Search

Background: The COVID-19-pandemic impacted on the care of seriously ill patients both with and without COVID-19. We anticipated that the pandemic and lockdown of Norway would also affect the holistic care of the dying and their family members. Objective: To gain insight into how family members experienced both end-of-life care for a close relative and support for themselves during the first phase of the COVID-19 pandemic in Norway. Method: Family members who had lost a close relative completed an open, online questionnaire that was available from July to October 2020. The form was answered anonymously by 102 bereaved persons. The questionnaire was based on CODE (Care of the Dying Evaluation), with additional questions linked to the pandemic and an option to add free-text comments. Quantitative data were analysed using descriptive statistics, and free-text comments were analysed thematically in five steps. Results: A total of 83 per cent of the family members were women, median age group 50-59 years, and 61 per cent had lost a parent. Of the deceased, 46 per cent were women, 75 per cent were > 0 years, 48 per cent had cancer and 24 per cent had dementia. A total of 83 per cent died between March and June. Sixteen per cent died at home while 33 per cent died in hospital and 40 per cent died in a nursing home. Most of the family members (85 per cent) were of the opinion that the patient had received satisfactory treatment and nursing care while 35 per cent felt that they themselves had not received adequate support during the patient's final days. Four themes stood out in the free-text comments: 'A safe and dignified end to the journey' describes the good care and individualised approach that many experienced despite the pandemic and lockdown. 'It was all about coronavirus measures' includes experiences of poor availability and quality of treatment and nursing care, inadequate follow-up of family members and a lack of information or confusing information. 'Loss of contact and closeness' deals with the experiences and consequences of visiting bans, visiting restrictions and infection control measures. 'We never heard anything afterwards' describes the lack of contact after the death. Conclusion: Family members largely considered the nursing care and symptom relief to be good. However, the lack of communication, strict visiting restrictions and alienating personal protective equipment led to feelings of uncertainty and a sense of loss and frustration during both the patient's final days and afterwards. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Recognized disparities in quality of end‐of‐life care exist. Our aim was to assess the quality of care for patients dying from cancer, as perceived by bereaved relatives, within hospitals in seven European and South American countries. Materials and Methods: A postbereavement survey was conducted by post, interview, or via tablet in Argentina, Brazil, Uruguay, U.K., Germany, Norway, and Poland. Next of kin to cancer patients were asked to complete the international version of the Care Of the Dying Evaluation (i‐CODE) questionnaire 6–8 weeks postbereavement. Primary outcomes were (a) how frequently the deceased patient was treated with dignity and respect, and (b) how well the family member was supported in the patient's last days of life. Results: Of 1,683 potential participants, 914 i‐CODE questionnaires were completed (response rate, 54%). Approximately 94% reported the doctors treated their family member with dignity and respect "always" or "most of the time"; similar responses were given about nursing staff (94%). Additionally, 89% of participants reported they were adequately supported; this was more likely if the patient died on a specialist palliative care unit (odds ratio, 6.3; 95% confidence interval, 2.3–17.8). Although 87% of participants were told their relative was likely to die, only 63% were informed about what to expect during the dying phase. Conclusion: This is the first study assessing quality of care for dying cancer patients from the bereaved relatives' perspective across several countries on two continents. Our findings suggest many elements of good care were practiced but improvement in communication with relatives of imminently dying patients is needed. (ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03566732). Implications for Practice: Previous studies have shown that bereaved relatives' views represent a valid way to assess care for dying patients in the last days of their life. The Care Of the Dying Evaluation questionnaire is a suitable tool for quality improvement work to help determine areas where care is perceived well and areas where care is perceived as lacking. Health care professionals need to sustain high quality communication into the last phase of the cancer trajectory. In particular, discussions about what to expect when someone is dying and the provision of hydration in the last days of life represent key areas for improvement. Disparities exist in the quality of end‐of‐life care. This article assesses the quality of care for dying cancer patients, as perceived by bereaved relatives, within hospitals in seven European and South American countries. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The ERANet-LAC CODE (Care Of the Dying Evaluation) international survey assessed quality of care for dying cancer patients in seven countries, by use of the i-CODE questionnaire completed by bereaved relatives. The aim of this sub study was to explore which factors improve or reduce quality of end-of-life (EOL) care from Norwegian relatives' point of view, as expressed in free text comments. Methods: 194 relatives of cancer patients dying in seven Norwegian hospitals completed the i-CODE questionnaire 6–8 weeks after bereavement; recruitment period 14 months; response rate 58%. Responders were similar to non-responders in terms of demographic details.104 participants (58% spouse/partner) added free text comments, which were analyzed by systematic text condensation. Results: Of the 104 comments, 45% contained negative descriptions, 27% positive and 23% mixed. 78% described previous experiences, whereas 22% alluded to the last 2 days of life. 64% of the comments represented medical/surgical/oncological wards and 36% palliative care units. Four main categories were developed from the free text comments: 1) Participants described how attentive care towards the practical needs of patients and relatives promoted dignity at the end of life, which could easily be lost when this awareness was missing. 2) They experienced that lack of staff, care continuity, professional competence or healthcare service coordination caused uncertainty and poor symptom alleviation. 3) Inadequate information to patient and family members generated unpredictable and distressing final illness trajectories. 4) Availability and professional support from healthcare providers created safety and enhanced coping in a difficult situation. Conclusions: Our findings suggest that hospitals caring for cancer patients at the end of life and their relatives, should systematically identify and attend to practical needs, as well as address important organizational issues. Education of staff members ought to emphasize how professional conduct and communication fundamentally affect patient care and relatives' coping. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: In contrast to typical measures employed to assess outcomes in healthcare such as mortality or recovery rates, it is difficult to define which specific outcomes of care are the most important in caring for dying individuals. Despite a variety of tools employed to assess different dimensions of palliative care, there is no consensus on a set of core outcomes to be measured in the last days of life. In order to optimise decision making in clinical practice and comparability of interventional studies, we aim to identify and propose a set of core outcomes for the care of the dying person. Methods: Following the COMET initiative approach, the proposed study will proceed through four stages to develop a set of core outcomes: In stage 1, a systematic review of the literature will identify outcomes measured in existing peer reviewed literature, as well as outcomes derived through qualitative studies. Grey literature, will also be included. Stage 2 will allow for the identification and determination of patient and proxy defined outcomes of care at the end of life via quantitative and qualitative methods at an international level. In stage 3, from a list of salient outcomes identified through stages 1 and 2, international experts, family members, patients, and patient advocates will be asked to score the importance of the preselected outcomes through a Delphi process. Stage 4 consists of a face-to-face consensus meeting of international experts and patient/family representatives in order to define, endorse, and propose the final Core Outcomes Set. Discussion: Core Outcome Sets aim at promoting uniform assessment of care outcomes in clinical practice as well as research. If consistently employed, a robust set of core outcomes for the end of life, and specifically for the dying phase, defined by relevant stakeholders, can ultimately be translated into best care for the dying person. Patient care will be improved by allowing clinicians to choose effective and meaningful treatments, and research impact will be improved by employing internationally agreed clinically relevant endpoints and enabling accurate comparison between studies in systematic reviews and/or in meta-analyses. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]