views exist regarding their role. This study aims to explore the views of GPs and specialist palliative care clinicians (SPCCs) on the role that GPs should play in the planning and provision of end-of-life care and important barriers and facilitators to GPs' involvement in end-of-life care including suggestions for improvement. Methods: Qualitative description methodology using semistructured interviews of 11 GPs and 10 SPCCs. Results: The participants identified two key roles that GPs should play in the planning and provision of end-of-life care: care planning and referring to palliative care services and being the primary clinician in charge of patient care. GPs and SPCCs expressed similar views; however, a significant proportion of the GP participants were not actively involved in end-of-life care. Factors affecting GPs' involvement in end-of-life care included: (1) GP and practice factors including continuity of care, long-term relationships with patients, knowledge and skills in end-of-life care, resource limitations and work patterns; (2) communication and collaboration between GPs and the acute healthcare system and (3) communication and collaboration between GPs and SPCCs. Conclusion: GPs have a key role in the planning and provision of end-of-life care. GPs could be encouraged in this role by providing them with education and practical experience in end-of-life care, making changes to remuneration structure, formalised arrangements for shared care and encouraging continuity of care and developing long-term relationship with their patients.

Background and objectives: Researchers and clinicians have been criticised for frequently misinterpreting and misusing P values. This study sought to understand how general practitioners (GPs) in Australia and New Zealand conceptualise P values presented in the manner typically encountered in a medical publication. Methods: This mixed-methods study used quantitative and qualitative questions embedded in an online questionnaire and delivered through an Australian and New Zealand GP-specific Facebook group in 2017. It included questions that elaborated on the participant's conceptualisation of 'P = 0.05' within a scenario and tested their P value interpretation ability and confidence. Results: There were 247 participants who completed the questionnaire. Participant conceptualisations of P values were described using six thematic categories. The most common (and erroneous) conceptualisation was that P values numerically indicated a 'real-world probability'. No demographic factor, including research experience, seemed associated with better interpretation ability. A confidence-ability gap was detected. Discussion: P value misunderstanding is pervasive and might be influenced by a few central misconceptions. Statistics education for clinicians should explicitly address the most common misconceptions.

Background: Standard setting is one of the most contentious topics in educational measurement. Commonly-used methods all have well reported limitations. To date, there is not conclusive evidence suggesting which standard setting method yields the highest validity. Methods: The method described and piloted in this study asked expert judges to estimate the scores on a real MCQ examination that they consider indicated a clear pass, clear fail, and pass mark for the examination as a whole. The mean and SD of the judges responses to these estimates, Z scores and confidence intervals were used to derive the cut-score and the confidence in it. Results: In this example the new method's cut-score was higher than the judges' estimate. The method also yielded estimates of statistical error which determine the range of the acceptable cut-score and the estimated level of confidence one may have in the accuracy of that cut-score. Conclusions: This new standard-setting method offers some advances, and possibly advantages, in that the decisions being asked of judges are based on firmer constructs, and it takes into account variation among judges.

BACKGROUND: Population ageing will lead to more deaths with an uncertain trajectory. Identifying patients at risk of dying could facilitate more effective care planning. AIM: To determine whether screening for likely death within 12 months is more effective using screening tools or intuition. DESIGN: Randomised controlled trial of screening tools (Surprise Question plus the Supportive and Palliative Care Indicators Tool for Surprise Question positive patients) to predict those at risk of death at 12 months compared with unguided intuition (clinical trials registry: ACTRN12613000266763). SETTING/PARTICIPANTS: Australian general practice. A total of 30 general practitioners (screening tool = 12, intuition = 18) screened all patients ( n = 4365) aged ≥70 years seen at least once in the last 2 years. RESULTS: There were 142 deaths (screening tool = 3.1%, intuition = 3.3%; p = 0.79). General practitioners identified more at risk of dying using Surprise Question (11.8%) than intuition (5.4%; p = 0.01), but no difference with Surprise Question positive then Supportive and Palliative Care Indicators Tool (5.1%; p = 0.87). Surprise Question positive predicted more deaths (53.2%, intuition = 33.7%; p = 0.001), but Surprise Question positive/Supportive and Palliative Care Indicators Tool predictions were similar (5.1%; p = 0.87 vs intuition). There was no difference in proportions correctly predicted to die (Surprise Question = 1.6%, intuition = 1.1%; p = 0.156 and Surprise Question positive/Supportive and Palliative Care Indicators Tool = 1.1%; p = 0.86 vs intuition). Screening tool had higher sensitivity and lower specificity than intuition, but no difference in positive or negative predictive value. CONCLUSION: Screening tool was better at predicting actual death than intuition, but with a higher false positive rate. Both were similarly effective at screening the whole cohort for death. Screening for possible death is not the best option for initiating end-of-life planning

