Background: end-of-life care is not always in line with end-of-life preferences, so patients do not always die at their preferred place of death (PPD). This study aims to identify factors associated with patients' PPD and changes in PPD. Methods: we prospectively collected data on PPD at four time points within 6 months from 230 acutely hospitalised older patients who were part of the control group in a stepped-wedge randomised controlled trial. Associations between patient characteristics and preferences were calculated using multivariable (multinomial) logistic regression analysis. Results: the mean age of participants was 80.7 years. 47.8% of the patients had no PPD at hospital admission. Patients previously admitted to hospital preferred to die at home (home versus no preference: odds ratio [OR] 2.38, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.15-4.92; home versus healthcare facility: OR 3.25, 95% CI 1.15-9.16). Patients with more chronic diseases preferred the healthcare facility as their PPD (healthcare facility versus no preference: OR 1.33, 95% CI 1.09-1.61; healthcare facility versus home: OR 1.21, 95% CI 1.00-1.47). 32 of 65 patients changed their preference during follow-up, and most of these had no PPD at hospital admission (home versus no preference: OR 0.005, 95% CI ≤0.001-0.095) and poorer self-rated well-being (OR 1.82, 95% CI 1.07-3.08). Conclusions: almost half of the patients had no PPD at baseline. Previous hospital admission, having more chronic diseases and living alone are associated with having a PPD. Introducing PPD could make older people aware of PPD and facilitate optimal palliative care.
DOCUMENT
Referral to home-based cardiac rehabilitation (HBCR) is low among older and frailer patients due to low expectations regarding adherence by healthcare professionals. The aim of this study was to determine adherence to HBCR when old and frail patients are referred, and to explore any differences in baseline characteristics between adherent and nonadherent patients. Data of the Cardiac Care Bridge were used (Dutch trial register NTR6316). The study included hospitalized cardiac patients ≥ 70 years old and at high risk of functional loss. Adherence to HBCR was confirmed when two-thirds of the intended nine sessions were followed. Of the 153 patients included (age: 82 ± 6 years, 54% female), 29% could not be referred due to death before referral, not returning home, or practical problems. Of the 109 patients who were referred, 67% adhered. Characteristics associated with non-adherence were older age (84 ± 6 vs. 82 ± 6, p = 0.05) and higher handgrip strength in men (33 ± 8 vs. 25 ± 11, p = 0.01). There was no difference in comorbidity, symptoms, or physical capacity. Based on these observations, most older cardiac patients who return home after hospital admission appear to adhere to HBCR after referral, suggesting that most older cardiac patients are motivated and capable of receiving HBCR.
DOCUMENT
Background: Team-based palliative care interventions have shown positive results for patients at the end of life in both hospital and community settings. However, evidence on the effectiveness of transmural, that is, spanning hospital and home, team-based palliative care collaborations is limited. Aim: To systematically review whether transmural team-based palliative care interventions can prevent hospital admissions and increase death at home. Design: Systematic review and meta-analysis. Data sources: MEDLINE (Ovid), Embase (Ovid), CINAHL (Ebsco), PsychINFO (Ovid), and Cochrane Library (Wiley) were systematically searched until January 2021. Studies incorporating teams in which hospital and community professionals co-managed patients, hospital-based teams with community follow-up, and case-management interventions led by palliative care teams were included. Data was extracted by two researchers independently. Results: About 19 studies were included involving 6614 patients, of whom 2202 received an intervention. The overall pooled odds ratio of at least one hospital (re)admissions was 0.46 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.34–0.68) in favor of the intervention group. The highest reduction in admission was in the hospital-based teams with community follow-up: OR 0.21 (95% CI 0.07–0.66). The pooled effect on home deaths was 2.19 (95% CI 1.26–3.79), favoring the intervention, with also the highest in the hospital-based teams: OR 4.77 (95% CI 1.23–18.47). However, studies had high heterogeneity regarding intervention, study population, and follow-up time. Conclusion: Transmural team-based palliative care interventions, especially hospital-based teams that follow-up patients at home, show an overall effect on lowering hospital admissions and increasing the number of patients dying at home. However, broad clinical and statistical heterogeneity of included studies results in uncertainty about the effect size.
DOCUMENT