Nurses are well positioned to initiate and conduct advance-care planning (ACP) conversations; however, there has been limited research on practice nurses performing this role in Australia. The aim of the present study was to understand the beliefs, attitudes, perceptions, confidence, training and educational needs of New South Wales practice nurses with regards to involvement in ACP. A cross-sectional online survey was conducted in August to October 2014. Nurses were recruited through nursing organisations and Medicare Locals. There were 147 completed surveys (n = 147). Participants were mostly female registered nurses, with a median age of 50, and 6 years of practice-nurse experience. Practice nurses were generally positive towards their involvement in ACP and believed it would be beneficial for the community. Their confidence in initiating ACP increased as their familiarity with patients increased. They showed a high level of interest in participating in training and education in ACP. Barriers to their involvement in ACP included the lack of a good documentation system, limited patient-education resources and unclear source of remuneration. Nurses were also concerned over legalities of ACP, ethical considerations and their understanding of end-of-life care options. Nevertheless, they were highly receptive of integrating ACP discussions and were willing to enhance their skills. These findings uncover a need for further training and development of practice nurses for ACP discussions.

Background Key Information Summaries (KIS) were introduced throughout Scotland in 2013 so that anticipatory care plans written by general practitioners (GPs) could be routinely shared electronically and updated in real time, between GPs and providers of unscheduled and secondary care. Aims We aimed to describe the current reach of anticipatory and palliative care, and to explore GPs' views on using KIS. Methods We studied the primary care records of all patients who died in 2014 in 9 diverse Lothian practices. We identified if anticipatory or palliative care had been started, and if so how many weeks before death and which aspects of care had been documented. We interviewed 10 GPs to understand barriers and facilitating factors. Results Overall, 60% of patients were identified for a KIS, a median of 18 weeks before death. The numbers identified were highest for patients with cancer, with 75% identified compared with 66% of those dying with dementia/frailty and only 41% dying from organ failure. Patients were more likely to die outside hospital if they had a KIS. GPs identified professional, patient and societal challenges in identifying patients for palliative care, especially those with non-cancer diagnoses. Conclusions GPs are identifying patients for anticipatory and palliative care more equitably across the different disease trajectories and earlier in the disease process than they were previously identifying patients specifically for palliative care. However, many patients still lack care planning, particularly those dying with organ failure.

Advance care planning (ACP) is described as an ongoing discussion between a patient, their family and healthcare professionals (HCPs) to understand a patient's wishes for future health care. Legislation supporting ACP in Western Australia is relatively new and HCPs are still learning about the process and implementation. This study aimed to provide a rich description of rural health professionals' perceptions and experiences with ACP within the context of their professional role and to identify systemic issues and training needs. Ten focus groups were conducted throughout 2014 with a total of 55 rural participants including general practitioners (n≤15), general practice registrars (n≤6), practice nurses (n≤18), community nurses (n≤4) and hospital nurses (n≤12) in the south-western regions of Western Australia. Thematic analysis has identified the following themes regarding ACP: benefits to patients and families; professional roles in ACP; barriers and enablers; and systems for communicating ACP. HCPs have self-determined their roles in the ACP process, which currently leaves some components of the process unaccounted for, suggesting that collaboration between HCPs working together in a rural health setting and a standardised system for distributing these documents may assist with the implementation of ACP.

OBJECTIVE: To determine if a web-based personally controlled health management system (PCHMS) could increase the uptake of sexually transmitted infections (STI) screening among a young university population. METHODS: A non-blinded parallel-group randomized controlled trial was conducted. Participants aged 18-29 years were recruited from a university environment between April and August 2013, and randomized 1:1 to either the intervention group (immediate online PCHMS access) or control group (no PCHMS access). The study outcome was self-reported STI testing, measured by an online follow-up survey in October 2013. RESULTS: Of the 369 participants allocated to the PCHMS, 150 completed the follow-up survey, and of the 378 in the control group, 225 completed the follow-up survey. The proportion of the PCHMS group who underwent an STI test during the study period was 15.3% (23/150) compared with 7.6% (17/225) in the control group (P = .017). The difference in STI testing rates within the subgroup of sexually active participants (20.4% (23/113) of the PCHMS group compared with 9.6% (15/157) of the control group) was significantly higher (P = .027) than among non-sexually active participants. DISCUSSION: Access to the PCHMS was associated with a significant increase in participants undergoing STI testing. This is also the first study to demonstrate efficacy of a PCHMS targeting a health concern where susceptibility is generally perceived as low and the majority of infections are asymptomatic. CONCLUSION: PCHMS interventions may provide an effective means of increasing the demand for STI testing which, combined with increased opportunistic testing by clinicians, could reduce the high and sustained rates of STIs in young people.